Paul Broun on Foreign Policy Republican

Voted NO on supporting democratic institutions in Pakistan.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. IKE SKELTON (D, MO-4): Pakistan is important to the Middle East and our intentions there. Their cooperation, of course, is so very, very important. This legislation gives economic and democratic development assistance to that country.

Rep. HOWARD BERMAN (D, CA-28): We can't allow al Qaeda or any other terrorist group that threatens our national security to operate with impunity in the tribal regions or any other part of Pakistan. Nor can we permit the Pakistani state and its nuclear arsenal to be taken over by the Taliban. To help prevent this nightmare scenario, we need to forge a true strategic partnership with Pakistan and its people, strengthen Pakistan's democrat government, and work to make Pakistan a source of stability in a volatile region.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN (R, FL-18): This bill focuses on past actions and failures attributed to the Pakistani Government, punishing the new leadership for the sins of its predecessors. While the authors of H.R. 1886 may have sought to empower our Pakistani partners to undertake the formidable task of fighting and winning against violent extremists, it does the opposite. We have gone down this road before. I recall during the Iraq debate, Members sought to prejudge the surge strategy before it could even be implemented. Let us hope that this will not be repeated with respect to Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Voted YES on cooperating with India as a nuclear power.

• Approves the US-India Agreement for Cooperation on Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy.
• Declares that it is US policy to prevent the transfer to India of nuclear equipment, materials, or technology from other participating governments in the Nuclear Suppliers Group or from any other source; and
• any nuclear power reactor fuel reserve provided to India for use in safeguarded civilian nuclear facilities should be commensurate with reasonable reactor operating requirements.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. HOWARD BERMAN (D, CA-28): Integrating India into a global nonproliferation regime is a positive step. Before anyone gets too sanctimonious about India's nuclear weapons program, we should acknowledge that the five recognized nuclear weapons states have not done nearly enough to fulfill their commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, including making serious reductions in their own arsenals, nor in the case of the US in ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. BARBARA LEE (D, CA-9): In withholding my approval, I seek not to penalize the people of India but, rather, to affirm the principle of nuclear nonproliferation. Jettisoning adherence to the international nuclear nonproliferation framework that has served the world so well for more than 30 years, as approval of the agreement before us would do, is just simply unwise. It is also reckless.

Approval of this agreement undermines our efforts to dissuade countries like Iran and North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. By approving this agreement, all we are doing is creating incentives for other countries to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Withhold UN funding until voluntary and program-specific.

Directs the President to influence the UN to shift the funding mechanism for the UN from an assessed to a voluntary basis.
• Withholds up to 50% of nonvoluntary US contributions to the regular budget of the UN unless 80% of the total regular budget of the UN is apportioned on a voluntary basis.
• Requires the annual congressional budget justification to include a detailed itemized request.
• Prohibits making funds available for international peacekeeping activities for any purpose other than the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) or to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR).
• States that it is US policy to oppose any proposals on expansion of the Security Council that would include veto rights for new members.
• Withholds US contributions from any UN entity that recognizes a Palestinian state or upgrades the status of the Palestinian observer mission at the UN.
• Withholds funds for human rights investigations in Palestinian territories.
• Withholds support for any member state which is subject to Security Council sanctions, has repeatedly supported acts of international terrorism, or is a country of particular concern for religious freedom.

1. The US pays billions of dollars into the UN system every year (almost $7.7 billion in 2010), significantly more than any other nation.
2. The UN system suffers from unacceptably high levels of waste, fraud, and abuse, which seriously impair its ability to fulfill the lofty ideals of its founding.
3. Amidst the continuing financial, corruption, and sexual abuse scandals of the past several years, American public disapproval of United Nations has reached all-time highs: 62% of Americans believe that the UN is doing a poor job
4. Significant improvements in UN transparency and accountability are necessary for improving public perceptions of and American support for UN operations.

Rated -2 by AAI, indicating a anti-Arab anti-Palestine voting record.

The Arab American Institute has compiled a Scorecard to catalogue the voting record of the 112th Congress on issues of importance to the Arab American community. For the House, we included 15 items: two bills on the Arab Spring, five bills and one letter on Palestine, two bills on Lebanon, three bills and a letter regarding civil liberties, and two bills on immigration.

