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 .  