Dan Burton

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, that is correct.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, let me just close by saying to my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ackerman), that I am not in full retreat. Withdrawing the amendment was because of a technicality, and I think my good friend knows that. And we are good friends. We worked together on other issues. But the thing that motivates me is 200,000 Christians that have died over the past 30, 40, 50 years in Nagaland; the 250,000 Sikhs that were killed in Punjab in the last 15 years; the 60,000 Muslims that were killed in Kashmir in the last 10 years; and the thousands of Dalits, who are lower cast people, the blacks, who are mistreated and killed in India. Maybe we are jousting windmills here. I do not know. But we have got to do what we think is right. So I would just like to say to my colleague, we will be back another time to fight this battle. And I am sure I will have some formidable opponents like my colleagues over there, but we will do the best we can. Just remember what Arnold Schwartzenegger said, ``I'll be back.'' Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my request to withdraw the amendment.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time, and I think I will make just a couple of points and then I will withdraw the amendment, because I have been convinced that since 2 years ago they changed the way the developmental assistance was provided and that there has been a misprinting or miswriting of the amendment, which I truly regret, but I do not think I will get unanimous consent to change it, so I will not even ask. Mr. Chairman, the previous speaker talked about India's minister of oil and gas, and he said that India was only going to allow that loan if the U.N. said that it was all right. The fact of the matter is India's minister of oil and gas, and I am quoting him now, acknowledged the grant would violate U.N. sanctions but said his country would never allow a friend like Iran to suffer. So the intent of India was very clear. They were going to violate the embargo. They were going to violate the U.N. sanctions. Let me just end by saying that the reason I come down here year after year is not because I like to argue with my colleagues, because I know the other side outnumbers me. And though I really liked Cyrano de Bergerac, where he fought hundreds of people by himself and emerged victorious, I come down here with no false illusions. I know when I come down, my colleagues will beat me into the ground. But I think it is important that we bring this issue up, because human rights are being violated in Kashmir and Punjab; because U.N. agreements have been violated, going back to 1948 and the plebiscite that was agreed to. All I can say to my colleagues is that someday I hope that we will see fit to send some kind of signal to India that will bring about some positive change. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the logic of some of the arguments tonight kind of eludes me. One of my colleagues was talking about India being such an essential ingredient in world peace and, for that reason, we ought to do everything we can to work with them. The logic that we have used with China is that China is so big, and they are a nuclear power, we have to stay engaged with them. We cannot criticize them. We cannot do anything but appease them because it might lead to a conflict down the road. As a result, we accept things like nuclear espionage; we accept things like illegal campaign contributions coming to the United States. Attitudes of appeasement usually do not lead to a solution. They lead to a conflict. We saw that in World War II when Lord Chamberlain went to Munich. All I can say is we are not talking about destabilizing or causing a problem in India right now. What we are talking about is sending a message to them. We are talking about sending a message to them that human rights violations, that gang rapes by Indian soldiers who are occupying, imposing martial law on Kashmir and Punjab will not be tolerated. I am not saying sever relations with India. I am not saying that we should not do business with India, trade with India. I am saying we should send them a strong signal like we should send to China. We do not want espionage from China. We do not want them stealing our nuclear secrets in our nuclear labs. We do not want them trying to influence our elections, like we do not try to influence theirs. We do not want India to violate human rights, or China. So we should send signals to those countries around the world where that occurs. We are supposedly the superpower. We are supposedly the moral compass in this world. If we are the moral compass, then at least send a signal to them. If we cut off just $11 million, and we did vote for that one year. We did pass that one year not too long ago, because I do remember debating Steven Solarz on this subject. I think sending that signal was the reason that India unleashed all of its resources that they possibly could to lobby this body so that we would not ever do it again. They evidently have been fairly successful. But the feeling I have that is so strong and the reason I bring this up year after year is because I cannot go to sleep at night when I know that there are gang rapes taking place, people being tortured, people being put in jail for no good reason other than they do not like what is going on when we are supposed to be the people who really believe in freedom, democracy, and human rights. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens).

