Dan Burton

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I will not take the whole 60 minutes. Mr. Speaker, every once in a while one of our colleagues here has a wife or a child or a husband that dies, and we express our condolences and we tell them how sorry we are; but our colleagues really do not know very much about those people who have passed on. If a Member dies, we have the flag on the Capitol that is lowered to half mast and Members fly out to the district for the funeral and there is a lot of attention paid to it. But behind the people in the Congress are husbands and wives and children that are never really known about, except when a tragedy occurs. They are there to help us get elected, to feed us, to bring us joy when we go home at night; but they do not get much attention. Well, this is a picture of my wife. We were married 42 years. We laid her to rest yesterday morning. She was one of the most wonderful people that I ever met. I promised her before she died that I would make sure that she would at least be remembered as a footnote in history, if not a little bit more. I told her I would come to the floor and tell a little bit about her life, because it was a very interesting life. She was born in Flat Creek, Kentucky, up in the mountains, the hills of Kentucky in a two-room shack. They had no water, running water, they had no plumbing, and they had no electricity. She and her grandmother and grandfather and her mother and her uncle lived in that two-room shack while she was a little girl. Her mother got pregnant and was not married, and her father would not marry her mother, so her uncle literally got on a horse, took the shotgun and went over to this guy's house and said, you are going to marry her or you are not going to come out of that house alive, so the proverbial shotgun wedding took place and he married my wife's mother, and he never lived with her again. He went to World War II and died while he was over there; not in combat, he died from some other kind of an illness. My wife's mother literally had a broken heart, because she was really in love with the fellow. She contracted tuberculosis. When my wife was about 6 years old, her mother died of tuberculosis and then she was left to be raised by her grandmother and grandfather. Her uncle had gone to the war as well. Her grandmother, from taking care of my wife's mother contracted tuberculosis, and she likewise died. So now my wife was about 7. She had a grandfather, and the uncle came back from the war and said, we cannot let this little girl stay in this house with just two men. So they took her to an uncle who was a superintendent of schools. He had a nice home in Kentucky, but his wife did not like the wildness of this little 7-year-old girl because she had never had any formal training or education, and she said she could not stand having her in the house, so they kept her for about 2 months and then they shuffled her off to another relative. She went to the other relative who was called her Aunt Jackie who had two children of her own, and she lived there until she was about 17 years old, and she matured and she became a very pretty lady. She was very popular among her fellow students because she was very quiet and withdrawn. I think it was probably because of the toughness of her childhood. She became what was called the band sponsor. She was elected by her classmates, and she was very proud of that. But what they did not know was she had contracted tuberculosis from her grandmother, which had been in her body all of that time. So in her senior year in high school, she had to go into a sanitarium in London, Kentucky; and she was there for about 6 months, pretty much by herself because they kept people pretty isolated in those days because they did not know how to cure tuberculosis. She did not do too well, so they sent her to Louisville, Kentucky, where she had half of one lung removed, and she was there for about another 3 or 4 months, and she was alone again. But she survived and she got better and then she moved to Cincinnati, Ohio, and lived with another aunt and went to secretarial school. I was studying for the ministry at the Cincinnati Bible Seminary when I met her at the Westwood Cheviot Church of Christ, and I asked her out and we started dating, and 6 months later we were married. Marriages that take place in 6 months they say do not last too long. We were married 42 years. She was probably, if not the best, one of the best things that ever happened to me. I ran for Congress four times before I got elected. If my colleagues know anything about spouses, they have to put up with the heartache, the pain, the financial losses and everything else when somebody runs for office. When you have a husband or a wife that runs and loses, you go through the pain with them. You go through the financial hardships with them. She did it once, twice, three times, and finally a fourth time. I remember the last time I thought we were going to win and everything started going wrong, and I told her we would have to put some of our own money into the campaign, and I told her we would probably have to mortgage the little farm that I had bought and I sold my car and I took our savings in order to be competitive and ended up borrowing and everything else on my land and everything to the tune of $91,000. I never will forget what she said when I told her we were going to have to do that, because I said, I can either do that or get out of the race. She put her arms around me and she said, Don't worry, we can make more money. It was the fourth time. Anyhow, we were successful; and now I have been in Congress 20 years, but I do not have her anymore. The thing that is interesting about it is, and I wish all of my colleagues were here to hear this, is one never really appreciates somebody like that until it is almost too late. Thankfully, we had the last year and a half together. We went to Germany and went to Florida and the State of Washington and every place we could to try to get her cured, but it was too late. She had metastatic colon cancer. I would like to say to my colleagues, if you have not had a colonoscopy be sure to get one, because if we had done that earlier she probably would have survived. But nevertheless, we expect our spouse, our loved ones to be there when we go home at night. When we go away on a campaign trip we expect them to be there when we get back. We take them for granted, year in and year out, and we never think that one day we will come home and they will be gone. Well, I would just like to say to my colleagues from one who knows there is a good possibility they will be gone. So whether you are in politics or whether you are not in politics, pay a little attention to your family and your kids and spend as much time with them as you can, because a car accident, cancer, something can come along real quickly and you will not have them any more and you will rue the day. I remember I was talking to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), who lost his wife a few years ago. We did not talk about that much on the floor either. I was trying to console him and he said, I would give 2 or 3 years of my life just to walk around the block with her. That is how hard it was on him, and that is how hard it is on me and my family right now. So I wanted to come down tonight and extol the virtues of a woman that I loved for 42 years. I did not treat her as well as I should have. She deserved a lot better but she was the best, the very best, and she will be missed. I hope that everybody takes a little inspiration from her because she was an inspiration to me, and I think she would be an inspiration to anybody who met her. On her tombstone we are putting the words, ``She was a wonderful wife and mother and an angel to everyone who knew her.'' And she really was.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, the British Broadcasting Company recently ran an expose of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), a fundamentalist, militant Hindu nationalist organization. The VHP is an organization, which operates under the umbrella of the pro-Facist Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS). The RSS is the parent organization of the ruling BJP. The BBC notes that the VHP has promoted Hindu supremacy and has engaged in violent acts against minorities. These acts include the murder of missionary Graham Staines and his two young sons while they slept in their jeep. The report states that the VHP, which it identifies as ``a hardline Hindu outfit,'' rarely makes a ``distinction between fellow (Muslim) citizens of the present and (Muslim `marauders' of the past.'' It further reports that ``the ambition of establishing a resurgent Hinduism by inculcating what some historians call a carefully constructed common `Hindu spirit' is very much central to the VHP.'' Moreover, it exposes the VHP's support for a militant Hindus' project to build a Hindu temple on the site of the most revered mosque in India, which was destroyed by the BJP. Since the BJP is also part of the RSS umbrella, it is critical to help ensure the rights of minorities in India. Tens of thousands of Sikhs and other minorities have been held in illegal custody as political prisoners for many years. Tens of thousands of minorities have been killed by the Indian governments regardless of the political party in power. It is time to stop American aid to India and to support self- determination for all the people of South Asia in the form of a plebiscite on independence so that their rights are not subject to the whims of militant Hindu nationalists. Mr. Speaker, I would like to place the text of the BBC report into the Record at this time. [The British Broadcasting Co., Mar. 8, 2002] Profile: The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (By Rajyasri Rao) The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) was founded in 1964 by a group of senior leaders from a hard-line Hindu organisation, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), to give Hindus what they believed would be a clearly defined sense of religious identity and political purpose. Hindu hardliners have grown more vocal Its founders felt the need to present Hinduism in a rigorous though simplified form which would be comparable to most other world religions. The superiority of other faiths was believed to stem