1. H.Res. 88 (+): supporting democratic aspirations in Egypt
2. H.R. 2643 (+): penalizing the Bahraini government for attacking medical personnel
3. H.R. 1006 (-): the Jerusalem Embassy and Recognition Act
4. H.R. 1501 (-): withholding US contributions until the UN retracts accusations of Israeli war crimes.
5. H.Res. 268 (-): opposing any unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state
6. H.R. 2457 (-): prohibiting any US government document from referring to "Palestine"
7. H.R. 2829 (-): defunding the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. The bill's 141 co-sponsors receive a (-).
8. 8. (+). Rep. David Price (D-NC) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) issued a letter titled "Support Palestinian Aid and Israel's Security," in which they call upon Congress to continue aid to the Palestinian Authority.
9. H.R. 2215 (*) "to ensure that United States taxpayer dollars are not used to fund terrorist entities in Lebanon
10. H.R. 996 (+): to raise awareness of the use of cluster munitions where civilians are present
11. H.R. 140 (-): the "Birthright Citizenship Act, to eliminate "anchor babies" by changing the 14th Amendment.
12. H. Res. 283 (+): to counter violence and discrimination against Muslim, Arab, Sikh, and South Asian communities
13. H.R. 1805 (-): authorizing an extension of the USA PATRIOT Act until 2013, and amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)
14. H.R. 1842 (+): the DREAM Act to protect undocumented minors pursuing higher education.
15. H.R. 1932 (-): the Keep our Communities Safe Act for greater power to detain undocumented immigrants.

Oppose Arms Treaty that limits gun trade to Israel & Taiwan.

RESOLUTION: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the conditions for the US becoming a signatory to the UN Arms Trade Treaty, or to any similar agreement on the arms trade.

• Whereas in July 2012, the UN Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty convened to negotiate the text of the Arms Trade Treaty;
• Whereas the Arms Trade Treaty poses significant risks to the national security, foreign policy, and economic interests of the US as well as to the constitutional rights of US citizens and US sovereignty;
• Whereas the Arms Trade Treaty fails to expressly recognize the fundamental, individual right to keep and to bear arms and the individual right of personal self-defense, and thus risks infringing on freedoms protected by the Second Amendment;
• Whereas the Arms Trade Treaty places free democracies and totalitarian regimes on a basis of equality, recognizing their equal right to transfer arms, and is thereby dangerous to the security of the US;
• Whereas the Arms Trade Treaty will create opportunities to engage in 'lawfare' against the US via the misuse of the treaty's criteria in foreign tribunals;
• Whereas the Arms Trade Treaty could hinder the US from fulfilling its strategic, legal, and moral commitments to provide arms to allies such as the Republic of China (Taiwan) and the State of Israel;
• Whereas the Arms Trade Treaty risks imposing costly regulatory burdens on US businesses, for example, by creating onerous reporting requirements that could damage the domestic defense manufacturing base and related firms;

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that:
1. the President should not sign the Arms Trade Treaty, and that, if he transmits the treaty with his signature to the Senate, the Senate should not ratify the Arms Trade Treaty; and
2. no Federal funds should be appropriated or authorized to implement the Arms Trade Treaty, or any similar agreement.

Commitment to unbreakable U.S.-Israel bond.

Dear Secretary Clinton:

We are writing to reaffirm our commitment to the unbreakable bond that exists between our country and the State of Israel and to express to you our deep concern over recent tension. In every important relationship, there will be occasional misunderstandings and conflicts.

Our valuable bilateral relationship with Israel needs and deserves constant reinforcement. As the Vice-President said during his recent visit to Israel: "Progress occurs in the Middle East when everyone knows there is simply no space between the U.S. and Israel when it comes to security, none. No space." Steadfast American backing has helped lead to Israeli peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. And American involvement continues to be critical to the effort to achieve peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

We recognize that, despite the extraordinary closeness between our country and Israel, there will be differences over issues both large and small. Our view is that such differences are best resolved quietly, in trust and confidence, as befits longstanding strategic allies. We hope and expect that, with mutual effort and good faith, the United States and Israel will move beyond this disruption quickly, to the lasting benefit of both nations.