Eni Faleomavaega

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for pointing out that article that appeared in the Washington Post about the leakage of iodine 131 into the sea. I want to share with my colleagues and with the public a little artistic demonstration of what this atoll really looks like from the air, if we were to look down directly. We can see that those areas of the atoll, this atoll sits right on top of what is known as a volcanic formation, as we see here. Some of our friends may think that this is how Polynesians decorate their Christmas trees with these funny red dots. I wanted to share with my good friend that these red dots represent 185 nuclear explosions that have already taken place in this atoll, and the French Government kept denying, ``No, no, no problem. It is impossible for leakage.'' Mr. Speaker, 185 nuclear bombs have already been exploded in this atoll, and the French Government has the gall to tell the public and the American people and our top scientists that it is perfectly safe to continue this program. This is outrageous. This is how it looks right now in this atoll. It is like a fractured cheese full of holes, and this is exactly what the Government has been doing, and they keep insisting by saying, ``It is perfectly safe. No problem over there.'' It just happens to be that this is right in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. That is my definite problem. I welcome my good friend, the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercromie], for his comments.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, it's me again. At times I feel like I'm out there in the wilderness talking to the birds and the trees--as I have imagined several times that I'm standing on a beautiful sandy beach along any one of those South Pacific islands, taking a long deep breath of that warm salt air, as I observe one of the great wonders of nature--the powerful waves of the ocean pounding the shore. Mr. Speaker, I believe I have counted at least 20 times I've taken an important matter before my colleagues and to the American people--the matter of French nuclear testing in the South Pacific and specifically in French Polynesia. Mr. Speaker, in June of last year, I introduced House Concurrent Resolution 80, that has numerous cosponsors from both sides of the aisle--including, Mr. Gilman from New York, Mr. Hamilton from Indiana, Mr. Leach from Iowa, Mr. Bereuter from Nebraska, Mr. Berman from California, Mr. Smith from New Jersey, Mr. Lantos from California, Mr. Rohrabacher from California, Mr. Ackerman from New York, Mr. Kim from California, Mr. Underwood from the Territory of Guam, Mrs. Mink from Hawaii, Mr. Abercrombie also from Hawaii, Mr. Markey from Massachusetts, Mr. DeFazio from Oregon, and Mr. Mineta from California. Mr. Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 80 expresses the sense of the Congress of the United States to recognize the concerns of the peoples of Oceania and to call upon France to stop nuclear testing in the South Pacific. Mr. Speaker, I want to share with my colleagues the substantive issues and concerns raised in this resolution, which delineates the environmental risks that France's testing has created for the 28 million men, women and children who live throughout the Pacific region, which is comprised of 22 sovereign nations and territories. The resolution further calls upon the Government of France, namely President Chirac and his administration, to cease all nuclear testing in the South Pacific. House Concurrent Resolution 80 holds that: The Government of France has been conducting nuclear tests over 10,000 miles from Paris on the South Pacific atolls of Moruroa and Fangataufa in French Polynesia; That since 1966 France has detonated at least 187 nuclear explosions above, on, and under these coral atolls in French Polynesia, including more than 140 underground nuclear tests; That there is considerable concern among the 28,000,000 people of the 22 countries and territories of Oceania regarding the adverse environmental effects in the region as a result of these nuclear tests; That the island nations of the South Pacific forum have staunchly opposed France's nuclear testing in the region, applauded France's adherence to a global nuclear testing moratorium since 1992, and strongly deplore and condemn any decision to resume France's nuclear testing in the South Pacific; That despite France's claim that its nuclear testing program is absolutely safe, there is scientific evidence to suggest both that radioactive leakage has already occurred at the testing site and that additional, more serious leakage might occur in the next 10 to 100 years; That there is also concern in the region that the coral atoll, Moruroa, has been subjected to premature and accelerated aging as a result of the testing program, risking the structural integrity of the atoll and increasing the possibility of its disintegration; That the leaders of France's insular territory, French Polynesia, have stated opposition to resumed nuclear testing, joining fellow Pacific Island governments, and it is inherently unfair that they should be used as a test site for France's nuclear explosions; Therefore, the Congress of the United States should recognize the concerns of the 28,000,000 people from nations and territories of Oceania and call upon the Government of France to cease all nuclear testing at the Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls. Mr. Speaker, after voice votes of both the House International Relations Subcommittee on the Asia-Pacific and the full Committee on International Relations--the committees unanimously approved the concurrent resolution and forwarded it for floor action. But for some unknown reason, Mr. Speaker, the concurrent resolution is being shuffled somewhere between offices and the floor of the House, and for that unknown reason, this important matter has conveniently been put on hold indefinitely. As a bipartisan measure that has been described as moderate and well balanced, it is shameful that the Republican leadership has chosen deliberately not to bring House Concurrent Resolution 80 to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to share with our colleagues some basic statistical data concerning nuclear testing not only in our country but other countries as well. I honestly believe there is a need for our policymakers and members of the nuclear club--the United States, Great Britain, France, Russia, and the Peoples Republic of China--to thoroughly re-examine the so-called merits--and the dark side--of having nuclear warheads as a deterrent against enemy aggression. Mr. Speaker, according to the bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the U.S. nuclear weapons program from 1940 to 1995 in constant U.S. dollars--is estimated to have cost America $4 trillion. Let me repeat, Mr. Speaker--$4 trillion. A $4 trillion stack of 1 dollar bills would reach the Moon, encircle it, and start part way back. Four trillion dollar bills could paper over every State east of the Mississippi, with enough left over to blanket Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, and most of Iowa. And, Mr. Speaker, the $4 trillion figure does not even include additional nuclear weapons-related costs America expends on aerial refueling tankers, aircraft and ships; nor the costs for dismantlement of outmoded missiles, bombs and submarines. And, Mr. Speaker, the $4 trillion does not even include the estimated cost of $350 billion needed to deal with impending nuclear waste management problems. Mr. Speaker, our nuclear weapons-related expenditure for last year alone was approximately $33.157 billion. Of this, the Department of Defense expended over $21 billion. DOD's costs included the maintenance, operations and modernization of nuclear weapons, ballistic missile defense, satellite systems, ground-airborne command posts, and the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program for dismantlement of nuclear weapons in the former Soviet Union. The Department of Energy expenditure to conduct stockpile research and testing of nuclear weapons--including nuclear materials stabilization, nuclear waste management, the naval nuclear propulsion program, technology transfer, intelligence and safety/security issues, verification and implementation of treaties--cost the Department of Energy almost $12 billion. Other agencies spent approximately $185 million on programs related to nuclear weapons. So, Mr. Speaker, just for the past year alone, our expenditure for nuclear weapons-related costs totalled over $33 billion. A question is raised, Mr. Speaker, whether or not the American taxpayers got their money's worth for our nuclear program. Here are some interesting figures for my colleagues to consider: The cost for not testing any nuclear bomb this year--$410 million; the total number of U.S.