from their being far less diffuse and more uniform than Hinduism. But its critics call the VHP a hardline Hindu outfit with unmistakably close ties to its parent organisation, the extremist RSS, whose objective to `Hinduise' the Indian nation, it shares. Central to the RSS ideology has been the belief that real national unity and progress will come only when India is `purged' of non-Hindus, or, when members of other communities subordinate themselves `willingly' to `Hindu superiority.' Linked groups The VHP has tended to tone down the rhetoric of Hindu supremacy and even make an occasional distinction between fellow (Muslim) citizens of the present and (Muslim) `marauders' of the past. But the ambition of establishing a resurgent Hinduism by inculcating what some historians call a carefully constructed common `Hindu spirit' is very much central to the VHP. The temple project enjoys a lot of support This is also something it shares with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which currently leads the Indian Government at the centre. Earlier known as the Bharatiya Jana Sangh (BJS), the BJP was established in 1951 as a political wing of the RSS to counter rising public revulsion after the revered independence figure Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated by a former RSS member. Some commentators say the party came close to obliteration in the 1960s with the Congress led by the charismatic and secular Jawaharlal Nehru, leaving little room for hardline communal politics. But a political emergency announced by Nehru's daughter, Indira Gandhi, in 1975 enabled the BJS leaders, Atal Behari Vajpayee and LK Advani among them, to gain near stardom after serving brief prison sentences. Many women have joined the hardliners' campaign. But it didn't really emerge as a political presence until the early 1980s. A series of events in that decade including the mass conversion of lower-cast Hindus to Islam pushed the BJP's close affiliate, the VHP, to the forefront. Historians say the VHP-led Hindu right considered the mass conversion of ``dalits'' or lower-caste Hindus to Islam to be an unforgivable insult. The dalits, for centuries beholden to the upper castes, outraged Hindu hardliners by daring to convert at all, and moreover, convert to Islam. The VHP saw this as a serious threat to its notion of Hinduism. It proceeded to whip up Hindu support for a re-defined communal force, organising a series of religious meetings, cross-country marches and processions through the 1980s. This phase coincided with the launch of an electoral strategy by the BJP to corner and hold on to the ``Hindu'' vote. Temple controversy Following the success of their campaign, senior VHP leaders announced at a religious meeting in 1984 their programme to ``liberate'' a site in Ayodhya from an ancient mosque to make way for a temple to the Hindu god Ram. Some `moderate' Hindu leaders support the VHP Analysts say this announcement heralded a turning point in the history of the Hindu nationalist movement. The VHP has since then claimed that the site belongs rightfully to Hindu worshippers who believe that the mosque stood on the birthplace of the god, Lord Ram. Although the claim does not stand up to substantial archaeological or historical scrutiny, the VHP and BJP are seen to have made possible the creation of a shared Hindu symbol that cuts through most divisions in Hindu society.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of my remarks is to congratulate, on behalf of myself and my colleagues, the Republic of Azerbaijan on the May 28 Republic Day. After the break-up of the Soviet Union we have all seen Azerbaijan's strife not only to occupy its rightful place in the international community, but, first and foremost, to preserve its sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity, to promote the energy projects on the Caspian, as well as to establish relations of friendship and cooperation with the United States and the European nations. Now we consider Azerbaijan to be one of the strongest U.S. allies among the post-Soviet countries. The reforms in Azerbaijan, both economic and political, as well as this nation's role in the international antiterrorist campaign, prove its dedication to the democracy, free market economy, its intention to pursue cooperation, not confrontation. I extend my congratulations to President Aliyev and the people of the Republic of Azerbaijan and express my belief that the bilateral relations between our two countries will further develop and strengthen for the well-being of both our peoples, as well as with the purpose of furthering the U.S. interests in the South Caucasus, where Azerbaijan has become a stabilizing force.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, due to a serious illness in my family, it was necessary for me to request a leave of absence for the week of May 6-10th. As a result I was unavailable for several rollcall votes. Had I been here, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 129-133. On rollcall vote 136, I would have voted ``yea.''On rollcall votes 137-139, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 140, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 141, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 142, I would have voted ``yea.''On rollcall vote 143, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 144, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 145, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 146, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 147, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 148, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 149, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 150, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 151, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 152, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 153, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 154, I would have voted ``yea.''On rollcall vote 155, I would have voted ``yea.''On rollcall vote 156, I would have voted ``yea.''On rollcall vote 157, I would have voted ``no.''On rollcall vote 158, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, on May 2, 2002, due to a family commitment, I was unavailable for rollcall vote No. 123. Had I been here, I would have vote ``yea.''

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 392, a resolution expressing solidarity with Israel in its fight against terrorism that was introduced by Congressman Tom DeLay, the distinguished Majority Whip from Texas. Unfortunately, due to a family illness, I was unable to be present when the House voted on H. Res. 392, however, had I been here, I would have voted ``Aye.'' Is it important for the House of Representatives to support H. Res. 392? You bet it is and let me tell why I believe so. The atrocities committed daily in the Middle East make us all sick and there's not a member in this body that doesn't want to see an end to it. We are confronted daily with scenes of carnage and destruction. Can we understand such violence? Yes we can. The facts, all too often forgotten, reveal the truth as to why peace has elluded the Middle East. Today, Israel is the only democracy in the region. Israel is smaller than the state of New Hampshire and is surrounded by nations hostile to its existence. When the United Nations proposed the establishment of two states in the region--one Jewish, one Arab, the Jews accepted the proposal and declared their independence in 1948. The Arab states rejected the UN plan. In 1948, five Arab armies invaded Israel. Again, in 1967, Arab armies amassed on Israel's borders with the clear intention to invade the state. Rather than suffer a bloody ambush, Israel rightfully took the necessary steps to defend its citizens and homeland, a right obliged to every Nation. It was during the Six Day War of 1967 that the West Bank and Gaza came under Israeli control. Israel has returned most of the land it captured during the 1967 war, and right after the war offered to return all of it in exchange for peace and normal relations. Unfortunately, the offer was rejected-- another missed opportunity for peace in the Middle East. As a result of the 1978 Camp David accords--in which Egypt recognized the right of Israel to exist and normal relations were established between the two countries--Israel returned the Sinai desert, a territory three times the size of Israel and 91 percent of the territory Israel took control of in the 1967 war. Israel has conceded that the Palestinians have legitimate claims to the disputed territories and is willing to engage in negotiations on the matter, and in return they only ask that they be allowed to live in peace. Seventy-three percent of Israelis agree to a Palestinian state that will live peacefully alongside Israel. In 2000, a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza was offered to the Palestinians at Camp David, by Israel and the U.S., in return for peace. The U.S. said yes, Europe said yes, the U.N. said yes, and the Arab countries said yes. Why didn't it happen? Arafat said No. Chairman Arafat and the other Palestinian leaders said no because they demand a Palestinian state in place of Israel, not alongside of it. Instead, the Palestinian Authority sanctioned an intifada, which the world is witnessing today. This has included twenty months of terror, shooting, and the bombing of innocent civilians. Simply describing the situation as a ``cycle of violence,'' although it may be accurate, ignores the distinctions in tactics and motivations of the two sides. Palestinian militants kill Israeli civilians, using bombs detonated by teenage suicide bombers who are promised wealth and pleasure for their martyrdom. Israeli troops kill Palestinians in self- defense of their lives and that of their countrymen. The list of disturbing facts about Palestinian terror is long. Israeli troops recently discovered large quantities of counterfeit Israeli currency in the basement of Chairman Arafat's Ramallah headquarters, along with the printing machines that made it. They also found an invoice for $8,500 to cover bombing supplies in the office of Arafat's chief financial officer--it was on the letterhead of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Bridgade, an offshoot of Arafat's Fatah Party. The invoice specifically requested $150 to build each bomb, saying