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to point out that there are seven multilateral and 13 bilateral donors that provide assistance to India. The United States is the seventh largest donor after the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the European Union, Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom. So there is a lot of people that are giving money to India. But nobody is sending any kind of a message to them that they ought to clean up their act as far as the human rights tragedies that are going on. Christians are dying in Nagaland. Dalits, the blacks in India, are being persecuted and are dying because of Indian repression, because of the caste system. In Punjab, Sikhs are dying and being tortured. In Kashmir, women are being gang raped and men are being tortured and dying. People are going to jail without proper judicial proceedings. We ought to at least send a signal. That is all we are saying. They are getting money from all over the world. A signal. The signal is going to be sent tonight whether we pass this amendment or not because we are talking about it. The Indian ambassador came to me and did not want me to introduce this amendment because of what is going on over there right now. But somebody said to me a little while ago, what about the signal this is sending because of the chaotic situation that is going on up there on the border between Kashmir and Pakistan or India and Pakistan? But what about the signal that was sent when they were going to give $25 million to Iraq just the other day? When the Indian ambassador was in my office, they were planning to give $25 million to Iraq in violation of the U.N. embargo. Does not anybody care about that? Do we want them to support and work with Saddam Hussein? They said they are planning to work with him in developing oil fields in southern Iraq. Saddam Hussein has not changed. He is a terror to that entire region. He is a blot on the world. India says they want to help them, and we are not going to send a signal? Let alone the human rights violations. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Inaccurate information. Human Rights Watch. My colleagues, I hear them quoting from them all the time. Amnesty International, I hear my colleagues quoting them all the time. They quote them all the time. They sit over there, and they smile and they laugh. Amnesty International Human Rights Watch, the 1999 report that just came out, 1999 report: gang raping women, gang raping women, torturing people, throwing people in canals with their hands tied behind their back and their feet tied, drowning them; and that is an error? Come on, guys. My colleagues are obviously concerned about constituents of theirs who lobby them hard. I understand that. But the fact of the matter is these things are going on, and we are not doing a damn thing about it. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan), chairman of the committee, just said that our amendment only addresses developmental assistance when he knows full well that this amendment has been proposed in years past when developmental assistance and child survival and disease assistance was lumped into one category. Today he is trying to say that if our amendment passes, that we are actually increasing money to India, when I think they are trying to come up with a straw issue here to defeat the amendment and it is very disconcerting.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, our foreign policy in our country has been concerned about human rights violations around the world for a long time. However, Mr. Chairman, we have been concerned about human rights around the world on a very selective basis in this country. Recently we were in Yugoslavia, in Kosovo, trying to help the people who were being persecuted on both sides, and there were about 10,000 deaths in Kosovo. In Haiti, we sent in our troops a few years ago, and there were only a few hundred people killed, and it cost us probably several hundred million dollars to have our troops down there, but we thought it was a good cause in this country. Yet in places like the Sudan, where 2 million people have been killed, 2 million, in the struggle for freedom, we have not done a thing. Our role is almost nonexistent. In other parts of Africa, Rwanda, Burundi and Burma, where thousands and thousands, hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, we have not done a thing. We do not even talk about it. In a place called Kashmir, where there are half a million Indian troops occupying that area, women are being gang raped and men are being tortured and killed. Amnesty International calls the policy of the Indian government ``An official policy sanctioning extrajudicial killings,'' and we do not even talk about it. In Punjab, since 1984, the last 14 to 15 years, a quarter of a million, 250,000 Sikhs, have been killed, not to mention those who have been tortured and maimed. In Kashmir, since 1988, a mere 10 years ago, 60,000 Muslims have been killed. Thousands of so-called untouchables, Dalits, the blacks in India, have been killed. As result of some of these problems, there is a conflict going on on the border between India and Pakistan that could lead to a real problem for that part of the world, and, yes, the whole world itself, because both of those countries have nuclear weapons. According to our own State Department, India paid over 41,000 cash bounties to police for killing innocent Sikhs between 1991 and 1993. In July of 1998, police picked up Kashmir Sing, a man in Punjab. They said they arrested him for theft. Then they tortured him for 15 days. They rolled logs over his legs so he could not walk. They submerged him in a tub of water and slashed his thighs with razor blades and put hot peppers into the wounds. Sikhs are routinely found floating dead in canals with their hands and feet bound together. One thousand cases of unidentified bodies were cremated not too long ago by the military. Of course, I talked to you about the Muslim persecution in Kashmir where there are 500,000 troops. Women are gang raped while their husbands are forced to wait outside at gun point. The Christian persecution, since Christmas Day of 1998, there has been a wave of attacks on Christian churches, prayer halls, schools, including the murder of priests, one of which was beheaded. Our State department