madam speaker , i yield myself 7 minutes , and i thank the gentleman from utah ( mr. bishop )  for yielding me the time .  let me quote , this would undermine american credibility at the united nations .  it would undermine our effectiveness .  those are the words of the distinguished under secretary of state nicholas burns , who said of the bill that we are considering , it will call into question our reliability as the founder and host nation and leading contributor to the united nations and would also harm our image worldwide .  my colleague from utah pointed to the bipartisanship .  i gather that he would agree that it is bipartisan when nicholas burns and alcee hastings and other democrats and this administration join in opposing this measure .  in my opinion , this bill takes a shortsighted approach to reforming the united nations .  there are decent , necessary and desirable provisions in this legislation , but , madam speaker , this bill takes well-thought-out ideas and pushes them far into the realm of demagoguery , demonstrating a contempt for the united nations that is entirely unfounded .  the united nations reform act is yet another example of the majority 's willingness to bulldoze over dissension and force its will upon those who would otherwise disagree .  the draconian requirements of the underlying legislation will affect everything from the promotion of human rights in the organization to the inclusion of mandatory sunset provisions for all new u.n .  programs .  the most shortsighted of the bill 's provisions would require a mandatory withholding of peacekeeping funds unless the requirements in this legislation are met .  madam speaker , simply put , prohibiting the secretary of state from exercising discretion regarding the withholding of funds to the united nations is counterproductive .  the secretary herself told a group here in the capitol day before yesterday that the bush administration is not supporting the mandatory withholdings contained in this bill .  it seems clear that if even this administration , which has never been reluctant to withhold criticism of the u.n. , is against this provision , then it must be bad .  it has become a cliche when members of the house speak repeatedly about winning the hearts and minds of the world ; yet our constant use of gun-barrel diplomacy continues to fail .  do my colleagues really believe that withholding millions of dollars from the united nations will encourage the member nations to go along with what we are trying to do today ?  adlai stevenson , that great champion of world diplomacy , said , `` the whole basis of the united nations is the right of all nations , great or small , to have weight , to have a vote , to be attended to. '' now , more than 40 years later , the underlying legislation seeks to eliminate the right of any country besides our own to chart the future of the united nations .  the only way for us to reform the u.n .  is to work within it rather than threatening to take our ball and go home .  we will not be successful by withholding the funds that are needed to do the job .  thanks to the bush administration , the united states ' international reputation as a peace-loving nation is in tatters .  now my friends on the other side want to pass a bill which will withhold peacekeeping funds while conflicts rage around this world unchecked ?  this is irresponsible , immoral and a foreign policy disaster .  everyone in this body realizes that the united nations is not a perfect organization , but on balance , the united nations has been and will continue to be good for america on a range of global issues .  let us not forget the thousands of united nations personnel who risked their lives in iraq and afghanistan to bring about successful and free elections in those countries or the role of the u.n .  in effecting the withdrawal of syrian military forces from lebanon .  in march of 2005 , secretary-general annan released a string of initiatives to combat terrorism , proposals that the united states government has openly supported .  and in the sudan , the u.n .  has committed aid workers , troops , police , and money to ensure the success of peace accords .  the u.n .  also continues to provide a global voice and to be a powerful advocate for change around the world .  how many millions of children 's lives have been saved through unicef , madam speaker ?  how many millions of lives have been saved through disease treatment and eradication programs ?  how many have been made better through development assistance , cultural programs , and advances in education ?  can we really justify cutting off our support for all these efforts simply because the u.n .  does not implement every single one of our reform proposals ?  madam speaker , that is the reason i will be supporting the lantos-shays substitute to this bill .  eleanor roosevelt , our country 's first representative to the united nations , remarked , `` do what you feel in your heart to be right , for you will be criticized anyway. '' it may be that the united states will still be criticized even if we adopt the substitute and these reforms are pushed through .  but i would rather do the right thing and be criticized than give up and go home because things did not go 100 percent of the way that we wanted it to .  the lantos-shays substitute takes a realistic approach to reforming the united nations .  it includes virtually all of the reforms in h.r. 2745 , with one crucial difference .  the substitute gives the secretary of state the flexibility to make decisions regarding funds based on the needs of the united states .  the substitute avoids the counterproductive all-or-nothing diplomacy of this measure , while still promoting the reforms everyone agrees are needed .  madam speaker , legislating unrealistic ultimatums will not achieve the goal that we are seeking .  i urge my colleagues to oppose this ill-advised and shortsighted legislation .  madam speaker , i reserve the balance of my time .  