the group would need five to nine bombs per week. The Al Aqsa Brigades, which are forces directly under Chairman Arafat's control, have been designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by our government. Indeed, Yasser Arafat wears the map of the entire area of Israel on his uniform. Mr. Speaker, the national Palestinian goal is Jihad. All Palestinian organizations--political, military, cultural and commercial, along with the whole Palestinian school system, advocate the annihilation of Israel and educate generations of school-age children to become terrorists. Furthermore, Palestinians who have voiced an objection to the practice of blowing up innocent Israeli civilians are labeled traitors. In July 2001, these are the words of Chairman Yasser Arafat himself addressing his people at a public event, ``Kill a settler every day. Shoot at settlers everywhere. Do not pay attention to what I say to the media, the television or public appearances. Pay attention only to the written instructions that you receive from me.'' The Palestinian terror attacks are not spontaneous acts of desperation. They are the product of a deliberate, well-planned, state- sponsored education and incitement program. Its product is to turn a whole people into a nation of terrorists. Since the Oslo Accords in 1993, when the Palestinian Authority gained control over 98% of the Palestinian population, it has been hard at work building this kind of terror system. A fair and balanced portrayal of the current Middle East situation reveals that one nation stands head and shoulders above the other in its commitment to human right and democracy, as well as in its commitment to peace and mutual security. Mr. Speaker, that nation is Israel. That's why H. Res. 392 is so important. I, for one, don't want the greatest nation on earth, the United States, to weaken our resolve in the all-important fight against terrorism. Nor should we ask it of our only true friend and ally in the Middle East region, and that is clearly Israel.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor to pay tribute to Scott Billingsley. Scott died suddenly and unexpectedly on March 25, 2002. He was only 31 years old. Scott had served ably as Counsel to the Committee on Government Reform for two years before recently leaving to become Legislative Director for Congressman Tancredo. In his time with the Committee, Scott displayed the best characteristics of a Capitol Hill professional: idealism, honesty, dependability, and selfless devotion to his work. His endearing spirit and infectious good cheer were a blessing to his co-workers with whom he spent countless long hours and late nights. Everyone who knew Scott liked him, and those who knew him best will love and remember him forever. Scott wanted to make a difference in the world, and he did--not just professionally but personally as well. Others can speak more eloquently about Scott's unique personality, and they have done so in the eulogies that Mr. Tancredo will place into the Record. I want to take this opportunity, however, to say a few words about Scott Billingsley's work for the Committee. Scott's deeply held belief in the importance of integrity and accountably in government led him to become a Counsel for the Committee on Government Reform. In that position, he played a vital role in our oversight investigations in recent years. Most recently Scott was responsible for drafting the largest and most important section of the Committee's report on abuses of the Presidential pardon power--a chapter on the pardons of Marc Rich and Pincus Green. Scott's work on this chapter represented a substantial share of the final product and formed the solid foundation on which others built. Even though Scott left the Committee before the report was complete, he generously returned to our offices on many occasions to assist the staff in completing what he had begun. He did this under no obligation and on his own time, which says a lot about the kind of person he was. Now, we know how precious little time Scott had left, and we are honored that he chose to spend some of it at the Committee. Scott's parents--and his fiance, Katie--should be proud of his professional accomplishments. Scott was an excellent lawyer who chose to defend the principles he held dear. He gladly sacrificed the lure of private sector salaries in favor of public service, working tirelessly to promote what he believed in so passionately. Scott's work reflected his strong conviction that public corruption should be opposed vigorously. His commitment to honesty and integrity in government deserves to be remembered and honored, as does his drive and determination to work toward those goals. Therefore, as a token of our appreciation for his service to the Committee, I will be presenting to Scott's family a special copy of the pardon report on which he worked so diligently--dedicated to the memory of an extraordinary professional: Scott Billingsley. May he rest in peace.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, let me just say to my colleagues, Fidel Castro can buy products from the United States today, and he has been. But he has to pay cash. And what we want to do with this, what you want to do with this motion is you want to allow him to get credit. Let me just tell you what credit he has honored in the past. He owes $120 million to Spain. No payments. They are trying to restructure the loan. He owes $170 million to France. He defaulted on $10.5 million. They are trying to restructure that loan. He owes $20 million to Chile. No payments on that. $400 million to Mexico; past due, but they are trying to restructure the loan. If he wants to pay cash, he can buy it. But the reason he wants to get credit is because he knows long term that he is going to be able to get out of the debt. And ultimately, I think my colleagues who have made this point in the past are accurate; it will be borne by the taxpayers of America. The money will be borrowed and eventually when it gets up to such a level, the financial institutions that lend it are going to be complaining to high heaven and the government will bail them out. And so henceforth the taxpayers of the United States will be paying for the food that Castro gets. Let us look at what Castro is. He is still a terrorist. He is working with the FARC guerillas in Colombia. They are selling heroin and cocaine by the carload to American youth. And they are terrorists. They are kidnapping and killing Americans down there, and they are holding them hostage and he works with them. They even wear Che Guevera hats, berets, because they support Castro. They go back and forth to Cuba on a regular basis. He is not for democracy. He is not for human rights. He supports terrorism, and now he wants credit from the United States. The fact of the matter is, my colleagues, we should not be giving it to him. I have businesspeople in my district that have come to me and say, ``We want to do business with Fidel Castro.'' My answer to them is, when Fidel Castro starts allowing democracy in Cuba, when he starts allowing human rights, when he starts taking steps in the directions that we believe ought to be taken, then we will consider those things. But so far Fidel Castro has done none of these things. He goes around the world condemning the United States, saying he is going to bring us to our knees and we want to kiss him on both cheeks. I think that is a mistake. Until we see a manifest change in Castro's behavior, we should not be giving him credit. If he wants to buy American products, let him pay cash. Let him pay cash. And when he starts showing some changes in human rights and moving toward democracy, we will start looking at credit.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall votes Nos. 90, 91, and 92, I was unavailable due to an illness in my family. Had I been here I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall votes Nos. 90 and 91 and ``yea'' on rollcall vote No. 92.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I think the Waxman amendment is well intentioned, and I know he has given this a lot of thought. Unfortunately, it has two problems, in my opinion. First, it goes too far; and, second, it addresses a problem that does not appear to be very serious. This bill requires private sector employees who go to Federal agencies to comply with every single ethics rule that Federal employees have to follow, and then some. This bill has financial disclosure requirements and postemployment restrictions and conflict-of-interest protections. This bill may have more ethical safeguards than any bill that has ever passed this Congress. What the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) is concerned about is that private sector employees may go to a Federal agency, learn some trade secret of a competitor, and go back to their company and share that information, or government information. Well, guess what? This bill has a lifetime ban on disclosing that kind of information, with criminal penalties if it is violated. It has a lifetime ban, not 7 years, like the statute of limitations on several other law violations. If someone taking part in this program discloses secret information 20 or 30 years after they see it, they could go to jail. I am a little concerned that we may have gone too far already. We may have placed so many restrictions on this program that we may scare people away from participating in it, and that would be a real shame. We have bent over backwards to satisfy everyone's concerns. But the amendment of the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) would go even further. Private sector employees would be barred from seeing any proprietary information while they are at the Federal agency. What that means in practical terms is that they would not or could not work on any major modernization program because those programs all involve private vendors. That would basically shut them out of doing any meaningful work while they are at that agency. The question we have to ask ourselves is this: Is it worth it? Will trade secrets of private companies be jeopardized by this program? If that was the case, then I think all of the major high-tech companies would be opposing this bill. But guess what, they all support it. I have a letter here from the Information Technology Association of America, and I have another letter from the Information Technology Industry Council. They represent hundreds of high-tech companies. They support this bill. Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record these letters. The letters referred to are as follows: Information Technology Association of America, April 9, 2002. Hon. Dan Burton, Chairman, Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Burton: On behalf of the 500 corporate members of the Information Technology Association of America (ITAA), I am writing in strong support of H.R. 3925, The Digital Tech Corps Act of 2002, which would create an executive exchange program for information technology managers between Federal agencies and private companies. ITAA has long supported the concept of a ``Digital Tech Force''--an exchange program to benefit government and private sector IT workers. The program in H.R. 3925 would allow government employees to receive technology experience without leaving their government posts, and provides industry with first-hand knowledge of the needs of government customers. The improved public-private training and communications fostered by the proposed program would be a win-win for government and industry. ITAA believes that the bill, as revised by the full Government Reform Committee, provides additional safeguards while still maintaining the attractiveness of the exchange program. ITAA continues to believe that this program, if enacted by Congress, could be used as one of a series of initiatives that could improve the understanding of both industry and government and promote the necessary partnerships that will be required for the success of future IT projects. We look forward to working with you and Chairman Tom Davis to support this important piece of legislation. Sincerely, Harris N. Miller, President.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. (Mr. BURTON of Indiana asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for that information. Let me just say, the biggest industry in America is the Federal Government. It is bigger than Chrysler, it is bigger than General Motors, it is bigger than any company, Big Blue; and yet we have agencies that cannot talk to each other through their computer technology. It is an absolute tragedy. Billions and billions of dollars of taxpayer money is wasted because this lack of communication takes place on a daily basis, and that is why we ought to use the examples of the private sector in the Federal Government. Now, how do you do that? The only way you can do that is to take Federal employees who do not yet have that kind of knowledge and allow them to go to the private sector and learn the tricks of the trade, so to speak, so that they can bring that technology back to the Federal Government so we can coordinate our agencies to make sure this technology is used properly. If we do that, it is going to streamline it, it is going to make the government more efficient for every American, and it is going to make sure it is going to save us a lot of money. So I would just like to say I think this is a very, very important piece of legislation. I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), the chairman of the subcommittee, for sponsoring this legislation and being so farsighted with it, as well as his ranking member. Let me end up by saying this is a bipartisan piece of legislation. I would like to say that the Republicans should take credit for it, but this idea came from the Clinton administration, with which I took issue on a number of occasions. A fellow who worked for OMB under President Clinton, Steve Kelman of Harvard University, came up with this idea. So we cannot embrace it as our own; but we can say it is a good idea, and we should say with bipartisan support, it should pass overwhelmingly.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, let me just say that I share some of the concerns that my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), has. We have seen on some of the health agency advisory committees some conflicts of interest which are very disconcerting and concern a lot of us. But there are ways to police that. When we have contributor lists that we do not want somebody else to use, we do what is called ``salting'' them, where we put different names in there that are fictitious, and if somebody illegally uses that list, you find out very quickly. There are severe criminal penalties for people that break its law. In fact, I would like to yield to my colleague, the author of the bill, to illuminate and illustrate some of these criminal penalties imposed if people do break the law.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, this Saturday, April 13, is Vaisakhi, the birthday of the Sikhs. It marks the day on which the last of the Sikh gurus, Guru Gobind Singh, consecrated the Khalsa Panth. It is the Sikhs' most important holiday. I would like to take this opportunity to wish the Sikhs in America, In Khalistan, and around the world a happy Vaisakhi Day. This important occasion is usually marked with parades and services in the Gurdwara. It should also be a time for the Sikh Nation to focus on freedom. Sikhs have made many contributions to this country. They have been leaders in agriculture, law, medicine, and many other fields. One Sikh, Dr. Dalip Singh, a mathematics professor from California, served two terms in this House from 1959-63. He was the first person from the subcontinent to serve in Congress. As is the regular practice, Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President of the Council of Khalistan, has issued a Vaisakhi Day greeting to the Sikh Nation. He urges the Sikhs to use this occasion to begin a peaceful movement to reclaim their lost sovereignty and freedom. I urge all my colleagues to read this outstanding letter. The time has come for America to cut off its aid to India and to support a free and fair plebiscite on independence in Punjab, Khalistan, in Kashmir, in Christian Nagaland, and in the many nations seeking their freedom from India. These are the best measures to ensure freedom, peace, security, and prosperity in South Asia. Vaisakhi Message to the Sikh Nation, Mar. 25, 2002. Khalsa Ji: Wahe Guru Ji Ka Khalsa, Wahe Guru Ji Ki Fateh! This is a time of celebration of our 303rd anniversary of the Khalsa Panth. It is also time to look back at our history. The Guru gave sovereignty to the Khalsa Panth. (``In grieb Sikhin ko deon Patshahi.'') Banda Singh Bahadur established the first Khalsa rule in Punjab from 1710 to 1716. Then there was a period of persecution of the Sikhs. Again Sikhs established a sovereign, independent rule from 1765 to 1849, when the British annexed the Sikh homeland, Punjab, into British India. To regain freedom from the British, Sikhs were on the front line of the fight. The Sikh Nation gave about 80 percent of the sacrifices during this freedom struggle when they formed only 1.5 percent of the Indian population. At the time of the independence of India, Sikhs were equal signatories to the transfer of power from the British. Muslim leader Mohammed Ali Jinnah was very wise and well educated and he did not trust the majority Hindu leadership. He got an independent Pakistan for the Muslims. The Sikh leadership should have gotten an independent country for the Sikhs at that time, but they were fooled by the Hindu leadership of Nehru and Gandhi so Sikhs took their share and joined India on the promise that they would have the glow of freedom in the northwest part of India. Khalsa Ji, we have seen this ``glow of freedom'' in the form of the attack on the Golden Temple in June 1984, when over 20,000 Sikhs were killed in Punjab in a single month. The next massacre of Sikhs occurred after the assassination of Indira Gandhi in Delhi. There was a mass murder of Sikhs throughout India, including Delhi. The Sikhs were pulled out of trains and burned alive. Sikh truck drivers were pulled out of their trucks. Tires were put around their necks by Hindu militants and they were burned to death. In Punjab, this genocide continued under Beant Singh's government. Sikhs were arrested, tortured, and then cremated and their bodies were declared ``unidentified.'' Since 1984, over 250,000 Sikhs have been murdered. 52,268 are rotting in Indian jails under TADA, which expired in 1995. Many of them have be in illegal custody since Operation Bluestar in 1984. Only last month, 42 Members of the U.S. Congress wrote to President Bush to get these political prisoners released. Jaswant Singh Khalra, who exposed the government killing of Sikhs in fake encounters, became a victim of the Indian police himself. He was kidnapped outside his house and murdered in police custody. He documented 6,018 Sikhs who were secretly cremated by the government in three cremation grounds, Patti, Tarn Taran, and Durgiana Mandir. Subsequently, Punjab Human Rights Organization (PHRO) chairman Justice Ajit Singh Bains said that about 50,000 Sikhs were secretly cremated in this manner. Even Akal Takht Jathedar Gurdev Singh Kaunke was murdered by SSP Swaran Singh Ghotna and then his body was disposed of. The Badal government was forced to conduct an inquiry into the killing of Jathedar Kaunke. It was done by three Punjab police officials under the leadership of DIG Tiwari. He submitted a report to the Badal government, which has not been made public as of today. How could a democratically elected Akali government hide the murder of the Akal Takht Jathedar by not releasing this report, which was conducted by its own order? The Badal government was the most corrupt one in Punjab's history. They invented a new term for bribery: ``fee for service.'' If you didn't pay the fee, you didn't get the service. There was a fixed amount of money for government jobs. Bags of money were received by Mrs. Badal in return for these jobs. The Punjab economy deteriorated under Badal and the Punjab government had its largest debt ever. It is bankrupt now. Badal made three promises to get elected. He promised to free the political prisoners, to punish the police officers who carried out atrocities against the Sikh Nation, and to appoint a commission to investigate atrocities. He did not keep any of them. The Sikh leadership is completely under Indian government control, whether it is the Akali leadership of Badal, Tohra, Mann, and others or the Congress leadership of Punjab under Captain Amarinder Singh or former Chief