agrees. They said, ``There was a sharp increase in attacks against Christians just last year.'' Some of the things that are going on I cannot even talk about. They parade Dalit women, the blacks, around naked, and they are gang raped as well in many cases. The State Department report on page 22 says, ``The Human Rights Commission is prohibited by statute from directly investigating allegations of abuse involving army and paramilitary forces.'' They are talking about the Human Rights Commission in India. They are specifically prohibited by statute from directly investigating allegations of abuse involving the army and paramilitary forces. The human rights organizations around the world, such as Human Rights Watch says, ``Despite government claims that normalcy has returned to Kashmir, Indian troops in the state continue to carry out summary executions, disappearances, rape and torture.'' This report was written in July of 1999, this year. Methods of torture include severe beatings with truncheons, rolling a heavy log on the legs, hanging the detainee upside down, and the use of electric shocks. Indian security forces have raped women in Kashmir during search operations. I can go on and on. Amnesty International, another human rights group says, ``Torture, including rape and ill-treatment continue to be endemic throughout the country.'' This is in their annual report, 1999. ``Disappearances continue to be reported during the year, predominantly in Punjab and Kashmir,'' 1999. ``Hundreds of extrajudicial killings and executions were reported in many states, including Kashmir and Punjab,'' 1999, this year. I talk about this year after year after year. My colleagues who defend India's government policies keep coming down saying, ``Oh, well, it is a big country, the second biggest in the world. We have to keep those economic doors open. We have got to make sure that we do business with them.'' Well, okay, let us do business with them, but let us at least send them a signal, send a little-bitty signal to them that these kinds of atrocities cannot be tolerated, should not be tolerated. $11 million cut from our foreign aid to India is a drop in the bucket. They are getting foreign aid from all over the world. So if we cut them by a mere $11 million, one-fourth of the developmental aid we are going to give them, to send a little signal that they should stop these human rights abuses, is that wrong? I think not. But if the persecution of these people were not enough, let me talk to you about something else, something that I think is extremely important that we have not talked about for a while. Last week, my colleagues who support these atrocities in India by not sending them a signal, last week the Indian oil minister attempted to circumvent the United Nations embargo on Iraq by extending a $25 million loan to Iraq in a deal that knowingly violated, or were going to knowingly violate the U.N. trade sanctions imposed on Iraq for invading Kuwait in 1990. It was not until international pressure was put on India that they reluctantly bowed and complied with the U.N. rules governing these transactions. India's minister of oil and gas said, granted his agreement would violate U.N. sanctions, but he said his country would never allow a friend like Iraq to suffer. He went on to say India is deeply concerned about the situation in Iraq, adding that the Indian government would offer Iraq all the political, material, and moral support that they needed. India also wants to help Iraq rehabilitate some Iraqi oil refineries and a lubricant oil plant. India and Iraqi officials have said they would like to soon sign a contract to develop two oil fields in southern Iraq. So India wants to help one of the worst tyrannical regimes in the world, Saddam Hussein's, at a time when we are participating in a U.N. embargo. And we are going to continue to send the same amount of foreign aid or almost the same amount. We are not going to send any signal about the human rights violations or about them breaking this embargo, or wanting to break this embargo, about their intention to work with Saddam Hussein to develop the oil fields in southern Iraq? And I say to my colleagues, do you not want to say anything about this? Do you not want to send any kind of a signal to India? Eleven million dollars is a drop in the bucket, but it will tell the whole world that the United States is paying attention to the horrible human rights abuses that are taking place, the atrocities that are taking place, the killings that are taking place, and, yes, the violations of the U.N. embargo that they want to take place. So I would say to my colleagues, who I know have their minds already made up and who are going to be out here en masse tonight opposing this amendment, have a heart. Show a little bit of heart for these people who are suffering over there. Because unless we say something, nobody will. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following statement into the Congressional Record. During rollcall vote No. 354 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been here I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. I would just like to say to the chairman that for the past several years there have been commitments by the government of Nicaragua that they would try to make restitution for what the Sandinistas took away from people down there during the Sandinista regime. They have kind of reneged on that. President Aleman and his administration recently has told some of the people who have had their property stolen that the only way they are going to get restitution was to go to court. I know of one case where they did go to court. It was carried all the way to the Nicaraguan Supreme Court, not once but twice. Even though the Supreme Court agreed there should be a settlement made and gave a monetary settlement figure, the government still would not pay these people who had a legitimate claim, and the Supreme Court agreed with them. They tried to convince some Members of Congress who are interested in this that there was corruption at the Supreme Court in order to try to sidestep their responsibility. So I join my colleague, the gentleman from Florida, in saying that I hope that he as chairman will send a very strong message to President Aleman and the government of Nicaragua that they should make proper restitution to these people, and adhere to their own Supreme Court's decisions.