mr. speaker i rise with great reservations over this legislation . 
why is the federal government involving itself in the sale of a private american company ? 
do we really believe we have this kind of authority ? 
i would remind my colleagues that unocal is a private company with shareholders and a board of directors . 
that is the governance of the company -- not the u.s. congress . 
do we really believe that we should be the real board of governors of unocal ? 
if in the united states a private company does not have the right to be sold on the free market , should we really be criticizing the lack of freedom in china ? 
many conservatives who have decried the recent supreme court decision that severely undermines the principle of private property in the united states are now on the other side , cheering this blatant congressional attempt to do something that may be even worse than kelo vs . 
new london . 
i voted recently against allowing the eximbank to use u.s. taxpayer money to underwrite chinese construction of nuclear power plants . 
i do not support subsidizing the chinese government 's economic activities . 
but i also do not support the u.s. congress involving itself in the private economic transactions of u.s. companies . 
some have raised concerns that the purchase of unocal by a company tied to the chinese government will create security problems for the united states . 
i would argue the opposite . 
international trade and economic activity tends to diminish , not increase tensions between countries . 
increased economic relationships between the united states and china make military conflict much less likely , as it becomes in neither country 's interest to allow tensions to get out of hand . 
mr. speaker , we should not criticize a lack of economic freedom in china when congress , as evidenced in this legislation , attempts to restrict the economic freedom of american citizens . 