Minister Mrs. Bhatthal. Changing parties and faces every election will not solve the problems of the Sikh Nation. Congress is no better than the Akalis and the Alkalis proved to be the worst enemies of the Sikh Nation. How could an Akali government keep 52,268 Sikhs in jail without charge or trial for the last 16 years? It is shameful and a black mark on the present Akali leadership. They have cashed in on the sacrifices and good will of the pre-independence Akali leadership. Khalsa Ji, the only solution to this quagmire is the formation of a Khalsa Raj Party under new, honest, dedicated, and committed leadership. The time is now to do it. Let's not waste time and prolong the suffering and agony of the Sikh Nation under the present corrupt Akali leadership which is controlled by the Indian government and is determined to wipe out the Sikh Nation and the Sikh religion. The only remedy is to sever our relationship with Delhi completely, once and for all, and declare the independence from India and start a peaceful agitation to free the Sikh homeland, Punjab, Khalistan. The victory of the Congress Party was a massive rejection of the Akalis, who were elected five years ago to reject the Congress Party. However, the Congress Party remains the enemy of the Sikh Nation. In the last two elections, the Sikh Nation has soundly rejected both parties. Neither supports the interests of the Sikh Nation; neither can be trusted by the Sikh Nation. The time has come to discard the present Akali leadership that has betrayed the Sikh Nation. We must press for action against the police officials who carried out the police kidnapping and murder of human-rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra. These would be good first steps for the Sikh leadership and for the new government in Punjab. But we must continue to pursue our ultimate goal of freeing the Sikh homeland, Punjab, Khalistan. The Sikh Nation is sovereign and it must have its sovereign, independent country. Guru gave sovereignty to the Khalsa Panth. Remember ``Raj Kare Ga Khalsa.'' Sikhs can never forgive or forget the desecration of the Golden Temple. This is the history and tradition of the Sikh Nation. The time has come to form a Khalsa Raj Party to liberate Khalistan. The new Sikh leadership must launch a Shantmai Morcha to liberate our homeland. The only way the Sikh Nation can prosper is to free the Sikh homeland, Punjab, Khalistan. The freedom of the Sikh Nation will bring prosperity, stability, and peace to Punjab and to South Asia. Panth Da Sewadar, Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President, Council of Khalistan.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today to express my appreciation to my colleagues in the House of Representatives who voted to pass H. Res. 377, a resolution that I introduced recognizing the Ellis Island Medal of Honor and commending the National Ethnic Coalition of Organizations (NECO). NECO's annual medal ceremony and reception on Ellis Island in New York Harbor is the Nation's largest celebration of ethnic pride. Established in 1986 by NECO, the Ellis Island Medals of Honor pay tribute to the ancestry groups that comprise America's unique cultural mosaic. To date, approximately 1400 American citizens have received medals. NECO is the largest organization of its kind in the U.S. serving as an umbrella group for over 250 ethnic organizations and whose mandate is to preserve ethnic diversity, promote ethnic and religious equality, tolerance and harmony, and to combat injustice, hatred and bigotry. NECO has a new goal in its humanitarian mission: saving the lives of children with life-threatening medical conditions. NECO has founded The Forum's Children Foundation, which brings children from developing nations needing life-saving surgery to the United States for treatment. Ellis Island Medals of Honor recipients are selected each year through a national nomination process. Screening committees from NECO's member organizations select the final nominees, who are then considered by the Board of Directors. Past Ellis Island Medals of Honor recipients have included several U.S. Presidents, entertainers, athletes, entrepreneurs, religious leaders and business executives, such as Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, George Bush, Richard Nixon, George Pataki, Mario Cuomo, Bob Hope, Frank Sinatra, Michael Douglas, Gloria Estefan, Coretta Scott King, Rosa Parks, Elie Wiesel, Muhammad Ali, Mickey Mantle, General Normal Schwarzkopf, Barbara Walters, Terry Anderson, Dr. Michael DeBakey, Senator John McCain, and Attorney General Janet Reno. I would like to close by expressing my deepest gratitude to my good friends Bill Fugazy and Rosemarie Taglione and everyone associated with NECO and the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Bhagwan Singh Sandhu, a leader of the Sikh Students Federation, was detained at the airports in Vancouver and in London last month, apparently at the behest of the Indian government. According to information I have received, Dr. Sandhu was detained overnight and interrogated by Canadian intelligence agents who were in constant contact with Indian officials in Delhi. According to Dr. Sandhu, he was told that he was a terrorist, yet no evidence to support this claim was produced by authorities in Canada. The same thing apparently happened to him on his arrival in London. All records of his interrogation were retained by the Indian regime. Mr. Speaker, the Indian Government appears to be trying to capitalize on the world's heightened concerns about terrorism to harass innocent Sikhs beyond its own borders. In the case of Dr. Sandhu, it appears that India manipulated our friends in Canada and Great Britain so that they would detain Dr. Sandhu. The Council of Khalistan has issued an excellent press release on the detention of Dr. Sandhu. It is very informative. I would like to place it in the Record at this time. [From the Council of Khalistan, Mar. 11, 2002] Sikh Activist Arrested in Canada and England at Behest of Indian Government India Terrorizing Sikhs internationally Washington, D.C., March 11, 2002.--Dr. Bhagwan Singh Sandhu, a leader of the Sikh Student Federation, was arrested at the Vancouver airport on February 12 on the instructions of the Indian government. Canadian intelligence agents interrogated Dr. Sandhu while they were in constant touch with Indian intelligence in Delhi. They offered no evidence of any involvement by Dr. Sandhu in any terrorist activity in India or any other country. Yet he was labeled a terrorist by the Canadian intelligence operatives. They locked him in a cold, small cell with only a cement bench to lie down on. The following evening, February 13, he was put on a plane to London. When Dr. Sandhu arrived in London, the British, acting at the behest of the Indian government arrested him. He was interrogated and searched, then held in jail overnight. He was then sent back to India. The Indian government kept all the papers related to his arrest and detention. When he arrived in India, he was arrested again. He had to get medical attention due to his injuries from his arrests. His letters of protests to the Canadian, British, and Indian authorities have gone unanswered. ``This arrest shows the true face of Indian secularism,'' said Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President of the Council of Khalistan, the organization that leads the Sikh Nation's struggle for independence. ``These illegal arrests show that the Hindu nationalists will reach anywhere to destroy Sikhs and other minorities,'' he said. ``They attacked the Golden Temple in 1984. They have attacked Christian churches, schools, and prayer halls. It has been an ongoing pattern of repression,'' he said. ``It is shameful that the Canadian and British governments have gone along with India's repression by illegally arresting and harassing Dr. Sandhu,'' said Dr. Aulakh. ``Dr. Sandhu is a victim of India's tyrannical, fanatical drive to eliminate all minority populations in the service of rampaging Hindu cultural imperialism,'' he said. ``It is clear that the agents at the airports in Vancouver and London were working at the behest of the brutal Indian government, perhaps at its direction since they were apparently in constant contact with Delhi.'' The Indian government has murdered over 250,000 Sikhs since 1984. Over 75,000 Kashrairi Muslims have been killed since 1988. More than 200,000 Christians have been killed since 1947, along with tens of thousands of Dalits, Tamils, Assamese, Bodos, Manipuris, and other minorities. A report issued last year shows that 52,268 Sikh political prisoners are held in Indian jails, as well as tens of thousands of others. On February 28, 42 Members of the U.S. Congress wrote to President Bush, asking him to work to get these political prisoners freed. Since Christmas 1998, Christians have felt the brunt of the attacks. Priests have been murdered, nuns have been raped, churches have been burned, Christian schools and prayer halls have been destroyed, and no one has been punished for these acts. Militant Hindu fundamentalists allied with the RSS, the pro-Fascist parent organization of the ruling BJP, burned missionary Graham Staines and his two young sons to death. Last year, a cabinet member said that everyone living in India must be a Hindu or be subservient to Hindus. In July 1997, Narinder Singh, a spokesman for the Golden Temple, told National Public Radio, ``The Indian government, all the time they boast that they're democratic, they're secular, but they have nothing to do with a democracy, they have nothing to do with a secularism. They try to crush Sikhs just to please the majority.'' ``The only way to escape this government-supported violence and tyranny is for the Sikhs, Christians, Muslims, and other minorities to claim their freedom from India,'' Dr. Aulakh said. ``That is the only way to prevent the Hindu theocracy from wiping us out,'' he said. ``We must launch a Shantmai Morcha (peaceful agitation) to liberate Khalistan,'' he said. ``Sikhs are a separate nation and ruled Punjab until 1849. No Sikh leader has signed the Indian constitution. The people of South Asia must have self-determination now,'' Dr. Aulakh said. ``India is on the verge of disintegration, as Steve Forbes predicted in the current issue of Forbes magazine,'' he said. ``Khalistan will be free by 2008.''