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say to the gentleman I really appreciate that, and I hope that President Aleman and his finance minister heard what the chairman said tonight; and that is, if they do not start doing what they have said they would do, that the chairman would take this into consideration next year when the appropriations process takes place.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman from Florida yield?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, here we go again. First we gift wrap and hand over to Communist China virtually all of our most sensitive secrets. Now we are going to grant them most preferential trade status. What in the world is going on? China has stolen data on the W-88 nuclear warhead and the neutron bomb. They have funneled illegal campaign contributions to the Democratic party and the administration. They are transferring missile technology to countries like North Korea and Iran. They continue to violate basic human rights. They are circumventing our trade laws by transshipping their textile goods through third countries. Does this sound like a country that deserves preferential treatment? According to Paul Redmund, the CIA's chief spy hunter, China's spying was far more damaging to national security than Aldrich Ames and would turn out to be as bad as the Rosenbergs, who were executed back in the 1950s for that. A team of U.S. nuclear experts practically fainted when the CIA showed them the data that China has stolen. The Chinese penetration is total, said one official. They are deep, deep into the labs' black programs, thus endangering every man, woman and child in this country. Why are we rewarding China for its spying? For God's sake, this is the country that funneled illegal contributions to President Clinton's 1996 reelection campaign. This is the country that told Johnny Chung, we like your President, and then gave him $300,000 to give to the Democrat Party. Johnny Chung testified under oath that he was directed to make illegal contributions to the President's campaign by General Ji, who is the head of China's military spy operations worldwide. General Ji met with him three times and ordered that $300,000 be directed to Chung for political contributions here in the United States. One of its joint ventures was the Indonesia-based international firm called the Lippo Group, run by Mochtar and James Riady, close friends of the President, and who frequently visited the White House. James Riady's chief adviser on political donations was John Huang, a former employee of Lippo. John Huang received a job from the Clinton administration at the Commerce Department. He later left Commerce to work for the Democratic National Committee where, with the help of James Riady, he collected nearly $3 million in illegal contributions from China. Mr. Speaker, Johnny Chung, John Huang, and Charlie Trie together raised over $3 million in illegal donations that we know of that have been linked to the Bank of China. Over the past 2 years, my committee has been conducting an investigation into illegal fundraising, including illegal efforts by the Chinese Government to influence our elections. We asked the Bank of China to provide us bank records that would show the origins of millions of dollars in foreign money that was funneled to the DNC. The Bank of China turned us down flat. We had 121 people take the fifth amendment or flee the country. A number of the most important people among this list are hiding in China. When my staff attempted to travel to China to interview these people, the Chinese Government denied us visas and threatened to arrest our investigators. Does this sound like a country that deserves preferential trade status? Does it really make sense to give preferential trade status to a country that is helping North Korea build a missile capable of delivering nuclear warheads to the West Coast of the United States? With respect to trade, in the last 10 years, 91 percent of all illegal transshipment cases have been filed against China. The U.S. Customs Department has cited China for illegally transshipping textile and apparel goods through more than 30 other countries. Mr. Speaker, in just about every area I can think of China's record stinks. They spy on us, they try to buy our elections, they send missile technology to just about every rogue regime in the world, they are actively working to improve the missile technology of our enemies, and they thumb their noses at our trade laws and have one of the worst human rights records in the world. How all this merits preferential trade status is beyond me. I urge a vote in favor of House Joint Resolution 57. It is time to show China some backbone and stop letting them walk all over America.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall No. 337 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been here I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to honor every ``Hoosier'' who took part in the 1999 Memorial Day activities in Indianapolis. It was one of the most significant weekends in the history of that great city. As the last days of the 20th century continue to unfold, Memorial Day weekend in the capital of Indiana was one to remember. Nearly 100 Medal of Honor recipients were guests for a series of stirring tributes. These included a solemn Memorial Service; the dedication of the only memorial to recipients of the Medal of Honor; grand marshals in the IPALCO 500 Festival Parade; an outdoor concert by the Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra; and a parade lap around the famed Indianapolis Motor Speedway prior to the start of the race. As the 20th century draws to a close, many wonder if the Nation has lost sight of the sacrifices which have been made to preserve freedom. After this year's Memorial Day weekend in Indianapolis, my heart remains swollen with pride in our land and my fellow citizens. The reception given these ordinary citizens who did extraordinary things can never be equaled. I am especially proud of the untold hundreds of volunteers who gave their free time and talent to make these events possible. Memorial Day weekend 1999 did much to convince me that our Nation's spirit of freedom is alive and well. It also underscored the true meaning of ``Hoosier Hospitality.''

