Maurice Hinchey

Mr. HINCHEY

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, Congress has been moving for the last few years to protect the identities, personal information, and privacy of Americans. Almost 2 years ago, the House pushed for a creation of the Federal Do Not Call Registry. Months later, however, Congress passed legislation that will put millions of people's personal information and privacy in jeopardy. The Medicare Modernization Act allows and encourages the Secretary of Health and Human Services to distribute the personal information of millions of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries to private companies for marketing purposes. In light of the number of significant breaches of personal information recently and the widespread reports of identity theft, this amendment would prevent the government from distributing the personal information of millions of Americans to the many companies that may be providing prescription drug plans when the so-called Medicaid Modernization Act goes into effect. If personal Medicare information is given to these providers, our constituents will be subjected to calls from any of the prescription drug plan providers. If we have learned anything from telemarketers, it is that our senior citizens will be harassed at home by plan providers calling and sending direct mail. Personal privacy is a nonpartisan issue. During the 108th Congress, over 400 Members voted in favor of creating the Do Not Call Registry. Millions of Americans have had their identity stolen, no matter their political affiliation. We can stop the spread of this personal information being carelessly distributed. I urge support of the gentleman from Oregon's (Mr. DeFazio) amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I appreciate the sentiments expressed by the gentleman from Ohio, my good friend, and I understand that he is interested in the best interests of the people in this country, particularly the Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. But the fact of the matter is we have experience in this regard. We have the Federal Employees Health Benefits plan. None of the information about who they are, where they are located, what their telephone numbers may be, is distributed to anyone so that they may be contacted under the provisions of the Federal Employees Health Benefits plan. So why, under this new so-called Medicare Modernization Act, are we communicating that kind of information indiscriminately to a whole host of companies that are now going to besiege senior citizens with phone calls that they are not going to welcome? We have ways to communicate whatever information we want to to the people who may be the beneficiaries under this program, and they can do that through the existing Medicare and Medicaid programs very simply. There is no reason whatsoever to give this information out indiscriminately so that these people can be harassed. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. HINCHEY

Mr. HINCHEY. 44. Specialist Nathaniel A. Caldwell 45. Private David Evans Jr. 46. Private First Class Jeremiah D. Smith 47. Major Matthew E. Schram 48. Staff Sergeant Brett J. Petriken 49. Private Kenneth A. Nalley 50. Sergeant Keman L. Mitchell 51. Staff Sergeant Michael B. Quinn 52. Sergeant Thomas F. Broomhead 53. Staff Sergeant Kenneth R. Bradley 54. Specialist Jose A. Perez III 55. Specialist Kyle A. Griffin 56. Specialist Michael T. Gleason 57. Specialist Zachariah W. Long 58. Sergeant Jonathan W. Lambert 59. Sergeant Atanasio Haro Marin Jr. 60. Private First Class Branden F. Oberleitner 61. Petty Officer Third Class Doyle W. Bollinger Jr. 62. Sergeant Travis L. Burkhardt 63. Private Jesse M. Halling 64. Sergeant Michael E. Dooley 65. Private First Class Gavin L. Neighbor 66. Specialist John K. Klinesmith Jr. 67. Staff Sergeant Andrew R. Pokorny 68. Private First Class Ryan R. Cox 69. Specialist Joseph D. Suell 70. Private Shawn D. Pahnke 71. Sergeant Michael L. Tosto 72. Private Robert L. Frantz 73. Private First Class Michael R. Deuel 74. Staff Sergeant William T. Latham 75. Specialist Paul T. Nakamura 76. Specialist Orenthial Javon Smith 77. Sergeant First Class Gladimir Philippe 78. Specialist Cedric Lamont Lennon 79. Private First Class Kevin C. Ott 80. Lance Corporal Gregory E. MacDonald 81. Specialist Andrew F. Chris 82. Specialist Richard P. Orengo