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, back in March 2000, just before former President Clinton visited India, 35 Sikhs were massacred in the village of Chithistinghpora in Kashmir. At the time, many people accused the Indian government of this atrocity while the Indian government laid the blame on Pakistani-sponsored militants. A study by the Movement Against State Repression (MASR) and the Punjab Human Rights Organization (PHRO) showed that the Indian government's own forces had killed these innocent Sikhs, a conclusion confirmed by a study from the international Human Rights Organization (IHRO) and by an article in the New York Times Magazine by Barry Bearak. Yet the Indian government maintained the fiction that Pakistanis carried out the massacre. They killed five young Kashmiris, claiming they were responsible, then were force to admit that they were not. Then five other Kashmiris were arrested and charged with the crime. On March 8, Reuters news service reported that the chief minister of Kasmir, Farooq Abdullah, admitted that the evidence against these Kashmiris was faked. That's right, Mr. Speaker, the ``world's largest democracy'' faked evidence to falsely convict some Kashmiris of the massacre of these Sikhs in order to set these two minorities against each other. Fortunately, it has not worked. Last year, some Indian troops were caught red-handed trying to set fire to a Gurdwara and some Sikh homes in Kashmir and they were overwhelmed by Sikh and Muslim villagers. Remember also, Mr. Speaker, that the ruling BJP is part of a militant Hindu nationalist organization the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS), which published a booklet last year on how to implicate minorities in false criminal cases. Given the government's admission of fraud in this case, how many other cases have they faked? They admit to holding 52,268 Sikhs as political prisoners, according to a MASR report. Amnesty International says that that tens of thousands of other minorities are also being held as political prisoners in ``the world's largest democracy.'' How many cases have been faked against these prisoners? Mr. Speaker, it is shameful that the evidence in the Chithistinghpora massacre was faked, and it is shameful that it needed to be. However, the people who carry out atrocities like this massacre are rarely if ever punished. Instead, the state either finds scapegoats like the five Kashmiris it is currently holding or it does nothing. It has found a scapegoat in the killing of Graham Staines, even though every report at the time reported that a mob of people chanting Hindu slogans burned Mr. Staines and his two sons. No one has been punished in the murder of former Akal Takht Jathedar Gurdev Singh Kaunke or in the kidnapping and murder of Jaswant Singh Khalar, who was killed in police custody. I call on the Indian government to punish those who tampered with the evidence in this case immediately. I also call on the United States to cut off aid with India until they allow people to enjoy basic human rights and a fair, impartial system of justice. We should also press for a free and fair plebiscite on independence for the people of Khalistan, Kashmir, Nagaland, and the other countries seeking their freedom. That is only way to protect their rights and end this kinf of abuse. Kashmir Govt. Says Sikh Massacre Samples Faked (By Ashok Pahalwan) Jammu, India (Reuters).--The state government of Kashmir admitted on Friday that forensic samples taken in an attempt to confirm the guilt of five young men blamed for a Sikh massacre two years ago were faked. The killing of 36 Sikhs in remote Chitisingpora village in the violence-racked state of Jammu and Kashmir in March 2000 occurred hours before a visit by U.S. President Bill Clinton to India and drew strong condemnation from him. Indian newspapers have alleged that soon after the massacre security forces picked up five innocent youths, killed them in a stage-managed gun battle, burned their bodies and then claimed they were ``foreign militants'' responsible for the Sikhs' deaths. The bodies of the five youths were exhumed and forensic samples taken only after massive demonstrations in Kashmir by protesters. Kashmir state chief minister Farooq Abdullah told the legislature on Friday ``it appears fake samples were sent'' to laboratories and apologized for ``the injustice done to the people for which I feel ashamed''. ``We strongly suggest those responsible for collecting and sending the samples had something to hide,'' he added, promising an investigation into the tampering. India had identified the five youths blamed for the Sikh killings as belonging to the militant separatist groups Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hizbul Mujahideen. Both groups denied responsibility and, with Pakistan, blamed India for the massacre which they said was aimed at discrediting the Kashmiri independence cause during Clinton's visit. The laboratories to which the samples were sent to establish the youths' identity said they were mislabeled and showed serious discrepancies. Abdullah said a judge would lead the probe, which would take two months. He also said fresh test samples would be taken under the supervision of police and doctors. The Times of India, one of the newspapers which investigated reports that the samples had been falsified, accused the state in an editorial on Friday of a ``brazen'' cover-up. ``From knowingly foisting the charge of terrorism on innocents to eliminating them in a fake encounter . . . (it) is an example of the worst kind of state high-handedness,'' it said in an editorial. More than 33,000 people have been killed since 1989 when Islamic guerrillas seeking either independence or union with neighboring Pakistan launched a revolt in Kashmir. Human rights groups have frequently accused Indian security forces of abuses such as summary killings and torture. India has always denied systematic human rights abuses and said that any allegations are investigated and the guilty punished.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, October 26, my good friend Gerry Solomon passed away after suffering congestive heart failure. What a great loss for this institution and for the constituents he once served. Gerry was a Member of this Chamber for 10 terms serving from 1979- 1999. Ask anyone who served with him, and they will remember him as an outspoken and tenacious advocate for his views and constituents. I knew Gerry well and he was second to none in this Chamber. In losing Gerry, we lost a tremendous patriot and committed public servant. He was often referred to by his fellow colleagues as ``the Pit Bull of the House.'' And, although he enjoyed his work in Washington and in the International arena, he always said his greatest enjoyment came from successfully helping people back home in his district cope with problems they had with the Federal bureaucracy. He was very proud of the often repeated comments on the streets back in his district that ``you may not always agree with Jerry Solomon, but you sure as hell know where he stands on the issues.'' His commuting back home every weekend, catapulted him to re-election usually by overwhelming 3-1 margins during his ten terms in Congress. During his Congressional career, which spanned 20 years serving in the House of Representatives, Jerry devoted most of his time to the issues of veterans, senior citizens, foreign policy, national defense, the war on drugs, and the budget. May he always be remembered for the good father and husband that he was, and his relentless efforts to promote pride, patriotism and volunteerism. He proudly and unabashedly showcased his love for his family and his country everyday of his life. Mr. Speaker, H. Con. Res. 338, a resolution authoring the printing of a collection of memorial tributes made in honor of the late Gerald Solomon, is a fitting tribute to our late colleague and friend. I rise in strong support of it.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, recently another Christian church was attacked in India. The Associated Press reported on February 17 that about 50 militant, extremist Hindu fundamentalists attacked a Catholic church on the outskirts of Bangalore. Unfortunately, this is just the latest incident in a longstanding campaign of repression against Christians and other religious minorities in India, which appears to be tacitly supported by the government. Last year, a cabinet member was quoted as saying that everyone who lives in India must either be a Hindu or be subservient to Hindus. This is part of the Hindutva ideology of the ruling BJP and its parent organization, the RSS, which was founded in support of the Fascists. This latest incident seems to mirror with so many other actions perpetrated by Hindu militants under the umbrella of the RSS. They have murdered priests, raped nuns, and burned churches. They have attacked Christian schools and prayer halls. It was Hindu militants under the RSS umbrella who burned missionary Graham Staines and his two young sons to death while they slept in their jeep, all the while chanting ``Victory to Hannuman,'' a Hindu god. India subsequently threw Mr. Staines's widow out of the country rather than let her continue his work providing health services for the downtrodden. The RSS itself published a booklet on how to file fake criminal cases against Christians and other religious minorities. Indian police used gunfire to break up a Christian religious festival. More than 200,000 Christians in Nagaland have been murdered by Indian forces. In the face of this pattern of repression, abuse, and tyranny, Prime Minister Vajpayee told an audience in New York, ``I will always be a Swayamsewak,'' invoking the self-designation of RSS members. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the Indian government has done little to stop or prevent these acts of violence. If the abuse and repression of Christians were the only story, it would be bad enough, but it is not. Sikhs, Muslims, and other minorities have faced repression also. The Indian government has murdered over 250,000 Sikhs, over 75,000 Kashmiri Muslims, and many thousands of other minorities, including Tamils, Dalit ``untouchables,'' Bodos, Assamese, Manipuris and others. According to the Movement Against State Repression, India admitted to holding 52,268 Sikhs as political prisoners, and we know the numbers the government admits to are generally low. Amnesty International reports that tens of thousands of other minorities are also being held as political prisoners. To make it worse, Mr. Speaker, it was reported in the January 2 issue of the Washington Times that India is sponsoring cross-border terrorism in the province of Sindh to destabilize Pakistan, which has been a solid, strong ally in the war on terrorism. In addition, India's aggressive military maneuvers have forced Pakistan to shift troops away from the border with Afghanistan to the Indian border, possibly creating an escape for Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists. In effect, India's actions are abetting the Al Qaeda terrorists. In light of all this repression and terrorism America must make a strong stand. We must make it clear that such practices are unacceptable for countries that proclaim democratic principles and for countries that seek U.S. support. To do so, we should stop U.S. aid to India until these abuses are ended and we should publicly support the freedom movements within India's borders by calling for a free and fair plebiscite on the issue of Independence for Kashmir, Khalistan, predominantly Christian Nagaland, and the other nations seeking their freedom from India. These measures will help shine the light of freedom on everyone in South Asia. Mr. Speaker, I would like to place the Associated Press article into the Record at this time. [From the Associated Press, Feb. 17, 2002] Police: Hindu Extremists Hit Church Bangalore, India.