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, due to a prior commitment, I was unavoidably detained during the following rollcall votes. Had I been there. I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall No. 302; ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 303; ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 304; ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 305; ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 306; and ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 307.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), who is from my committee, for allowing me to interrupt his one hour special order. Mr. Speaker, today the Independent Counsel statute expires. There has been a real heralding by many people in the legal community for the demise of this law. I would like to tonight talk just a little bit about that law and why something like it is absolutely necessary. For the past 3 years my committee has been investigating illegal campaign contributions. We are now involved in investigating espionage and lack of security at our nuclear laboratories, and the possibility that these things had something in common. One of the biggest problems that we have had has been a reluctance by the Justice Department, under Janet Reno, to cooperate with our committee. It has been extremely difficult to get the Justice Department to work with us to get to the bottom of these scandals. If we have an administration that has broken the law, if we have an administration or people in an administration who have become corrupt, and we have an Attorney General who is appointed by the President who is blocking for the administration, how do we administer justice? How do we get to the bottom of illegal activities, if we have an administration that has broken the law and a Justice Department that is controlled by the administration who will not bring those who broke the law to justice? I think that that is what we have today. We have had a number of people that have taken the Fifth Amendment. Our committee has faced over 121 people who have taken the Fifth Amendment or fled the country in the campaign finance scandal, 121 people. That is unparalleled in American history. We have asked the Justice Department and Janet Reno time and time and time again to work with us to bring these people before the committee to explain to the American people why Communist China, Macao, Egypt, Taiwan, South American countries, have been giving campaign contributions to the Democrat National Committee and the President's reelection committee, and we have gotten absolutely no cooperation from the Justice Department. In fact, if Members look at the administration and the Justice Department, we will find they have, in effect, erected a stone wall between what happened and the American people. How do we break through that stone wall? What mechanism do we use to bring people to justice who broke the law, who may have even endangered America's national security? The only way we can do that is to have somebody outside the system investigate and prosecute those people who have broken the law. Unfortunately, now that we no longer have an Independent Counsel statute, we have no mechanism with which to do that. Maybe the Independent Counsel statute was flawed, maybe there were some problems with it, but it should have been perfected, in my opinion, so there was a mechanism to investigate people in an administration that might be corrupt without going through the person that they appoint to be the Attorney General who might be blocking for them, as I believe has been the case with this Attorney General and this Justice Department. So tonight I am one of those voices, I am sure, that is crying in the wilderness, because I believe we need something like an Independent Counsel statute to ensure that justice will be done in this country. Right now, now that the Independent Counsel statute has expired, if we have a president now or in the future who breaks the law or if we have people in his administration who break the law, and the President has appointed an Attorney General who is willing to block for him and keep the facts from coming out where there might have been corruption, then there is nothing that can be done for the American people to count on to bring these people to justice. So I would just like to say that although the Independent Counsel statute may have had some flaws, we should not have junked the whole thing, we should have found an alternative. I am sorry that we did not.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise today and take great pride in describing to my colleagues the events surrounding the dedication of this Nation's only memorial to our 3,410 Medal of Honor recipients--the highest award for Valor given by our country. On May 28th, the last Memorial Day weekend of the 20th century, I was joined by my Hoosier colleagues Representatives Buyer, McIntosh, and Hill, Senator Bayh, Lt. Governor Kernan, Mayor Goldsmith of Indianapolis, IPALCO Chairman John Hodowal, and 98 of the 157 living Medal of Honor recipients, to dedicate the new Medal of Honor Memorial. Medal of Honor recipients Sammy L. Davis and Melvin Biddle joined us on the dais, representing their comrades-in-arms. The new memorial is located along the north bank of the Central Canal in White River State Park, located in downtown Indianapolis. It sits adjacent to Military Park, the site of the city's first recorded 4th of July celebration in 1822, which would later be used as a recruiting and training camp for soldiers from Indiana during the Civil War. It is at this aptly suited site that the local power utility, IPALCO Enterprises, under the leadership of its Chairman, John Hodowal, who along with his wife, Caroline, and countless IPALCO employees and volunteers, has erected this breathtaking memorial. It was Caroline Hodowal, who first read a newspaper article about the Medal recipients, and then conceived the idea for the new memorial when she and her husband realized that none existed. Visitors to the site will see citations for each of the 3,410 medal recipients etched into glass walls. The twenty-seven curved glass walls, each between 7 and 10 feet tall, represent the 15 conflicts, dating back to the Civil War, in which selfless acts of bravery resulted in the awarding of the Medal of Honor. Steps, benches and a grassy area provide seating for visitors to rest, reflect and view this magnificent memorial. Additionally, each evening at dusk, a sound system plays a thirty minute recorded account about a medal recipient, his story, and the act for which he received this Nation's highest military honor. As each story is told, lights illuminate the appropriate portion of the memorial to highlight the war or conflict being discussed. In the words of Mr. Hodowal, this memorial serves two purposes: ``It's an opportunity to say thanks for the sacrifices [these men] made, and it's a chance to show the next generation what real heroes look like . . . to show that ordinary people sometimes do extraordinary things.'' Mr. Speaker, Indiana has a proud tradition of honoring those who have sacrificed so much to preserve our freedom. We must never forget that our freedom is not free. Because of the selfless sacrifices of so many, we are free to enjoy so much in America. I encourage all of my colleagues to visit Indianapolis and see this newest jewel of our city and State. It is something that you will not soon forget. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the record the list of the Medal recipients who were the guests of the people of Indiana at the festivities during this past Memorial Day weekend.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following: Ellis Island Medals of Honor Awards Ceremony--NECO Chairman William Denis Fugazy Leads Dramatic Ceremony Ellis Island, NY, May 8.--Standing on the hallowed grounds of Ellis Island--the portal through which 17 million immigrants entered the United States--a cast of ethnic Americans who have made significant contributions to the life of this nation were presented with the coveted Ellis Island Medal of Honor at an emotionally uplifting ceremony. NECO's annual medal ceremony and reception on Ellis Island in New York Harbor is the Nation's largest celebration of ethnic pride. Representing a rainbow of ethnic origins, this year's recipients received their award in the shadow of the historic Great Hall, where the first footsteps were taken by the millions of immigrants who entered the U.S. in the latter part of the nineteenth century. ``Today we honor great ethnic Americans who, through their achievements and contributions, and in the spirit of their ethnic origins, have enriched this country and have become role models for future generations,'' said NECO Chairman William Denis Fugazy. ``In addition, we honor the immigrant experience--those who passed through this Great Hall decades ago, and the new immigrants who arrive on American soil seeking opportunity.'' Mr. Fugazy added,'' It doesn't matter how you got here or if you already were here. Ellis Island is a symbol of the freedom, diversity and opportunity--ingredients inherent in the fabric of this nation. Although many recipients have no familial ties to Ellis Island, their ancestors share similar histories of struggle and hope for a better life here. 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 1,100 ethnic 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 Children of the World Foundation which brings children from developing nations needing life-saving surgery to the United States for treatment. This year alone, NECO's efforts have helped save the lives of six infants from around the world. Ellis Island Medal 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 Medal of Honor recipients have included several U.S. Presidents, entertainers, athletes, entrepreneurs, religious leaders and business executives, such as William 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 Norman Schwarzkopf, Barbara Walters, Terry Anderson and Dr. Michael DeBakey. congratulations to the 1999 ellis island medal of honor recipients

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Chairman, I want to thank Matt on my staff for all the work he has done as well. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman needs more than 30 seconds, I would be glad to yield him the time.