Mr. HINCHEY

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I was very pleased to see that the amendment that was offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) to prevent any funds in this bill from being used to contravene the United Nations' acts and other acts against torture. I think that is a very good thing. But I need to take this opportunity to point out to the House that we are foregoing our responsibility here to investigate these kinds of acts that have taken place over the course of the last 2 years or so in places like Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Camp Cropper, Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan; and we have an increasing amount of evidence indicating that these kinds of torturous activities were not just carried out incidentally by low-ranking members of the armed services, but that this was systemic and systematic. We have, for example, recently released documents from Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez which seem to indicate that he approved interrogation techniques outside of the Geneva Convention, outside of international law, and outside the U.S. Army's own field manual. These activities included prolonged stress positions, sensory deprivation, use of dogs to induce stress and fear. We have the first Abu Ghraib report directed by U.S. Army Major General Antonio Taguba, who wrote in his conclusion that ``between October and December of 2003 at the Abu Ghraib confinement facility, numerous incidents and sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses were inflicted. This systemic,'' he says, ``systemic and illegal abuse was intentionally perpetrated.'' It is clear from General Taguba's reports that these were not incidental, and that they were inflicted broadly. The Red Cross reported, by eye witnesses at about the same time, ``these methods of physical and psychological coercion were used by the military intelligence in a systematic way to gain confessions and extract information or other forms of cooperation from persons who had been arrested or deemed to have security value.'' That is a quote from the Red Cross report. Officials implicated in abuse now, interestingly enough, are being promoted. There has been no action taken against the officials implicated in this abuse at the highest levels. This Congress is abrogating its responsibility. This House of Representatives should be holding hearings. It may be necessary to appoint a special counsel out of the Justice Department to look into this. We need to get to the bottom of this. Our reputation as a Nation is at stake. Now, we might ask, as others have, how did all of this begin? Well, here is what the circumstantial evidence indicates. The circumstantial evidence, backed up by the report from which I just quoted, written by Major General Antonio Taguba, shows that it originated at the highest levels of the Pentagon, communicated by Steven Cambone, who was appointed by Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld to be the first Under Secretary for Intelligence. This is the first time that the Secretary of Defense or that the Pentagon has had an Under Secretary for Intelligence. That man is Steven Cambone. He communicated to General Geoffrey Miller, the commander of the detention and interrogation center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, that these kinds of activities needed to take place. Now, General Geoffrey Miller, according to the Taguba report, said that detention operations must act as enablers for interrogation. He introduced into Iraq the exclusive and illegal interrogation tactics used at Guantanamo to ``GITMO-ize'' the prison system in Iraq. They told our good soldiers in Iraq that no rules apply, no rules apply; and then people wonder how these low-ranking individuals carried out the acts that have been documented now in court proceedings as well as in photographs. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Chairman, that the House of Representatives is not fulfilling its obligations under the law and under the Constitution. The system of checks and balances has broken down. It seems as though the executive branch of government is behaving in a way outside of the law. We need to pay attention to this. This House needs to engage itself in the right kinds of activities for the right kinds of purposes. Amendment Offered by Mr. Obey

Mr. HINCHEY

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of my departed friends Keith and Ruth Smiley, on the occasion of the 25th Anniversary of Mohonk Consultations. It is with great pleasure that I honor Keith and Ruth for their outstanding vision and their steadfast dedication to a more equitable and sustainable global community. Keith Smiley was a good friend, who shared my enthusiasm for protecting and preserving the unique beauty of the Shawangunk Mountains. Keith's life reflected his Quaker upbringing. He treasured the world around him and sought to bring peace and social justice to people by promoting self-determination. He truly believed that all people had the innate right to be involved in the decisions that affected their day-to-day lives. However, the quality that made him special, and that I pay homage to today, was his ardent belief that these decisions, decisions on governing and development, must take into account their impact on the environment. The idea of ``consultations'' had always been part of the Mohonk Mountain tradition and under Keith Smiley's leadership they were very successful. When the Mohonk Trust was formed in 1963, the Smileys were able to further their stewardship of the land as well as their goals of promoting international understanding and world peace through conferences and the exchange of ideas. After successfully hosting a gathering of environmental and international development groups for the Agency for International Development, Keith moved forward with his own dream for a unique environmental organization. Mohonk Consultations was officially incorporated in 1980. Since that time, the group has brought together the foremost leaders on the environment, the economy and other individuals seeking new, environmentally sound methods of getting things accomplished. A tribute to Keith and his work would be incomplete without mentioning his wife, Ruth. Trained as a naturalist and horticulturist, she truly appreciated the sublime nature of her surroundings. What Keith brought to the table in discussion, Ruth brought through her photographs. She always had her camera ready to capture the beauty of the Mountains and was an eager participant in the numerous programs and nature walks sponsored at Mohonk. Together, Keith and Ruth had a holistic approach to life, the environment and to the world around them. Their vision lives on today through Mohonk Consultations. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to submit these remarks in honor of Keith and Ruth Smiley and in recognition of the 25th anniversary of Mohonk Consultations.

Mr. HINCHEY

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, let me just say in closing that the opposition to this amendment today on the floor has presented 19th century arguments for a 21st century problem. We have people in this country who are suffering the debilitating pain that comes from cancer and chemotherapy. No relief is available to them except by association with cannabinoids. That association should be allowed under a doctor's prescription. That condition exists now in 10 States across this country. This Congress says to those 10 States, I am sorry, but you cannot do it. We are intervening. That should stop. This Congress should not be about inducing pain, encouraging pain. This Congress should be about relieving pain in the American people. This Congress should be about enlightened medication and an enlightened health care delivery system, not one based upon 19th century prejudices, biases and a narrow ideology. Let us pass this amendment. Let us be sensible, creative, decent and caring for the American people. Let us pass this amendment.

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This amendment would prohibit funds for the Department of Justice from being used to prevent patients in States that have medical marijuana laws from following those laws. Over the past 9 years, 10 States have adopted laws which allow the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. They legalized the use of marijuana to relieve the intense pain that accompanies debilitating diseases, including AIDS, cancer, multiple sclerosis, and glaucoma. With the exceptions of Hawaii and Vermont, all of those laws were adopted by referendum, passed by the people. Thousands of patients have testified, explained, and acknowledged that marijuana helps relieve symptoms, such as nausea, pain, and loss of appetite associated with serious illnesses. These people have found that marijuana is the only remedy that improves their quality of life. Yet the DEA has been targeting these people for arrest and sending them to jail. This needs to stop. It is unconscionable that we in Congress could possibly presume to tell a patient that he or she cannot use the only medication that has proven to combat the pain and symptoms associated with a devastating illness. How can we tell very sick people that they cannot have the drug that could save their lives simply because of a narrow ideology and bias against that drug in this Congress? A 1999 Institute of Medicine report for the National Academy of Sciences described the legitimate use of medical marijuana. It stated: ``Until a nonsmoked rapid-onset cannabinoid drug delivery system becomes available, we acknowledge that there is no clear alternative for people suffering from chronic conditions that might be relieved by smoking marijuana. Today there is no such alternative available.'' This amendment would affect only the States that allow the use of medical marijuana by preventing the Justice Department from arresting, prosecuting, suing, or otherwise discouraging doctors and patients in those States from following the laws of those States to relieve their physical injuries and conditions. In the Supreme Court's majority opinion last week, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the issue can be addressed ``through the democratic process, in which the voices of voters allied with these respondents may one day be heard in the halls of Congress.'' With this amendment, we intend to use the powers granted us in the Constitution and reaffirmed by the Supreme Court last week to do just that. Opponents of this amendment have tried to misrepresent it. This amendment does not encourage the recreational use of marijuana. It does not encourage drug use in children. It does not legalize marijuana. It would give relief to people suffering from horrific diseases and allow their doctors to decide which drugs will work best to do so. Organizations including the Nation's largest medical organization, the 2.7 million member American Nurses Association, the American Public Health Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the New York State Medical Society, among others, have publicly endorsed the medical use of marijuana. Our amendment is about compassion, in allowing patients the simple right of using the most effective medicine possible. Taxpayers' dollars should not be spent on sending seriously or terminally ill patients to jail. A vote for this amendment is a vote for States rights and for compassion. Ten States have decided to use medical marijuana in their laws. The Federal Government should not stand in their way. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), a sponsor of this amendment.

Mr. HINCHEY

Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.