--About 50 Hindu hard-liners attacked a Roman Catholic church in southern India on Sunday and injured several worshipers, police said. V.V. Bhaskar, the police chief in the city of Mysore, declined to say how many people were hurt in the attack, which happened on the outskirts of the city. The assailants threw stones at the church before forcing their way inside, breaking furniture, smashing windows and attacking worshipers. The men demanded the priest end what they said were efforts to convert local villagers, who are mainly Hindu, Bhaskar said. Christians make up only a tiny fraction of India's 1 billion-plus population. About 80 percent are Hindus. Some Hindu extremist groups have accused church officials of trying to attract poor Hindus with promises of money and jobs. The worst attack against Christians in India took place in 1999, when an Australian missionary and his two children were burned alive by a mob.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I'm proud to be introducing legislation today to help families that are trying to cope with children who have suffered vaccine-related injuries. Vaccine injuries may be very rare, but when they do occur, they're devastating. Fifteen years ago, we created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. It was supposed to be generous. It was supposed to be non-adversarial. It was supposed to compensate families without tying them up in court for years. Too many times, this program hasn't worked the way we intended. Last fall, we held two hearings. We heard testimony from parents of injured children. We heard testimony from husbands of injured wives. They told us about long delays. They told us about overly adversarial tactics. They told us about having to fight for years over injuries that are widely acknowledged to be related to vaccines. We've also heard from families who learned about the program too late to file claims. There is a bipartisan consensus that reforms are needed. Not every family has faced these kinds of problems. Many families have worked their way through the system without facing the kinds of ordeals we've heard about. However, too many families have faced too many problems for us to sit by and do nothing. I want to thank Henry Waxman, the Ranking Minority Member of the Government Reform Committee for working with me to put this bill together. I want to thank Dave Weldon, one of our subcommittee chairmen, for working with us as well. I also want to thank our other original cosponsors, Jerrold Nadler, Constance Morella, Benjamin Gilman, Stephen Horn, Martin Frost, John Duncan, Dennis Kucinich, Jo Ann Davis and Tom Davis. This bill doesn't do everything we'd like to do to fix this program. It's not going to eliminate some of the problems families are encountering. However, I think it's a good first step. I think it's a realistic assessment of what we can accomplish this year. This bill does some very worthwhile things: It changes the calculation for future lost earnings for injured children to make it more generous. It increases the level of compensation a family receives after a vaccine-related death from $250,000 to $300,000. It allows families of vaccine-injured children to be compensated for the costs of family counseling and creating and maintaining a guardianship to administer the award. It allows for the payment of interim attorneys fees and costs while a petition is being adjudicated. It extends the statute of limitations for seeking compensation to six years instead of three. It provides a one-time, two-year period for families to file a petition if they were previously excluded from doing so because they missed the statute of limitations. I want to briefly mention a couple of the stories we heard during our hearings so my colleagues will have a better understanding of the kinds of problems families are facing. The first story involves Janet Zuhlke and her daughter Rachel of Florida. Rachel received her pre-kindergarten vaccinations in 1990. Within 6 hours, she had a severe reaction. Within three weeks, she was in critical condition and had to be medi-vac'd to a hospital. Today, Rachel is a mentally retarded teenager. She suffers from periodic bouts of blindness and severe neurological breakdowns that leave her confined to a wheelchair. Rachel's condition is known as an encephalopathy. Medical experts agree that this is one of the most common injuries caused by vaccines. The connection is so well-established, it's written into the table of vaccine injuries in the law. Despite this, the government attorneys fought for nine years to try to prove a questionable theory that Rachel's injury was caused by a strep infection. For nine years, Janet Zuhlke has had to pay all of Rachel's medical bills without any help. Last year, she finally won her case. But the process drags on. It could still be another year before the Zuhlkes receive a penny. Next, I want to talk about the case of Lori Barton and her son Dustin of Arizona. Dustin received a DTP shot in 1989. He began to have subtle seizures within hours. Eventually, he was diagnosed with residual seizure disorder and he became legally blind. The Barton's filed for compensation, but the government lawyer assigned to the case set out to prove that Dustin's seizures didn't start as soon after the shot as Lori claimed. At their first hearing in 1993, that lawyer's tactics were so abusive that she was reprimanded by the special master overseeing the case. Lori Barton testified that she felt like she was being treated like a criminal. It took them four years to get to the next hearing, in August 1997. Three months later, Dustin suffered a massive seizure and died. In 1999, eight years after the Bartons filed their petition, they were finally awarded compensation. But there was one final hitch. The government threatened to appeal the decision unless the Barton's agreed not to have it published so it couldn't serve as a precedent for other families. That's wrong, and we shouldn't accept it. As I said before, every family that enters the program isn't treated this way. Not every government lawyer is abusive. There are many people who work in this program who sincerely want to help these families. But these aren't isolated incidents. We have real problems here, and Congress needs to address them. For many of these families, the deck is stacked against them, and that's not right. I want to thank my colleagues who've worked with me to put together this legislation--the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Improvement Act of 2002. It has strong bipartisan support. There are other problems that go beyond the scope of this bill, and we need to address those. But this is a good first step. I hope all of my colleagues will support it.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, it is disappointing to note that India's actions of late have had the effect of undermining our war against terrorism. India's massive military buildup has forced Pakistan to pull troops away from the Afghan border, creating a potential opportunity for Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders to escape. India claims that this act is in response to Pakistan's failure to turn over alleged terrorists to them, but Pakistan has been cracking down on terrorists and has jailed many of them so far. It will not turn over non-Indians to India, however. India also blames Pakistan for the attack on its parliament, even though India has a record of committing acts of terrorism in the guise of various minorities. Two independent investigations have proven that they did so in Chithisinghpora in March 2000, when they murdered 35 sikhs. The book Soft Target asserts that the Indian government was responsible for shooting down an Air India airliner in 1985, killing 329 people. In addition, India created the militant Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which our government has labeled a ``terrorist organization,'' and put up its leaders in Delhi's finest hotel, according to India Today, India's leading newsmagazine. Internet journalist Justin Raimondo has reported that Defense Minister George Fernandes supplied money and arms to the LTTE. On January 2, columnist Tony Blankley, writing in the Washington Times, reported that the Indian government sponsors cross-border terrorism in the Pakistani province of Sindh. The time has come for India to release its political prisoners. According to the Movement Against State Repression (MASR), India admitted to holding 52,268 Sikhs as political prisoners in ``the world's largest democracy.'' In addition, according to Amnesty International, tens of thousands of other minorities are also being held in jail. India has also been guilty of terrorism against the minorities within its own borders. The newspaper Hitavada reported on November 1994 that the Indian government paid $1.5 billion to the late governor of Punjab, Surendra Nath, to foment terrorist activity in Kashmir and Punjab, Khalistan. If we are going to win the war on terrorism, we must eliminate it wherever it shows up. That includes countries that claim to be democratic. I call on the White House to urge India to end its support for terrorism. In addition, it is time to cut off U.S. aid to India and to declare our support for a free and fair plebiscite in Punjab, Khalistan, in Christian Nagaland, in Kashmir, and in the other minority nations under Indian occupation on the subject of independence. Mr. Speaker, on January 7, the Council of Khalistan published a press release urging that India be declared a terrorist state. I would like to place it into the Record at this time. [Press Release from the Council of Khalistan, Jan. 7, 2002] Declare India a Terrorist Nation--It Sponsors Domestic and International Terror India Must Free Over 52,000 Sikh Political Prisoners Washington, DC.