-built nuclear warheads and bombs from 1945 to the present-- 70,000; the total number of nuclear missiles the United States built from 1951 to the present--67,500; the total land area occupied by the Departments of Defense and Energy to carry out our nuclear weapons program--approximately 12,800 square miles--which is comparable to the combined area covered by the States of Maryland, Delaware and the District of Columbia; the total number of nuclear bombs we exploded in the State of Nevada--935. The total number of nuclear bombs the United States exploded in the Marshall Islands--now the Republic of the Marshall Islands--106. One of these explosions, Mr. Speaker, was the world's first hydrogen bomb test--known as the Bravo Shot. This was a 15 megaton hydrogen bomb explosion that was 1,000 times more powerful than the atom bomb that we dropped on the city of Hiroshima, which incidently killed and vaporized some 150,000 men, women, and children. Let me go on, Mr. Speaker, after our nuclear testing program in the Marshalls, there are still, to this day, up to 26 islands that remain contaminated as a result of our nuclear tests. Let me also add, Mr. Speaker, that we either lost or never received 11 nuclear bombs through our testing program. We have also built, Mr. Speaker, about 75 special facilities for the President and our national leaders to utilize in the event of a nuclear war. Today, over 250 million pages of documents remain secret that the Department of Energy has not yet declassified. Mr. Speaker, I'm no pacifist. As a Vietnam veteran, I have fought for America. I firmly believe that our country must always be second to none as far as our national security is concerned. Mr. Speaker, without boasting or arrogance on my part, I take great comfort in knowing that the United States stands not only as the preeminent leader of the free world but as the most powerful nation on this planet. Which brings me to the question before us--and to the 187 recognized sovereign nations of the world. There are nations that test, possess, and can even deliver and explode nuclear bombs if necessary in times of national crisis. Then there are nations that because of threats and perceived danger to their national security from bordering countries with nuclear bombs--want to develop their own nuclear weapons systems. Regional examples among such nations are the problems between Pakistan, India and China; between North Korea and South Korea; and between Israel and Iran. However, Mr. Speaker, the vast majority of the world's nations simply want nothing to do with nuclear bombs, nuclear missiles, nuclear everything. These nations consider nuclear weapons as weapons of genocide, that should be outlawed altogether by international law and standards of conduct. So, Mr. Speaker, I commend President Clinton and his administration for taking a strong stand against nuclear testing and support of a genuine zero-yield comprehensive test ban treaty. The Clinton administration, and in particular the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, should also be commended for their leadership in gaining the indefinite extension of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Mr. Speaker, 4 years ago a moratorium on testing was called for by the nuclear nations of the world. With the exception of China, all the nuclear powers, including the United States, Great Britain, Russia and France, complied and did not detonate nuclear bombs. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, last year in June with a newly elected President in France, one of the first policy decisions made by President Chirac was to destroy the moratorium and announce that France would explode eight more nuclear bombs in the South Pacific in French Polynesia. Chirac maintains it is in the highest national interest of France to expand its nuclear arsenal with a new generation of nuclear weapons--a neutron warhead. Mr. Speaker, where are these weapons to be pointed--Russia, a nation striving toward democracy? Or are their nuclear missiles pointed at Germany, whose humiliating invasion of France in World War II gave birth to France's desperate need today for a nuclear security blanket? Mr. Speaker, the cold war is over. Our Nation's taxpayers paid well over $5 trillion to overcome the global threat of Marxist communism. Thank God, Mr. Speaker, that nuclear weapons of mass destruction were never utilized--and certainly credit should be given to our country and our NATO allies, and to the former Soviet Union and members of the Warsaw Pact, for taking every precautionary measure to ensure the planet wasn't blown up into tiny pieces. Mr. Speaker, I'm sure my colleagues are aware but perhaps many Americans are not aware of the fact that without even considering the deadliness of the former Soviet Union's nuclear arsenal, our Nation alone, Mr. Speaker, has enough nuclear bombs to blow this planet up 17 times over. Mr. Speaker, if a nuclear war occurs, there is no such thing as a win-win result nor even a win-lose result. I submit, Mr. Speaker, the next nuclear holocaust will be a definite lose-lose result. There will be no winners--period. Everyone, everywhere, comes out a loser, as we will all ultimately suffer the harm and violence committed against the Earth's ecosystem. Mr. Speaker, I am also greatly troubled by man's difficulty in harnessing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Although the electricity generated by nuclear power is a great benefit to humanity, at the same time we are faced with the very serious crisis of how to dispose of nuclear waste materials. Even now, Mr. Speaker, there is a serious debate in Congress as to which State or States in the United States are going to have the dubious honor of playing host to storage centers of nuclear waste, now and for the future. Unfortunately, some of our national leaders are looking at Nevada as the designated storage site for dangerous and hazardous nuclear waste materials--but is it fair to the citizens of Nevada that their State should bear such a burden? And it should also be noted, Mr. Speaker, that it will cost our country over $350 billion to clean up and safely store such nuclear waste, when and if ever, our National Government decides where nuclear waste materials are to be stored. My point, Mr. Speaker, is that we're still greatly struggling with the peaceful application and harnessing of nuclear energy. Given that we haven't even been able to control and manage the peaceful use of nuclear power, Mr. Speaker, I find it most disturbing that our Nation and other nations look at nuclear weapons as a means of providing security and protection against aggression. Literally, Mr. Speaker, nuclear bombs are weapons of genocide and mass destruction. What bothers me greatly, Mr. Speaker, is that France--supposedly a shining example of Western values, Western virtues, and Western civilization, where there is a very high premium placed upon the value of human lives, human rights and human dignity--their Government simply went ahead 5 months ago and started exploding nuclear bombs half-a- world away from Paris, despite the protests and objections of millions of people from around the world. France exploded these nuclear bombs in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, with no real interest or concern for the marine environment; no real concern over the ciguatera fish poisoning created; no real concern for the pleadings of the nations that are part of the Pacific Ocean; no real concern for the tremendous amount of nuclear contamination from their testing that will eventually have to be addressed in the near future; and, no real concern for the health and welfare of some 200,000 French citizens who live in French Polynesia where the nuclear tests have taken place. Mr. Speaker, the post-cold-war era presents a rare and unique opportunity to lessen our reliance on nuclear weapons for global security and stability. With the progress achieved on the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty and Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty negotiations, the world stands at a historic point in time as we move toward nuclear disarmament. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me to tell President Chirac that what he is doing is not only shameful on behalf of the Government of France, but certainly outrageous, as far as I am concerned, as far as those people who live in the Pacific. Mr. Speaker, I want to express my appreciation to my two distinguished Members and colleagues from the great State of Hawaii who have volunteered to share with me their concerns about what the French Government has been doing to these areas in the South Pacific. I gladly yield to my good friend, the gentlewoman from Hawaii [Mrs. Mink].

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, now that it's almost certain that President Chirac of France will be making a state visit to our Nation's Capitol next week to meet with President Clinton and the leadership of the Congress, this will be a sad occasion for me, Mr. Speaker, and the millions of peoples throughout the world and through representation of leaders of some 168 countries throughout the world who have earnestly pleaded with President Chirac not to break the moratorium on nuclear testing. And yet despite all this, President Chirac of France in defiance of global consensus on raising tensions and suspicion, and even to promote again the extension and proliferation of nuclear weapons testing and development, France has already now exploded five nuclear bombs to improve its nuclear delivery capabilities with its long-distance missiles. It might interest my colleagues that French Government officials--and they're masters of these ploys--a few leaks here and some leaks there-- some critical points that President Chirac is going to shove right at our noses at the joint session of Congress next Thursday. First, a warning to Republican leaders and the President that closing our Government down will have serious economic consequences not only to France but to Europe and other regions of the world. Second, that the United States contributes too little in foreign aid to Third World countries. Third, that the United States should live up to its global responsibilities, whatever that means. Fourth, that United States contributions to the crisis in Bosnia is not enough, but at the same time, France expects to play very prominent, if not, the leading role as far as Europe is concerned relative to Bosnia. And fifth, France does not want any nation of the world to criticize its current nuclear testing program, because France does not trust the United States involvement with Europe's security needs for the past 50 years. Mr. Speaker, I suggest to my colleagues that what we're going to get from President Chirac next week is not the eloquence of Marquis de Lafayette, but the ghost of Charles de Gaulle II. Mr. Speaker, I include the following article from the January 24 New York Times for the Record: [From the New York Times, Jan. 24, 1996] Possibility of Default Starts to Worry Europe, Especially France (By Craig R. Whitney) Paris, January 23.--The possibility that the deficit- cutting impasse between Congress and the Clinton Administration could start causing the United States Government to default on its debt next month has begun to sink in on European leaders, and the French are anxious to avoid the turmoil that could result. President Jacques Chirac, who will visit Washington next week, is prepared to warn in a speech to a joint session of Congress that default would upset economies around the world and deeply undermine the American global position, French officials said today. Congressional Republicans have threatened to refuse to raise the national debt limit unless the Clinton Administration agrees to their agenda for cutting the Federal deficit. If the Administration refuses to give in and fails to find other ways of coming up with money, the Government could start running out of money to pay obligations due on March 1. At this point, some European leaders are said to be beginning to feel like onlookers at a political game whose players appear little concerned about the chaos a default would cause in international currency and bond markets. Some see a situation comparable to that in 1975, when Chancellor Helmut Schmidt of West Germany felt compelled to warn President Gerald R. Ford that letting New York City go bankrupt could send economic shock waves around the world, which was still fragile from the effects of a sudden rise in oil prices. Mr. Chirac told the Senate majority leader, Bob Dole, and Speaker Newt Gingrich during his last visit to Washington in the summer that the United States gave too little foreign aid to developing countries, and French officials say that he plans to deliver the same message to Congress in an address planned for Feb. 1. ``We hope that Congress will be disposed to let the United States live up to its global responsibilities,'' one official here said. Mr. Chirac will tell Congress, French officials say, that Europe, with about the same size economy as the United States, gives three times as much to developing countries-- $31 billion, compared with less than $9 billion last year from the United States. ``Where is America and its traditional generosity, where is its desire to help reshape the world?'' asked one French policy maker. Mr. Chirac is also likely to use his visit to tell both Congress and the Administration that France will insist on reshaping the NATO alliance to reflect changes since the end of the cold war, according to officials in Brussels and Paris. Mr. Chirac has reintegrated France into some NATO military structures that it left in 1966, but officials say he did so to push for the creation of a stronger European defense arm within the alliance. ``We need to be able to deal with crises like Bosnia even if the United States doesn't want to become involved,'' an official said. Mr. Chirac may also tell Washington that American plans to contribute $600 million to the reconstruction of Bosnia over the next three years are inadequate. European estimates of the total cost run to $3.7 billion. ``Don't think that the Europeans will be the only ones paying for Bosnian reconstruction,'' Mr. Chirac said in a recent interview, adding that the Europeans expected the United States to pay about the same as they will--about one third. American officials have responded that the United States committed 20,000 soldiers to the NATO peacekeeping force that began moving into Bosnia last month, a larger contingent than any of its allies.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to share with my colleagues and the American public an article that appeared in today's Washington Post. The article cites the French Government's admission that radioactive materials have leaked into the sea from its nuclear tests in the South Pacific. Mr. Speaker, while the French Government now tells the world it is just a small amount and it should be no problem, this radioactive material that has leaked into the Pacific Ocean from the Mururoa Atoll is iodine 131. Iodine 131 is produced only as a result of nuclear explosions. Mr. Speaker, President Chirac of France has already exploded five nuclear bombs on the Mururoa Atoll; let alone the fact that on the same atoll total, the French Government has exploded some 177 nuclear bombs, and that the contamination now on this atoll is worth several Chernobyls. Yet our Government is going to honor this man next week in Washington? Mr. Speaker, a defense secret report reveals that in 1979, the French Government detonated a 150-kiloton nuclear bomb only 1,300 feet below the surface of this atoll. Shame on you, France, for doing this terrible thing to the people of the Pacific. Mr. Speaker, for the Record I present the article by William Drozdiak entitled ``France Acknowledges Radioactive Leakage in South Pacific Nuclear Tests.'' [From the Washington Post, Jan. 24, 1996] France Acknowledges Radioactive Leakage in South Pacific Nuclear Tests (By William Drozdiak) Paris, January 23.--France acknowledged today that radioactive materials have leaked into the sea from its nuclear tests in the South Pacific but insisted that the quantities were so minimal that they posed no threat to the environment. The confirmation that radioactive elements such as iodine- 131 have seeped into the lagoon near the Mururoa test site seemed likely to revive the storm of protests that followed President Jacques Chirac's decision to conduct a final series of underground nuclear explosions before signing a global test-ban treaty. Japanese Foreign Minister Yukihiko Ikeda said he will demand a full explanation from France about the nature of the leaks. Other countries in the Pacific region, notably Australia and New Zealand, are expected to follow suit, French officials said. Defying international criticism, France has carried out five nuclear tests since September to verify a new warhead and to perfect simulation technology that will be used to monitor reliability of its nuclear weapons. A final test will take place next month before the test site is shut down permanently, French officials said. But the latest accounts of radioactive leakage at the Mururoa test site have raised questions about the credibility of the French government's arguments that the nuclear explosions present no environmental menace. ``There is no way to assess whether there is a coverup because the French do not allow independent verification,'' said Tom Cochran, a nuclear-test specialist at the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington. ``What makes people suspicious about whether they are hearing the truth is the fact that these tests were really unnecessary in the first place.'' France has always contended that its underground nuclear blasts inflict no damage on the fragile ecology of the Mururoa coral atoll, 750 miles southeast of Tahiti, which serves as its principal test site. Explosive devices are bored deep within the basalt foundation of the atoll, and French scientists say the intense heat from the blast vitrifies the rock and traps all radioactivity before it can escape. But Alain Barthoux, director of nuclear tests at France's Atomic Energy Commission, acknowledged that traces of radioactive material are usually ``vented'' into the lagoon when scientists drill down into the rock to obtain samples after every blast. Barthoux claimed, however, that such leaks involve ``insignificant amounts'' of radioactive substances, such as cesium, tritium or iodine, that vanish quickly in the environment. Quantities of iodine-131, for example, which can cause cancer when ingested by humans, shrink by half within eight days and disappear entirely within 80 days, he said. Barthoux denied a report in the Japan's Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper that small amounts of radioactive iodine were continuing to leak into the water as a result of the latest round of nuclear tests. The paper quoted sources at the Geneva disarmament conference, where the global test-ban treaty is being negotiated, as saying a French nuclear expert disclosed the radiation leakage at a meeting in Washington last November. The French specialist was quoted as saying the information was ``extremely confidential.'' France first acknowledged the release of radioactivity from its nuclear tests when oceanographer Jacques Cousteau visited the Mururoa site in 1987 and was allowed to conduct independent tests of the water in the lagoon. He found the presence of radioactive iodine, cesium, cobalt and europium, but in quantities that were not considered dangerous. But he warned that Mururoa's coral crown was deeply cracked and could pose a problem if testing continued. He said risks grew that higher levels of radioactive residue could seep into the lagoon. French Defense Minister Charles Millon denounced reports from last year of widening fissures in the atoll as ``unreliable.'' Foreign Minister Herve de Charette told the National Assembly that ``never have any cracks of any kind been spotted.'' But a confidential Defense Ministry report acknowledged the government has been aware, at least since 1979, that Mururoa's underwater basalt foundation is fractured several places. The report described the effects of an accident in 1979 in which the French detonated a 150-kiloton weapon only 1,300 feet below the surface of the lagoon. The blast was supposed to occur at 2,600 feet, but the bomb got stuck halfway down the test shaft and the French detonated it there rather than risk trying to move it. The explosion blasted loose more than 130 million cubic yards of rock and coral, causing a tidal wave that injured several French scientists and guards. The document also described underwater avalanches that followed three tests as proof the growing number of tests was posing serious environmental risks to the Mururoa atoll. The fragile state of the site after repeated tests persuaded France to stage its biggest blasts on nearby Fangataufa atoll, where, in October, it exploded a 100- kiloton warhead, designed for submarine launch.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentleman from Guam for being the chief sponsor of this important legislation. I think it is not only long overdue but, as the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Native Americans and Insular Affairs, I think it is most needful that the Congress should address this very important issue of true representation by our fellow American citizens that live in the Northern Marianas. I would like to ask the gentleman for just a couple of responses to one question that I have. I think it is needful that the American people need to know how important these islands were in World War II, even at this point in time. The fact that this covenant that was signed between the leaders and the people of the Northern Marianas and the United States Government still to this day holds a very important strategic importance to our security interests in that part of the world. I would ask the gentleman if this is still true.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, since September of last year, France has resumed detonating nuclear bombs in coral atolls in the South Pacific, defying worldwide protests against this crime against nature and against the lives and welfare of some 27 million men, women, and children who live in the Pacific region. In deciding to resume nuclear testing, the French President Jacques Chirac promised the international community there would be no environmental consequences from their nuclear tests, as radioactive substances would not be discharged into the ocean and the surrounding areas. Mr. Speaker, despite the intense fears of millions of residents in the Pacific, France's nuclear bomb detonations over the past 30 years are laying the foundation for a major environmental tragedy like Chernobyl. The French Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly stated that radioactive substances from their nuclear tests are trapped in the ground and there is no danger of radioactive contamination. Yesterday, France's big lie was revealed. After a Japanese newspaper broke the story yesterday, media reports confirm that France now acknowledges that radioactive materials have, indeed, leaked into the sea from their recent nuclear tests at Moruroa Atoll. Radioactive iodine-131, which is created by nuclear explosions and causes cancer in humans, was detected by French officials after the tests but was apparently covered up. Only after a French nuclear specialist mistakenly revealed the information during a disarmament conference held right here in Washington last November--that the radioactive leakage was brought to light. Mr. Speaker, this just confirms what we all know. The French Government cannot be trusted to tell the truth. One wonders what other monstrosities they have been hiding in the name of national interest. Although the French routinely deny that their nuclear tests threaten the health and safety of Pacific residents or endanger the region's fragile marine environment, documents from France's Atomic Energy Commission confirm that at least three tests in the past have also led to radioactive contamination at Moruroa Atoll. Scientific missions to Moruroa--although severely restricted by French authorities in to their access to test sites, test data and time for study--have verified the presence of radioactive isotopes such as iodine-131, cesium-134, tritium, krypton-85, and plutonium. The presence of these radioactive materials substantiate fears that leakage, venting, and accidental dispersal of radioactive materials have occurred at France's test facilities in the two island atolls in the Pacific. Despite France's assurances to the contrary, these reports and the events of yesterday confirm that France's underground testing program cannot ensure that radioactive contamination is fully contained. While France's Defense Minister and Foreign Minister denounce accounts that Moruroa Atoll has suffered deep cracks and fissuring from the nuclear testing, a confidential French Defense Ministry study directly contradicts them. As reported in today's Washington Post, The French Government has been aware, at least since 1979, that Moruroa's underwater basalt foundation is fractured in several places. The report described the effects of an accident in 1979 in which the French detonated a 150-kiloton weapon only 1,300 feet below the surface of the lagoon. The blast was supposed to occur at 2,600 feet, but the bomb got stuck halfway down the test shaft, and the French detonated it there rather than risk trying to move it. The explosion blasted loose more than 130 million cubic yards of rock and coral, causing a tidal wave that injured several French scientists and guards. The document also described underwater avalanches that followed three tests as proof the growing number of tests was posing serious environmental risks to Mururoa Atoll. Mr. Speaker, with French President Chirac expected in Washington next week, I would ask our colleagues to join me in urging that the French Government stop this madness and immediately cease nuclear testing in the South Pacific. Mr. Speaker, I've said it earlier and I'll say it again--the French Government has already exploded some 177 nuclear bombs in this atoll in the Pacific, and Prime Minister John Majors of Great Britain and our own President have given only lip service to these acts of atrocity against the marine environment and against the lives of human beings who live in that part of the world. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the following information: Radioactive Leak Found at France's Mururoa Tokyo (Reuter)--A Japanese newspaper said on Tuesday that France had detected a toxic radioactive substance near Mururoa Atoll in the South Pacific after resuming nuclear testing there last September. Yomiuri Shimbun, quoting unnamed sources close to the Geneva Conference on Disarmament, said the radioactive substance called ``Iodine 131'' was detected near Mururoa Atoll. The sources said a specialist from the French Nuclear Energy Agency disclosed the radiation leakage at an unofficial meeting in Washington last November of experts from prospective signatories of a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The French expert, however, did not make it clear exactly when the radioactive substance was detected. After making the disclosure, the French expert asked the other participants to ``forget what they had just heard,'' saying the data was ``extremely confidential,'' the sources were quoted as saying. Quoting one source close to the Washington meeting, Yomiuri said the radiation level of the substance was so low that it would not harm humans. But when Iodine 131, commonly detected after frequent nuclear tests, is taken into the human body, it could cause cancer, Yomiuri said. France has defied worldwide protests and conducted five nuclear weapons tests in the South Pacific since last September.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I would like to note the gentleman's remarks. It is true that it seems as if some of our colleagues have always had a very difficult time in pronouncing our names, but in spite of all of that, I think more importantly to commend the gentleman again in bringing this kind of legislation in a spirit of bipartisanship that I sure hope that in the coming weeks and months perhaps our other colleagues could better exemplify the true spirit of how legislation could be passed, in the spirit of cooperation, and the spirit of resolving the problems and not be part of the problem. Again I commend my good friend from California for bringing this bill. I hope we will continue to pass more legislation in the same spirit as we have done in these two pieces of legislation. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, again in the spirit of bipartisanship, I commend my good friend, the gentleman from California [Mr. Gallegly], chairman of the subcommittee, for bringing this bill to the floor. Mr. Speaker, the bill before us today, H.R. 2726, contains 19 technical amendments that, for the most part, correct grammatical oversights or incorrect statutory references in Indian-related laws. I would like to note two of the changes made by this bill. The first, contained in section 19, will make it easier for Indian tribes to carry out Self-Goverance compacts under the Indian Self-Determination Act. Mr. Speaker, the Indian Self-Determination Act is one of the most important acts passed by Congress for Indians and has enabled tribes to carry out governmental activities and become more self-sufficient. The second change is contained in section 14, which extends by 18 months the life of the Advisory Council of California Indian Policy, a body created through legislation sponsored by the ranking member of the Committee on Resources, the gentleman from California, George Miller. I would like to commend my colleague, Chairman Gallegly and his staff for their work on this bill. I have always been proud of the fact that both sides of our committee have always worked together on Indian issues. I am sure that we will continue to do so in the future. The Self-Governance amendment, which has been requested and is supported by the Indian tribes, would correct an oversight in last year's amendments to the Self-Governance program. Last year, Congress chose to respond to the six-year resistance of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service to streamlining the ``638'' contracting process by amending the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. The 1994 amendments further streamlining the ``638'' contracting and made permanent the Self-Governance program. The 1994 amendments also required the agencies to negotiate new regulations by mid 1996 with the Indian tribes to carry out the amendments. Since the passage of the 1994 Amendments, however, the Departments of the Interior and Health and Human Services have not interpreted and implemented all portions of the Act in accordance with Congressional intent. Specifically, the two departments have taken the position that certain beneficial provisions of Title I, governing Self-Determination or ``638'' contracts, may not be included in Title III or IV Self- Governance compacts and annual funding agreements. In addition, the position of the two departments has not always been consistent, so that in certain instances, one department has permitted inclusion of a Self- Governance clause reflective of a Title I provision while the other has not. Mr. Speaker, the result has been an inconsistent treatment of Self- Governance issues by the two Departments, and the denial to Self- Governance tribes of the substantial advantages afforded to the tribes under Title I of the Indian Self-Determination Act. This is troubling, since it has always been the intent of Congress that the Self- Governance initiative should be at least as broad and favorable to the tribes as the original Title I contracting mechanism. The amendment, which has been requested by the tribes and is supported by them, would allow tribes to incorporate the beneficial provisions of Title I of the Indian Self-Determination Act into Self- Governance compacts. Mr. Speaker, the amendment allows Self-Governance tribes to take advantage of the benefits extended to 638 contracting tribes. These advantages include--the ability to prepare annual audits pursuant to the Single Audit Act, using Indian preference in hiring, carryover prior year funding, coverage under the Federal Tort Claims Act, access to technical assistance grants, access to federal sources of supply, affords comparable rental rates for housing in Alaska, incorporation of 638 contract support cost provisions, protections against agency funding reductions, use of more flexible cost accounting procedures, incorporation of title I contract disputes procedures, limitation of costs provisions, applicability of Prompt Payment Act, authority to acquire excess Federal property, access to GSA screener IDs, use of interagency motor pool vehicles, and the Federal Tort Claims Act. The Government (basically IHS counsel) has taken the position that Congress did not apply these provisions in title I explicitly enough to titles III and IV. The Congress and the tribes disagree, but since the IHS has no real objection to them actually applying a technical amendment seemed like the proper thing to do. I want to commend the committee staff members on both sides of the aisle for this hard work. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as has been stated earlier by my good friend, the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Hayworth], I want to again express the true spirit of bipartisanship as we work towards agreement on some of the areas that were brought to the attention of both sides of the aisle. I commend my good friend from California, the chairman of the subcommittee, for his tremendous work in bringing this legislation to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, this bill would approve an agreement among the Resolution Trust Corporation, the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of Arizona, and the city of Scottsdale to divide 701 acres of land known as the Saddleback Mountain property. In 1989, the RTC, in its capacity as receiver for the Sun State Savings and Loan Association, acquired the Saddleback Mountain property and noticed the land for sale. The Pima Tribe submitted the highest cash bid for the property offering $6.5 million. In response to this bid, the city of Scottsdale filed suit against the RTC to acquire the property through eminent domain. Reacting to the suit, the RTC rejected all bids on the land and prepared to transfer the land to the city of Scottsdale at which point the tribe sued the city and the RTC for damages. Finally, all sides agreed to negotiate a settlement. The agreement will allow the tribe to receive the bulk of the land, the city of Scottsdale to obtain land for preservation purposes and to address traffic flow problems, and the RTC will receive the full amount originally bid. All parties support this agreement and both lawsuits will be dismissed upon its enactment. I support enactment of this bill and ask my colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman and my colleague from New York for this time; and also the chief sponsor of the legislation, the gentleman from Delaware. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation to give special recognition by the Congress to the Reverend and Mrs. Billy Graham, who over the course of some 60 years, have provided comfort and support for the spiritual needs of millions of men, women, and children throughout the world. Mr. Speaker, the Reverend Billy Graham, in my humble opinion, is perhaps the greatest Christian evangelist of this century. His spiritual messages were universal, in that they touched the hearts and minds of every human being who has been influenced by his demeanor, his example, and, most important of all by the giving of his life to serve the needs of others. That is pure Christianity in every way. Again, I commend my good friend from New York and the gentleman from Delaware for sponsoring this legislation.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, sometime next week President Ghirac of France will be visiting Washington to meet with our President, and I understand there may even be a chance that he will address a joint session of the Congress. Mr. Speaker, give me a break. This is the man with tremendous arrogance and disregard for the concerns of some 170 nations. He totally disregarded the concerns of the health and welfare of some 27 million men, women, and children who live in the nations of the Pacific. He disregarded and decided to break the moratorium and has already exploded five nuclear bombs in atolls in the South Pacific. Mr. Speaker, by my last count, President Chirac and his predecessors have already exploded 182 nuclear bombs in the atmosphere and in 2 Pacific atolls. One of these atolls is a timed nuclear bomb, the equivalent of several Chernobyls that the French Government has forced upon the lives of the Pacific people. Is this fair, Mr. Speaker? Shame on you, President Chirac of France. Shame on you for doing this to the Pacific people.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I do not want to make a play on words with the issue that is now before this body. Mr. Speaker, I was moved by the remarks earlier made by the gentleman from California [Mr. Cunningham]. We share a similar sense of anger and frustration in our experiences as Vietnam veterans, although I was not a war hero like my good friend from California. But all I know is that we could have been among the 58,000 dead soldiers and sailors whose names are honored at the Vietnam Memorial. Mr. Speaker, our problem with Vietnam, Lebanon, and Somalia was not because we did not have the resources to protect and sustain our troops. it was because of poor military planning and execution by both our civilian and military leaders here in Washington. Mr. Speaker, I hope to God we will not have another Secretary of Defense make a confession to the world and to the American people that it was wrong for us to be in Vietnam. I consider it an insult to the names of every soldier who died in Vietnam to tell that to the faces of the parents and relatives of those who died there in Vietnam. Mr. Speaker, it is obvious the Dayton agreement is not perfect. Our President has spoken well, given leadership. I ask that we sustain the Hamilton resolution with caution, as expressed by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Skelton]. Mr. Speaker, I don't want to make a play on words with the issue that is now before this body. I believe it is appropriate that Congress fulfills its constitutional responsibility by deliberating the merits of the resolution now before us. Mr. Speaker, I was moved by the remarks expressed earlier by the gentleman from California [Mr. Cunningham]. We share a similar sense of anger and frustration in our experiences as Vietnam veterans, although I was not a war hero like my friend from California. But all I know is that we could have been among the 58,000 dead soldiers and sailors whose names are honored at the Vietnam Memorial. Mr. Speaker, our problems with Vietnam, Lebanon, and Somalia was not because we did not have the resources to protect and sustain our troops.--It was because of poor military planning and execution by both our civilian and military leaders here in Washington. Mr. Speaker, I hope to God we will not have another Secretary of Defense make a confession to the world and the American people--and that is after the fact, that the United States was wrong to be in Vietnam. I consider it an insult to the names of every soldier who died in Vietnam. Perhaps former Secretary McNamara should tell that to the faces of the parents and relatives of those brave soldiers who gave their lives because of misguided policies that our political leaders dreamed up here in Washington. Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that the Dayton agreement is not a perfect document, and I sincerely hope our President will not be blinded by the concerns appropriately addressed by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Shelton]. Mr. Speaker, it is quite obvious that our President is not running an opinion poll or is trying to compete in a popularity contest. I commend our President for his global leadership on this important issue. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support the Hamilton resolution, but to recognize also the concerns raised earlier by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Shelton]. Mr. Speaker, without United States leadership and participation, no peace is possible in Bosnia. For nearly 4 years, a horrifying war has torn Bosnia apart. The world has witnessed the murder of 250,000 innocent men, women, and children there, while over 2 million people have been forced from their homes and made refugees. Yesterday, like many other members, I was deeply touched by Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres' address before Congress. Prime Minister Peres noted the United States has saved the world from three of its greatest menaces: German Nazism, Japanese Militarism, and Soviet communism. In honoring America, Prime Minister Peres stated, ``You did it. You brought freedom. You defended it. Even in this very day, as Bosnia reels in agony, you offered a compass and a lamp to a confused situation like in the Middle East. Nobody else was able or ready to do it. You enabled many nations to save their democracies even as you strive now to assist nations to free themselves from their nondemocratic past.'' ``America,'' stated Prime Minister Peres, ``In my judgment, cannnot escape what history has laid on your shoulders, on the shoulders of each and every one of you. You cannot escape that which America can alone do. America alone can keep the world free and assist nations to assume the responsibility for their own fate.'' Mr. Speaker, Prime Minister Peres has it right. Throughout history, America has always stood for peace and freedom and what is right. In Bosnia, we and our allies are not going to fight a war, but to protect a peace. Without American Leadership, there would be no peace agreement. Without American troop participation, this peace agreement will not be carried out. As the leader of the free world, America cannot shirk its responsibility to end the suffering in Bosnia, to stop the spread of war to Europe, and to ensure a lasting peace. The President has committed the United States to the Bosnia mission. As former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger recently stated, ``I now believe that if we do not honor the President's words, the threat to our security would be greater because nobody would believe that we are capable of conducting a serious foreign policy. Mr. Speaker, with American leadership and credibility on the line, we cannot just cut and run from our duty to lead. It is time that we support our President and our troops in providing light and hope to this dark part of the world.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to again commend the gentleman from New Jersey, [Mr. Smith] as the chief sponsor of this legislation. Not only that, but I commend him not only as an outstanding leader on our committee but certainly a champion of human rights throughout the world. I want to commend him for his leadership in that capacity. Certainly I want to thank the gentleman from New York, chairman of our Committee on International Relations, for his leadership. In the spirit of bipartisanship, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues that we support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. Rohrabacher].

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Hastings]. (Mr. HASTINGS of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi].

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the House Concurrent Resolution 117 as amended, and certainly commend the chairman of the Committee on International Relations, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman], and also my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Smith], who is the chief sponsor of this legislation. Mr. Speaker, this resolution has broad bipartisan support. I certainly would like to commend also the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Hamilton] as the ranking Democrat on the full committee; also my colleague from California [Mr. Berman], who is the ranking Democrat of the subcommittee on Asian and Pacific Affairs. I commend these gentlemen and also the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi], the gentleman from California, [Mr. Lantos], and the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Gejdenson], all sponsors of this important legislation. Mr. Speaker, this is an important resolution, and it comes at an extremely opportune time. Tomorrow, Mr. Wei Jingsheng goes on trial for allegations that he attempted to overthrow the Government of the People's Republic of China. Mr. Wei Jingsheng is probably the leading pro-democracy advocate today in China, Mr. Speaker. For 14 years of his life he was in prison, from 1979 to 1993, and was released in 1993. And yet he was arrested again in April of last year, shortly after his meeting with the Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights, Mr. John Shattuck. Mr. Wei Jingsheng, since last year we did not know what was happening to him, until now we find out from the Government that he will have an open trial tomorrow. Mr. Speaker, I submit that the committee unanimously adopted this resolution last week. The resolution urges the unconditional release of Mr. Wei Jingsheng; and, in the event this does not happen, that he be afforded all the internationally recognized human and legal rights. The resolution also urges the State Department to make Mr. Wei's release a particularly important objective in relations with China, and to raise the issue relevant in bilateral and multilateral forums. Finally, Mr. Speaker, the resolution recognizes Mr. Wei merits careful consideration for the Nobel Peace Prize. The resolution has been changed in a number of respects, and the administration fully supports this resolution, as amended. Mr. Speaker, the only thing Mr. Wei is guilty of is standing as a symbol for the aspirations of the Chinese people to adhere to the basic and fundamental principles of freedom and democracy. I am sensitive to China's enormous and difficult task in meeting the needs of her 1.3 billion citizens, while undergoing dramatic economic and social changes. But I also submit, Mr. Speaker, at the same time the People's Republic of China must show more evidence of complying with the basic provisions of the United Nations Charter, specifically that of enhancement and protection of human rights. Mr. Speaker, it is important that the Congress of the United States speak out in very specific terms on the matter of human rights. We must say to China's political leaders that we expect them to live up to internationally accepted standards of conduct and behavior by all its citizens. Mr. Speaker, the People's Republic of China, as a full-fledged member of the United Nations, certainly should comply with the basic provisions of human rights as stated in the charter of the United Nations. I urge my colleagues to support the adoption of this resolution, and I commend again the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Gilman], my good friend and chairman of the Committee on International Relations, for bringing this resolution to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record articles on Wei Jingsheng. [From the Washington Post, Dec. 12, 1995] Why Is China Taking On World by Trying Dissent? Beijing.--Nine ago this month, senior leader Deng Xiaoping urged Communist Party leaders to take a hard line against domestic critics, without concern for China's international image. ``Didn't we arrest Wei Jingsheng?'' Deng asked rhetorically about the democracy activist who was sentenced to a 15-year prison term in 1979. ``We arrested him and haven't let him go, yet China's image has not suffered.'' This week China's leaders put Wei on trial again, charged with attempting to overthrow the government. And many China watchers worry that the trial portends a resurgence of actions by China's hard-line leadership violating internationally recognized human rights. ``There's no way that this can help China internationally,'' said UCLA political scientist Richard Baum. ``It's an unsettling sign, a jarring occurrence for a regime trying to portray itself as having joined the international community.'' Like many political prisoners, Wei's reputation and stature has been growing the longer he sits in prison. While many other Chinese political activists have put aside politics to pursue business, Wei has remained an uncompromising advocate of democracy for China. Over the last decade, he has become China's most prominent dissident. Wei's trial, scheduled for Wednesday at Beijing's Intermediate Court, has mobilized groups anxious about the outcome, which could carry punishment ranging from 10 years in prison to the death penalty. Human rights groups are prodding the U.S. Congress to adopt a resolution calling for Wei's release. Wei's sister, Wei Shanshan, who lives in Germany, flew to the United States today to lobby lawmakers on her brother's behalf. A demonstration is being organized for Tuesday afternoon in front of the Chinese Embassy on Connecticut Ave. Human rights groups are pressing the Clinton administration to take a strong stand in defense of Wei. Those groups say that President Clinton, by soft-pedaling human rights issues in his October meeting with Chinese President Jiang Zemin and by severing the link between human rights and trade, might have led the Chinese government to think it could sentence Wei without severe repercussions. Among those offerring to serve on Wei's defense team are: Nicholas Katzenbach and Richard Thornburgh, attorneys general under presidents Lyndon Johnson and George Bush; for French justice minister Robert Badinter; Singapore's former solicitor general Francis Seow, and former chairman of the Bar of England and Wales Lord Gareth Williams. A Chinese court spokesman said today that the trial of Wei would be open, an unusual step in political cases. The court said, however, that foreign lawyers would not be allowed to participate. Wei's family has hired Zhang Sishi, who defended dissidents Wang Juntao and Chen Ziming when they were tried for participating in the 1989 democracy demonstrations. Each was sentenced to 13 years in prison. In China, an arrest generally is announced after police and the courts have decided they have enough evidence to convict. Wei was the most daring and influential of the so-called Democracy Wall activists who in late 1978 printed magazines and pasted democracy manifestoes on a wall just west of the former Forbidden City, now part of the Chinese leadership compound. At that time, Deng had returned to power and promised to deliver China from the political upheaval of the Cultural Revolution and to undertake four modernizations: in agriculture, industry, science and technology, and national defense. While many Chinese welcomed Deng's return after a turbulent decade, Wei and other Democracy Wall activists were critical. Wei said Deng's program would fail without a ``fifth modernization''--democracy. Unlike political reformers within the Communist Party, Wei and his associates at Exploration magazine in 1978 totally rejected Marxism-Leninism. He said Marxist countries were ``without exception undemocratic and even anti-democratic autocracies.'' Wei was convicted of ``counter-revolutionary'' activities and of leaking secret information about China's war with Vietnam to a reporter. He was sentenced to 15 years in jail and was paroled six months early in September 1993. Unrepentant, he urged the international community to deny the 2000 Olympic Games to Beijing. He was rearrested April 1, 1994, shortly after meeting Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights John Shattuck, and was held incommunicado until last month--when the government announced charges against him. Analysts note several possibilities in trying to explain why Wei is being put on trial now. Some suggest China wants to use a convicted and resentenced Wei as a bargaining chip to persuade other governments to back off from a critical human rights resolution at the United Nations. That concern could also help explain the Chinese government's effort to make the trial look more legitimate. Others say that China could be preparing to boot Wei out of the country and that it needs to show its toughness by first handing him a long prison term--just as it did with Chinese- born American citizen Harry Wu, who was detained this summer while trying to enter China. Expulsion would give Wei a platform overseas but it would remove him from the Chinese political scene. A third possibility is that hard-line officials in the Ministry of State Security, the army and the Communist Party propaganda department are using the trial as a vehicle for their political comeback--as well as a warning to anyone contemplating dissent as the 91-year-old Deng fades from power. Whatever legal motions the government goes through, no observer consulted related Wei's incarceration to what are widely viewed as trumped-up charges. Merle Goldman, a professor of Chinese politics at Boston University, said, ``I don't see what evidence they can have since he was followed every single minute he was out of jail.''

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, today marks the 125th anniversary of the first African-American elected to the House of Representatives. Joseph Hayne Rainey, was elected to Congress in December 12, 1870, serving four consecutive terms from the First Congressional District of South Carolina. He also was the first black Member of Congress from South Carolina. From the humbling vocation of his father, a barber, to being drafted by the Confederacy to fortify Charleston, Joseph Hayne Rainey climbed the ranks of the Republican Party, serving as county chairman and as a member of the State executive committee from 1868 to 1876. While in Congress Joseph Rainey served on the following committees: Freedman's Affairs; Indian Affairs; Invalid Pensions; Selected Enrolled Bills; Select Centennial; and the Celebration of Proposed National Census of 1875. He was recognized for his gracious and suave manner, never humiliating, always approachable and always in service to his constituents. He demonstrated considerable ability as the expounder of the political aspirations for African-Americans, actively seeking civil rights legislation, including the integration of public schools. Mr. Speaker, today we pay tribute to Joseph Hayne Rainey, the first elected African-American Representative from South Carolina. He portrayed the struggle of African-Americans, the struggle to be recognized as people and citizens of the United States. As well as the passage of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to our Constitution, Joseph Rainey provided African- Americans a vision of what can be achieved. He fought hard for both African-Americans and caucasians, for the free and those still in chains, for the literate and illiterate, for man and for woman-- believing in equal opportunity and equal access, and that race should not be an issue. Mr. Speaker, I am in admiration of Joseph Rainey's achievement. He entered the political arena 10 to 20 years removed from the bondage of slavery, and his rise to the Halls of Congress helped lift the struggle of African-Americans to a new plain and acknowledgment. Joseph Hayne Rainey, born June 21, 1832, died August 1, 1887. Elected to the U.S. House of Representatives 125 years ago, December 12, 1870. Mr. Speaker, I yield back to my colleague from New Jersey, Congressman Payne, and thank him for the opportunity to bear testimony on this special occassion.