--``The time has come to declare India a terrorist nation,'' Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President of the Council of Khalistan, said today. The Council of Khalistan leads the Sikh Nation's struggle for independence and is the government pro tempore of Khalistan, the Sikh homeland, which declared its independence from India on October 7, 1987. ``India pays lip service to the war on terrorism, but it is a terrorist nation itself,'' Dr. Aulakh said. ``If America is committed to eradicating terrorism everywhere, that must include India, a major sponsor of international and domestic terrorism,'' Dr. Aulakh said. Columnist Tony Blankley, writing in the Washington Times on January 2, wrote that India sponsors cross-border terrorism in the Pakistani province of Sindh. Internet journalist Justin Raimondo recently reported that Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes raised money for the militant Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which the U.S. government has labelled as a ``terrorist organization,'' and provided arms for them. Journalist Tavleen Singh, writing in India Today, India's premier newsmagazine, reported that the Indian government created the LTTE and put up its leaders in the finest hotel in Delhi. The Deccan Chronicle reported on December 14 that the Indian government knew of the terrorist attack on its Parliament, which killed 13 people, in advance and that the government did nothing to stop it. No Members of Parliament were killed in the attack, but the victims were lower-caste people. This shows government involvement in the incident. India seeks to use this attack as a pretext for a war against Pakistan. Indian cabinet members have said that Pakistan should be incorporated into India. ``Sikhs and Kashmiris will be the main victims of war,'' said Dr. Aulakh. ``This is part of India's design. India is putting the stability of the entire South Asian region at risk for its own hegemonic ambitions,'' he said. ``We condemn terrorism in all forms, wherever it comes from,'' he said. ``It is time for India to release more than 52,000 Sikh political prisoners and the tens of thousands of other political prisoners and end its repression,'' Dr. Aulakh said . . . According to a report in May by the Movement Against State Repression, India admitted that 52,268 Sikh political prisoners are rotting in Indian jails without charge or trial. Many have been in illegal custody since 1984. ``I call on the Sikh leadership in Punjab to stop making coalitions with the Indian government and work for freedom for the Sikhs and the other minority nations of South Asia,'' he said. The book Soft Target, written by two respected Canadian journalists, shows that the Indian government blew up its own airliner in 1985 to provide a pretext for more repression against Sikhns. In November 1994, the newspaper Hitavada reported that the government paid the late governor of Punjab, Surendra Nath, $1.5 billion to generate terrorist activity in Punjab and Kashmir. The Indian government has murdered over 250,000 Sikhs since 1984. Over 75,000 Kashmiri Muslims have been killed since 1988. In May, Indian troops were caught red-handed trying to set fire to a Gurdwara (a Sikh temple) and some Sikh houses in Kashmir. Two independent investigations have proven that the Indian government carried out the March 2000 massacre of 35 Sikhs in Chithisinghpora. In August 1999, U.S. Congressman Dana Rohrabacher said that for Sikhs, Kashmiri Muslims, and other minorities ``India might as well be Nazi Germany.'' India has also repressed Christians. More than 200,000 Christians have been killed since 1947. Priests have been murdered, nuns have been raped, churches have been burned. Christian schools and prayer halls have been destroyed, and no one has been punished for these acts. Militant Hindu fundamentalists allied with the RSS, the pro-Fascist parent organization of the ruling BJP, burned missionary Graham Staines and his two young sons to death. In 1997, police broke up a Christian religious festival by firing their weapons at it. ``Now is the time for Sikhs, Kashmiris, Nagas, and other nations to claim their freedom,'' he said. ``Now is the time for a Shantmai Morcha (peaceful agitation) for the independence of Khalistan,'' he said. ``If India is truly the democracy it claims, then it should allow a free and fair vote on this issue,'' Dr. Aulakh said. ``Sikhs are a separate nation and ruled Punjab up to 1849 when the British annexed Punjab. The nations and peoples of South Asia must have self-determination now.''

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) very much for the time. I want to thank the gentleman who just spoke for introducing this legislation. I think everything that has been said about Musharraf is accurate and well deserved, but I would like to just digress for a moment and point out that Pakistan has been an ally and friend of the United States as far back as I can remember. During the Cold War, when other countries in the region were supporting the Soviet Union, at a time when the United States was concerned about its security and an attack from the Soviet Union, Pakistan was always there. When we had the war in Afghanistan the first time, when the Soviet Union invaded, Pakistan was there. They served as a conduit for American supplies going in to stop the Soviet advance. When we went to Somalia, and there is a movie that is called Black Hawk Down that talks about the travails we experienced in Somalia, Pakistan sent troops, and they were there. And now, President Musharraf has taken up the mantle of leadership in Pakistan, and he is likewise a great supporter of the United States and the things we jointly believe in. He has arrested and detained over 2,000 militant leaders and extremists in working with us to stop the terrorist threat around the world. He has banned groups that support terrorism, frozen their bank assets and their accounts, clamped down on their fund-raising and closed their offices. In short, he is a friend and ally of the United States even though he has put himself and his administration at risk by doing so. So, along with my colleagues, I want to welcome President Musharraf to the United States; and I want to say a very strong thank you to him and to the people of Pakistan and the Government of Pakistan, because every time America asks them, unlike some of the other people in that area, they are always there to march beside us. So, President Musharraf, thank you very much for all you do for us and for the free world.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam) for yielding me time; and I appreciate the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) for introducing this legislation. I think the achievements of Bob Davis have been covered and will be covered by the colleagues of mine from the Michigan delegation, but one thing I would like to say is that I was a personal friend of Bob Davis while he was a Member of the House. We participated in sports activities as well as cosponsored legislation here on the floor of the House. There was no finer Representative from the State of Michigan than Bob Davis. He was an outstanding Member. He really cared about his constituents, and he worked very, very hard. He continues to work hard here in Washington, D.C., advising Members of Congress about legislation that he has an interest in. So if Bob Davis is watching, we are glad to do this today. We are very happy to name this post office after you. I hope all the people of his district appreciate the work you have put forth on their behalf. Bob Davis was born in Marquette, Michigan. He graduated from high school in St. Ignace, Michigan. He attended Northern Michigan University and Hillsdale College, and graduated from Wayne State University in 1954 with a degree in Mortuary Science. After working as a mortician and funeral director in St. Ignace, Bob was elected to the City Council in 1964 and to the Michigan House of Representatives in 1966. Bob served in the Michigan House of Representatives from 1966 until 170, when he was elected to the Michigan Senate. Bob served in the Michigan Senate until 1978. He was Senate Republican Leader from 1974 until 1978. Bob was first elected to the United States House of Representatives in 1978. He was elected to six more terms before retiring in 1992. Bob served on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee and the Armed Services Committee. He was a tireless advocate for his district's interests, and a great supporter of the United States Coast Guard.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, due to a scheduling conflict, I was unable to be present during the following votes that were held on February 7, 2002. Had I been here, I would have voted ``aye'' on the Journal vote, ``aye'' on H. Res. 343, and ``aye'' on H.R. 3394.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I hope we are not infringing on the minority's time by going ahead. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill, and I want to thank the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) for his hard work on this legislation. He has worked on it for a long time, hit a few bumps in the road, but it is a good bill and it should pass. I want to personally thank him for being a new and more valuable member of our committee. He has worked very hard with us. I also want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn), who is one of the unsung heroes of the Committee on Government Reform. He works probably as hard or harder than anybody on the committee. He shepherded this bill through the subcommittee and full committee, and I appreciate all the hard work he has been doing for us. We will miss him when he leaves next year. He has been a great chairman. Mr. Speaker, our Presidential libraries are a valuable part of our society. They are monuments to our Presidents. They are places where young people can go to learn about history. They are places where scholars do serious research. We should be proud of each and every one of them. However, Presidential libraries cost a lot of money, and that money has to be raised from private sources. We all know that when money and politics cross paths there is always the potential for mischief, and that is why I think public disclosure is so important and why I support this bill. When there is secrecy in government, people have doubts; and when there is openness in government, people have confidence in their government. The vast majority of people who give money to Presidential libraries do it for the right reasons: they admire the President; they want to make a contribution to his legacy; they want to see history preserved. And they should be proud of their contributions. But there is always going to be those who make contributions for other reasons: to gain access to the President and staff; to gain influence. And that is why we need public disclosure. Right now, you can contribute $1 million to a Presidential library while the President is in office and nobody would know about it. That is not good for our democracy, and it is not good for the reputations of Presidential libraries. That is why we need this legislation. We have tried not to make this bill overly burdensome. While a President is in office, contributions over $200 have to be disclosed. That matches campaign finance law. Once a President is out of office and once the library has been turned over to the archives, only contributions over $5,000 have to be reported. Those contributions already have to be reported every year to the IRS, so the foundations already have to keep that information; and we are not asking them to create any more work for themselves. I am sure that everyone remembers the controversy over President Clinton's pardon last year. He pardoned a man named Marc Rich, who was an international fugitive. Marc Rich's wife gave $450,000 to President Clinton's library foundation. Nobody knew it at the time. So this is a perfect example of why we need public disclosure. But let us be fair. This is not a Democrat problem, and it is not a Republican problem. This system we have is an invitation to abuse no matter what party you are from or who occupies the White House. Having unlimited contributions in complete secrecy is a recipe for scandal, and we are doing the right thing by addressing it today. Let me close by repeating what I said in the beginning. We should be proud of our Presidential libraries. They should be places of honor. We wanted people to contribute to them and be proud of their contributions. We do not want our Presidential libraries to be tainted by accusations of influence peddling or frauds. Public disclosure is the right thing to do; and, therefore, I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill.