Tom Lantos

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on March 30th, the Congressional Human Rights Caucus held a groundbreaking Members' Briefing entitled, ``International Disability Rights: The Proposed UN Convention.'' This discussion of the global situation of people with disabilities was intended to help establish disability rights issues as an integral part of the general human rights discourse. The briefing brought together the human rights community and the disability rights community, and it raised awareness in Congress of the need to protect disability rights under international law to the same extent as other human rights through a binding UN convention on the rights of people with disabilities. Our expert witnesses included Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Mark P. Lagon; the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Ecuador to the United Nations, Ambassador Luis Gallegos; the United Nations Director of the Division for Social Policy and Development in the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Johan Scholvinck; the distinguished former Attorney General of the United States, former Under-Secretary General of the United Nations and former Governor of Pennsylvania, the Honorable Dick Thornburgh; the President of the National Organization on Disability (NOD), Alan A. Reich; Kathy Martinez, a member of the National Council on Disabilities (NCD); and a representative of the United States International Council on Disabilities (USCID) and Executive Director of Mental Disability Rights International, Eric Rosenthal. As I had announced earlier, I intend to place the important statements of our witnesses in the Congressional Record, so that all of my colleagues may profit from their expertise, and I ask that the statement of Mr. Scholvinck be placed at this point in the Congressional Record. Presentation by Johan Scholvinck Mr. Chairman, thank you for inviting me to this historic briefing on the proposed UN Convention on the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities. It is an honour and a pleasure being here with you. I will confine my remarks to describe the situation faced by persons with disabilities in developing countries. I believe that the disheartening picture that will emerge from what I am about to say will be further proof of the need for a UN Convention. First let me cite some statistics: 80 percent of people with disabilities and their families live in a developing country. Between 400 and 500 million people living in a developing country have a disability. Persons with disabilities are often trapped in a cycle of poverty and exclusion. For 150 million of them, disability has been caused by malnutrition and contagious diseases while conflicts and war accounts for a few millions, As many as 1 in 5 of the poorest people have a disability. These are staggering figures. Furthermore, persons with disabilities are frequently cut off from employment opportunities and suffer unemployment rates far higher than that of the non-disabled workforce. In many developing countries, it is estimated that 80 percent or more of the disabled are unemployed, which further contributes to their high incidence of poverty and social exclusion. While persons with disabilities also face similar challenges in developed countries the situation is far worse in developing countries where both disability benefits and vocational rehabilitation services may be virtually non- existent. In such cases, the disabled are often left dependent, destitute and despairing. Given the relatively small size of the formal labour market in most developing countries, particularly in rural areas where many of the disabled live, opportunities for integration of persons with disabilities through employment largely rest on informal work, particularly self-employment. Unfortunately, persons with disabilities are often denied loans by banks and lenders. Improving the living conditions of persons with disabilities in developing countries is an overlooked developmental challenge. As James Wolfensohn, the President of the World Bank once said, ``unless disabled people are brought into the development mainstream, it will be impossible to cut poverty in half by 2015 as agreed to by more than 180 world leaders at the United Nations Millennium Summit in September 2000''. So is the goal to give every girl and boy the chance to achieve a primary education by the same date. Every child is unique and has a fundamental right to education. Yet in developing countries, only a small minority of disabled children is in school. Less than 10 percent of children with disabilities attend formal education and over 9 in 10 are illiterate. When denied the basic right of education, disabled people become severely restricted in terms of their economic, social and political opportunities as well as the prospects for their personal development. Without an education it is more difficult to secure a job, particularly one that pays a decent wage, to participate actively and fully in the community and to have a meaningful voice in policy making, especially on issues that directly concern the affected population. Given the dynamics of disability and health, access to adequate health care services is essential for the promotion of independent living for the disabled. Health services play a critical role in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of illnesses and conditions which can cause physical, psychological and intellectual impairments. Yet for the majority of persons with disabilities living in developing countries, poverty precludes access to these vital services-- either because health care facilities and practitioners are not sufficiently available, or there are not enough funds to purchase needed medications and devices. Particularly dramatic is, beyond the lack of orthopedic surgeons, the greatly insufficient number of medical rehabilitation centers to help people adapt to disabling conditions. According to the World Health Organization, at most only 5 percent of the disabled in developing countries have access to rehabilitation services. The potential for enhancing the possibility of persons with disabilities to carry on independent lives rests on the integration of the disabled into the general community, rather than placing them in exclusionary institutions or relegating them into ``colonies'' of disabled. Community Based Rehabilitation programmes, which are in the process of becoming fairly well established in industrialized countries tend to be part and parcel of these strategies, but remain rare in developing countries. In developing countries, persons with disabilities are often excluded from the mainstream of the society, discriminated against and denied their human rights. Violations of the human rights of persons with disabilities are seldom addressed in society. Many disability legislation and policies are based on the assumption that persons with disabilities are simply not able to exercise the same rights as non-disabled persons. Consequently, the situation of persons with disabilities is often addressed in terms of rehabilitation and social services. In many countries, existing provisions do not provide for the rights of disabled persons in all their aspects--that is, political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights--on an equal basis with persons without disabilities. Furthermore, anti- discrimination laws often have weak enforcement mechanisms, thereby denying opportunities for persons with disabilities to participate on the basis of equality in social life and development. Mr. Chairman, the adoption of the UN Convention will not provide a magic wand in overcoming the dismal conditions faced by persons with disabilities in developing countries. However, without such an instrument their chances of becoming fully integrated in their societies will remain infinitely difficult to attain.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution and I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to commend the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), chair of the Subcommittee on Europe, for this excellent resolution. I also want to thank our colleagues who played a role in bringing this resolution forward: the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Wexler), the ranking member of the subcommittee; the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Jo Ann Davis), chair of the Transatlantic Legislators Dialogue, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee). Mr. Speaker, May 1, 2004, was a historic day. Ten days ago, the European Union expanded to a total of 25 member countries with the addition of 10 new member states to the European Union. This was the largest expansion in the organization's almost half a century of history. Most remarkably, 8 of the 10 countries became new members of the European Union that were formerly members of the Soviet bloc. Having seen on countless occasions firsthand the trials and challenges these countries faced in the 50 years following the Second World War, I am personally delighted and encouraged at the prospects that this new union will give to these countries. The 10 new member states bring an additional 75 million citizens to the European Union. The population of the European Union, as we all know, now surpasses that of our own country. The economic output of the 25-member European Union is very near to our own. With open and free borders, common economic policies and shared security objectives, the new European Union can and will become an even stronger economic and political force globally. Mr. Speaker, this expansion of the European Union extends the zone of economic and political stability and security hundreds of miles to the east. It anchors the new member states in an economic and political union that is committed to democratic values and respect for civil and human rights and the rule of law. The new member countries which were formerly part of the Soviet sphere have had more limited experience with democratic governments and the free market economy. Their participation in the EU will provide new experience and a stronger commitment to these vital values that we share with the European Union. Mr. Speaker, while the effects of this EU expansion will be different for every one of the new member states, it is clear that there is potential benefit for the United States in this historic development. We in the Congress welcome this new expansion of the European Union, and we reaffirm our desire to continue the positive relationship that we have had with the European Union and its predecessor organizations over the last half century. The U.S.-European relationship is critical to stability and security throughout the globe. To the extent that we cooperate and work together, the entire world will be a safer and more prosperous place. But to the extent that our political and economic relations are in disarray, the entire world will suffer. Mr. Speaker, in the economic sphere I call upon the united European Union, and particularly the new member states as well as our own government, to focus our relations on working together to resolve the trade and economic differences that occasionally divide us. Our economic ties are far too important to be dominated by minor disputes. In the political and security sphere, it is critical that we cooperate in dealing with the threat of terrorism and the challenges that face all of our societies. I urge all member countries of the European Union to work with the United States to assure that our significant mutual interests take precedence over less important irritants that have strained our relations in recent times. Mr. Speaker, our resolution welcomes a historic change in the European Union. We in the United States stand to gain much from this change, and we should all welcome it. I urge all of my colleagues to support H. Res. 577. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to my good friend and distinguished colleague, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez), a champion of human rights.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. Mr. Speaker, first I want to commend my good friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), for his leadership on Vietnam human rights issues and, indeed, on being the most indefatigable and passionate advocate of human rights in this body. As the political security and economic relationship between the United States and Vietnam become increasingly complex, we must never forget the continued absence of internationally recognized human rights in Vietnam. Mr. Speaker, Father Ly, the subject of this resolution, is a Vietnamese Catholic priest. Three years ago, he was invited by the International Religious Freedom Commission to give testimony related to religious freedom in Vietnam. Since the Vietnamese Government denied Father Ly permission to leave his country, he submitted written testimony for the record. In this testimony, Father Ly outlined the lack of religious freedom in Vietnam and urged his fellow Vietnamese citizens to continue to struggle, nonviolently, for their rights. He was subsequently sentenced to 15 years in prison after a 1-day closed trial in which he was denied adequate legal counsel. Father Ly was convicted of slandering the Communist Party and distorting the religious policy of the government of Vietnam. Subsequently, Mr. Speaker, the United Nations Working Group stated that Father Ly was arrested and detained only for his opinions, and the deprivation of the liberty of Father Ly is arbitrary and contravenes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Mr. Speaker, as we meet here today, Father Ly continues to remain in prison because he had the courage of his convictions and he refused to whitewash the continued lack of religious freedom in Vietnam. Our resolution urges his immediate release from prison, a call for justice long overdue. It is my strong hope that the Vietnamese Government will receive this wake-up call through the passage of our resolution. While large numbers of Vietnamese Catholics continue to attend services each Sunday, the Vietnamese Government prohibits the church from training enough priests to meet the growing demand for clerics. The Vietnamese Government has also refused to compensate the church fully for expropriated church property, and it prohibits the church from expanding its activities to help the poor in Vietnam. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to show their concern about the continued unjust imprisonment of Father Ly and the lack of religious freedom in Vietnam by supporting strongly our resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I want to invite my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to Ms. Evelyn Dubrow who is celebrating her birthday today--May 6. I am too much of a gentleman and Evy is too much of a lady for me to tell you exactly which birthday this is. Evy has been a force for good within the American Labor movement for over sixty years, and a good deal of that time she has worked with the Congress. Her first four decades were with the International Ladies Garment Workers Union (ILGWU), where she worked with its renowned president David Dubinsky. For the last twenty years Evy has been with that union in its new organizational incarnation as UNITE (the Union of Needles Trades, Industrial and Textile Employees). Evy served as UNITE's Vice President and Legislative Director. Mr. Speaker, Evy began her remarkable work on Capitol Hill in 1956 when she was one of the few women lobbyists in the halls of the Congress. She distinguished herself as a devoted and indefatigable champion of America's working women and men. She enlisted the support of then Senator John F. Kennedy in her fight against efforts to outlaw secondary boycotts, and she fought to increase the minimum wage to one dollar an hour. Under the leadership of President Kennedy and President Lyndon Johnson, when the Congress considered a series of critical bills that transformed our nation in the 1960s, Evy was a leader in the fight for civil rights and voting rights, the establishment of Medicare, pension protection, occupational safety and health rules, and a number of other causes that led to expanded social justice and economic opportunity. Evy is forthright and frank; she tells it like it is. But she is honest in presenting her case. Her word can always be trusted, and she will do anything to promote one of her worthy causes. And she has a remarkable understanding of the members of the House and the Senate, knowledge which she is able to use most effectively. In recognition of her achievements and accomplishments, Evy has been awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, our nation's highest civilian honor. Mr. Speaker, as Evy marks another milestone today, I invite my colleagues to join me in extending our very dear friend best wishes for a very Happy Birthday, and for many, many more.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in expressing revulsion at the deeply disturbing images that have ricocheted around the world, showing abuses committed by members of the U.S. armed forces against Iraqi detainees. I have seen first-hand the abuse of civilians and others during wartime. I understand the dehumanizing humiliation that can be perpetrated against an individual. At the same time, I also know that if it were not for the bravery and heroism of the U.S. military, I probably would not be walking on this earth--and there are countless people around the world who could say the same thing. It is important to keep in mind that the overwhelming majority of our men and women in uniform have acted honorably in fulfilling their duty in Iraq. They have risked their lives and suffered personal hardship to fulfill their responsibilities, and we continue to respect their sacrifices. These loyal soldiers have been tainted by the appalling acts of a small number of individuals. Mr. Speaker, among the most important values that we as Americans share are our profound respect for freedom and the rule of law, our respect for the value and worth of the individual, and our commitment to protect and respect human dignity. In this context, the images that we have seen in the past few days were simply sickening to me. They do not represent our American character. They do not represent the selfless sacrifice of more than a hundred thousand American soldiers in Iraq, trying to bring a new dawn to that country after decades of nightmare. On a purely personal level, I find the actions of these individuals abhorrent. On behalf of all Americans, let me express my deepest regret and apologies to all those who were wrongfully mistreated at the hands of a few. There can be no excuse for these actions. Any American should know that they are wrong. Indeed, the Geneva Conventions adopted after the Second World War clearly prohibit this behavior and were accepted by virtually every nation in the world to prevent these abuses. But Mr. Speaker, as everyone knows, these events are not merely about wrongdoing by a few foolish and misguided individuals that caused profound personal suffering. They have also damaged our credibility and crippled our efforts to pursue critical national security goals in the Middle East and around the world. I welcome this resolution that we are considering today, Mr. Speaker, but this resolution is not enough. We must take action to be certain that such tragic and unfortunate actions do not occur again. Our standing and our goals and objectives in the Middle East require that we do more. The entire detention system in Iraq must be investigated and those responsible for perpetrating these horrendous events must be brought to justice. Mr. Speaker, the responsibility for this episode is not only borne by the few who committed these offenses. These events represent a failure of leadership--not only in Iraq but throughout the chain of command. We must determine where and why those leadership failures occurred, and take appropriate remedial action. And we must also examine why it has taken months for this failure to be addressed. The initial reaction was slow and tepid at best. These atrocities should have generated an immediate and powerful response. Mr. Speaker, it is not enough to say that the Iraqi people are better off today than they were under Saddam Hussein. It is not enough to say that the atrocities and human indignities that were carried out by his despicable and detested regime were more horrendous or more widespread than what we have seen in the last few days. We are--and we should be-- judged by a higher standard. Because of our history and our commitment as a Nation to respect for human rights, human dignity and the rule of law, we must meet higher standards. This is who we are, and this is why we are different. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this resolution today, but more importantly, I urge our political and military leadership to act and to act quickly and decisively to deal with these despicable acts and the failures that allowed them. Our credibility as a Nation committed to the rule of law and our efforts in the Middle East in the war against terrorism are at risk.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this important resolution, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to pay tribute to the chairman of our committee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and to my friend, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), for their leadership on this issue. Mr. Speaker, for over a decade, the United States has been trying to alert the entire world to Iran's efforts to covertly develop nuclear weapons. Finally, the rest of the world seems at least ready to listen. Now we must convince them to act. For many years, Iran has deceived the International Atomic Energy Agency and the entire world about the true purpose of its supposedly peaceful nuclear energy program. The ayatollahs of terrorism have, through the international nuclear black market, acquired equipment and facilities to produce nuclear weapons-grade uranium. As a result of IAEA inspections over the past 15 months, we now know that Iran has acquired designs for sophisticated uranium enrichment equipment and that Iran has been lying about this for years. Iran has even experimented with materials that could be used to initiate a nuclear detonation. Given that Iran used the same supplier network that provided Libya with the blueprint for a nuclear warhead, we must assume that Iran has an operable nuclear bomb design. Iran is rightly condemned as a state sponsor of terrorism responsible for funding numerous terrorist groups that murder and maim innocent civilians. Imagine then, Mr. Speaker, this terrorist state armed with nuclear weapons. This is the threat we face. Iran must not under any circumstances be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. We must keep the pressure on Iran, as we did on Libya, to step off this most dangerous path. We must keep the pressure on our friends and allies in the European Union and elsewhere who mistakenly believe that continued trade and investment will somehow cause the ayatollahs to give up their multiyear quest for nuclear weapons. We must also keep the pressure on the IAEA's Board of Governors to again condemn Iran at their June meeting and to formally refer Iran's breaches of its safeguards and Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligations to the United Nations Security Council. Mr. Speaker, this resolution also sets a new standard for states to have access to technology for peaceful nuclear purposes. It declares that Iran, through its repeated and flagrant violations of its international obligations, has forfeited the right to be trusted with technology that can be misused to produce weapons-grade uranium and plutonium. I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution and to send a message to Iran and the entire world that enough is enough. It is past time to isolate Iran economically and diplomatically. A nuclear Iran threatens us all. Driven by its extremist ideology, it might attack and surely could blackmail our friends in the region. Iran's nuclearization would spell the end of the nuclear nonproliferation regime. We must not let that happen. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from the State of Washington (Mr. Baird).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding, and I am very pleased to respond to his inquiry. This resolution is not and cannot be construed to be an authorization for the use of force against Iran. It calls upon all of the state parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to take all appropriate measures to deter, dissuade, and prevent Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons, including economic sanctions and international pressure. The international sanctions on Libya were ultimately successful in convincing Colonel Qaddafi to give up all of his programs to develop weapons of mass destruction. This is the model that the world community needs to pursue with Iraq.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Before closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to my friend from Ohio by saying that it is not the intention of this author of this resolution to view this resolution as one authorizing unilateral use of force against Iran. With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I strongly support this important resolution, and I urge all of my colleagues to do so as well. I first would like to acknowledge the excellent work on this resolution of the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Napolitano). I would also like to express my appreciation to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton); the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), subcommittee chairman; and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman of our full committee for their strong support of this measure. Mr. Speaker, the litany of human rights abuses conducted by the Chinese government on its own citizens is nothing new to Members of this House. This resolution, however, calls our attention to a case where China's complete disregard for human rights and the rule of law has been brought to new heights. Having completely suppressed dissent at home, the Chinese government has actually begun kidnapping Chinese dissidents abroad to be brought to China for persecution. In June, 2002, Dr. Wang Bingzhang, a permanent resident of the United States and the leader in the overseas Chinese democracy movement, was in Vietnam to meet with Chinese labor leaders. Dr. Wang was kidnapped from Vietnam, forced over the border into China, and eventually jailed by the Chinese government. He was held incommunicado for 6 months while the Chinese authorities denied that they knew anything about his fate. Dr. Wang was then charged with espionage and terrorist activities, though the government produced no evidence linking him to these charges. He was prevented from calling witnesses to support his case, to have sufficient time to prepare his defense and to cross-examine the witnesses against him. After this mockery of a trial, Dr. Wang was sentenced to life in prison in February of 2003. His appeal was denied. Mr. Speaker, the kidnapping, trial and conviction of Dr. Wang is an outrageous violation of internationally recognized human rights. A United Nations working group declared that the detention of Dr. Wang is arbitrary and contravenes the universal declaration of human rights. Dr. Wang is in poor health, and our resolution simply asks that he be released so that he may return to his family here in the United States. I strongly support passage of this resolution, and I urge all of my colleagues to do so as well. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to my good friend, the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Napolitano).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 4 minutes to my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do so as well. First, I want to commend my good friend from Indiana, my distinguished colleague, for introducing this resolution; and I want to commend the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), the distinguished member of the Committee on International Relations, for her strong leadership on all matters related to Laos. We greatly appreciate her hard work on this long neglected region of the world. Mr. Speaker, the bilateral relationship between the United States and Laos has been frozen in time since the end of the Vietnam War. While we have maintained a diplomatic mission in Laos, our bilateral contacts have been infrequent and low-level. Over the past few years, both the United States and Laos have made significant efforts to improve the quality of our bilateral relationship. Given the increasingly large number of Laotian and Hmong Americans in the United States, a warming in the relationship is long overdue. The President may soon, in fact, propose the granting of normal trade relations status to Laos. As our relations with Laos become increasingly complex, the United States must not forget the ongoing deprivation of internationally recognized human rights in Laos as well as the totalitarian nature of the ruling regime. The promotion of human rights and religious and political freedom must always remain at the core of our agenda with Laos until the Laotian people can freely choose their own government, enjoy true political freedom, and freedom of worship as they wish. Our resolution calls attention to the negative human rights situation in Laos and urges the United States, the European Union, the United Nations, and ASEAN nations to work for positive change in Laos. The Laotian Government continues to imprison brave young people who had the courage to publicly demonstrate for political change in 1999, and some local Laotian officials continue to harass Laotians of the Christian persuasion. The Laotian Government also does not allow free and fair elections, and it prohibits any organized political opposition. Mr. Speaker, political and social change will come to Laos, and it is my hope that the United States and our allies will make every effort to ensure that these fundamental reforms come sooner rather than later. I strongly support passage of this resolution and urge all of my colleagues to do so as well. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on March 30th, the Congressional Human Rights Caucus held a groundbreaking Members' Briefing entitled, ``International Disability Rights: The Proposed U.N. Convention.'' This discussion of the global situation of people with disabilities was intended to help establish disability rights issues as an integral part of the general human rights discourse. The briefing brought together the human rights community and the disability rights community, and it raised awareness in Congress of the need to protect disability rights under an international law to the same extent as other human rights through a binding U.N. convention on the rights of people with disabilities. Our expert witnesses included Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Mark P. Lagon; the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Ecuador to the United Nations, Ambassador Luis Gallegos; the United Nations Director of the Division for Social Policy and Development in the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Johan Scholvinck; the distinguished former Attorney General of the United States, former Under-Secretary General of the United Nations and former Governor of Pennsylvania, the Honorable Dick Thornburgh; the President of the National Organization on Disability (NOD), Alan A. Reich; Kathy Martinez, a member of the National Council on Disabilities (NCD); and a representative of the United States International Council on Disabilities (USCID) and Executive Director of Mental Disability Rights International, Eric Rosenthal. As I had announced earlier, I intend to place the important statements of our witnesses in the Congressional Record, so that all of my colleagues may profit from their expertise, and I ask that the statement of Ambassador Gallegos be placed at this point in the Congressional Record. Mr. Chairman, Members of U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus, Representatives of the U.S. Administration, Representatives of Disability and Human Rights Organizations, Ladies and Gentlemen: I am deeply honored by the invitation extended to me to address you at this distinguished panel of the United States Congressional Human Rights Caucus. I regard the privilege of addressing you as imposing upon me three obligations: first that of discussing the background of the Ad Hoc committee on an international convention on the rights of persons with disabilities; second, that of informing you of its on-going work and third my analysis concerning development of an international convention and the newly emerging disability rights movement. I. Background The commitment of the United Nations to promotion of the rights of persons with disabilities is deeply rooted in the goal of the Organization: realization of the Charter's vision of a just and peaceful world and the better standards of life in larger freedoms. The work of the Organization in disability in its early period focused on improvement of the well-being of persons with disabilities to meet their needs in the social context. In the 1960s, initiatives within the disability community and adoption by the United Nations of the international human rights conventions both in civil and political and economic, social and cultural realms, resulted in a fundamental reevaluation of the rights of persons with disabilities within the context of development. The growing concern for the need of adopting a human rights perspective since 1970s were specifically addressed by the United Nations in adoption of the declarations concerning the rights of persons with disabilities. The human rights of persons with disabilities became part of the international policy agenda in the 1980s since adoption of the World Programme of Action concerning Disabled Persons by the General Assembly at its thirty-seventh session in 1982. The World Programme transformed the disability issue from ``social welfare'' issue into that of integrating the human rights of persons with disabilities in all facets of development. The Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities was adopted by the United Nations in 1993 to focus on the human rights perspective of the World Programme of Action. Though the Standard Rules was not a legal instrument, it has been widely used as a set of strategic guidelines to promote the rights of persons with disabilities. The international frameworks to promote the rights of persons with disabilities were further advanced by a series of 1990s United Nations development conferences and their respective five-year reviews, the Millennium Development Goals and other relevant international commitments. Proposals to elaborate a convention on the rights of persons with disabilities were presented during the United Nations Decade of Disabled Persons (1983-1992), many of which have reflected reformulated concepts of disability that have moved away from the traditional model of care, social welfare and medical support to a human rights framework. These proposals were required of further study by the international community. The initiative on a comprehensive and integral convention to promote and protect the rights of disabled persons is the result of a proposal made by President Vicente Fox of Mexico during the fifty-sixth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which called upon the international community to combat poverty and social exclusion with Mexico taking the lead in promoting an agenda for development. The importance was highlighted to involve all citizens as stakeholders and that a just world must be inclusive of all groups. For that reason, Mexico had proposed the establishment of a ``Special Committee'' to study the elaboration of an international convention on promoting the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities, which was endorsed by General Assembly resolution 56/168. II. Progress in elaborating a ``comprehensive and integral'' international convention The outcome of the first session of the Ad Hoc Committee (29 July-9 August 2002) was a resolution, adopted by the fifty-seventh session of the General Assembly as resolution 57/229 of 18 December 2002, on further action related to elaboration of a comprehensive and integral international convention. The Committee, in close collaboration with disability organizations and civil society organizations, reaffirmed the commitment to the goals set out before it by General Assembly resolution 56/168. The outcome of the second session of the Ad Hoc Committee was the decision to elaborate an international convention and to establish the Working Group to draft a text that would form the basis for negotiations on the convention, which will be submitted to the Ad Hoc Committee at its third session, from 24 May to 4 June at he United Nations Headquarters in New York. III. The Working Group of the Ad Hoc Committee Jan. 5-16, 2004 The Working Group was chaired by the Permanent Representative of New Zealand, Don MacKay. It took into account all contributions submitted to the Ad Hoc Committee by States, observers, expert meetings, United Nations bodies, regional commissions and intergovernmental organizations, as well as by non-governmental organizations (NGOs), independent experts and national disability and human rights institutions. Members of the Working Group were of a diverse body of policy makers, legal practitioners, disability advocates, and experts, consisted of 27 representatives of governments, one national human rights institution and 12 NGO representatives, mainly from organizations of persons with disabilities, resulting in a broader and enhanced understanding of disability in the context of promotion and protection of the rights of persons with disabilities in today's society and in development. Disability advocates, working side by side with experts in international law and other relevant fields, helped to view the existing human rights norms and standards from a disability perspective, which, in turn, proposed viable options to strengthen the existing system for promoting and protecting the rights of persons with disabilities as well as to incorporate the disability perspective into the human rights norms. (1) Summary of the meeting The Group identified possible approaches and narrowed down the options, which resulted in the draft text with options for consideration of the Ad Hoc Committee. The draft text embodies successful collaboration among all the members of the Working Group. It covers, in its 25 articles and the Preamble, encompassing human rights principles and norms, such as general principles and obligations, equality and non- discrimination, the right to work, and equal recognition before the law with a disability focus. It also addresses disability-specific issues and concerns, such as accessibility, independent living, protection of persons with disabilities from violence and abuse, accessibility, education, personal mobility, social security and adequate standards of living, as well as issues of inclusion, such as inclusion of disabled children, disabled women and persons with multiple disabilities, promotion of positive attitudes towards persons with disabilities, inclusion in the community, participation in political and public life, and participation in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport. (2) Analysis The draft text by the Working Group, reflecting their diversity in background and approach, resulted in a broader and enhanced understanding of disability in the context of promotion and protection of the rights of persons with disabilities in today's society and in development. The work of the Group facilitated interpreting the existing human rights norms and standards from the disability perspective as well as incorporating the disability perspective into the human rights norms. Members of the European Union advocated that a proposed new convention should focus on the model of a non-discrimination human rights treaty, such as the Convention on Elimination of all Forms of discrimination against Women and the Convention on Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which would minimize proliferation of detailed standards and mechanisms. Other Members, such as Mexico, Venezuela, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Thailand, and Organizations of Persons with Disabilities, promoting, in most cases, the model of a comprehensive convention, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child, emphasizing on the specificities of the situation of persons with disabilities as their focus in elaborating the Convention. The draft text by the Working Group, as it stands now, is the result of a hybrid between the two approaches and there are number of complex issues and tasks left to the Ad Hoc Committee for its consideration. (3) The issue areas requiring close attention The following issues would require close examinations and consultations by the Ad Hoc Committee as the views differed significantly among the Members: definition(s) of disability and persons with disabilities; disability statistics and data collection; international cooperation; special and inclusive education, and the monitoring mechanism(s). The Group did not cover the international monitoring mechanism at this time and focused instead on national frameworks for implementation and monitoring of the convention. (4) The third session of the Ad Hoc Committee The third session of the Ad Hoc Committee will take place from May 24-June 4 at the United Nations Headquarters in New York. The Ad Hoc Committee will have before it the draft text as a basis for negotiation of the text of an international convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. IV. The significant role played by U.S. leaders and advocates in disability rights in the work of the international community The commitment of the United States to further goals of human equality and dignity for persons with disabilities has been demonstrated in a number of legislative and policy initiatives, such as American with Disabilities Act (1992) and ``New Freedom Initiative'' (2001), which resulted in a comprehensive set of regulations and enforcement mechanisms and the new disability-sensitized community-- leadership of government, organizations of disabilities, countless advocates, scholars, practitioners in disability rights, as well as civic groups. I am delighted to see many of those leaders present at this meeting today. Those leaders have made extraordinary contributions not only to their own society, but also to the work of the international community. Such outstanding contributions are exemplified in a wide range of activities from legislative and policy initiatives, scholarship, research to advocacy at national, regional and international levels: for example, one of the finest institutions of higher-learning in the United States, University of California at Berkeley co-organized with the United Nations ``The United Nations Consultative Expert Meeting on international norms and standards relating to disability (December 1998). The work is considered as a first step to consider promotion of the human rights of persons through the use of international normative framework, including implications of an international convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. A number of US participants and leading scholars participated in both Berkeley and its follow-up meeting (the Interregional Seminar on international norms and standards relating to disability organized by the Equal Opportunities Commission, Hong Kong SAR, Republic of China). During the past two sessions of the Ad Hoc Committee and the most recent session of its Working Group in January 2004, US participants as government and NGO representatives, panelists, researchers or individual advocates played a major role in promoting the rights of persons with disabilities. The international community, along with the disability communities worldwide, would have much to gain from the continuing and active participation of the United States in the work of the Ad Hoc Committee and the newly emerging international disability rights movement. Conclusion As a result of consultations at national, regional and international levels concerning an international convention since the Ad Hoc Committee was established, new networks and communities of disability-sensitized policy makers, programme specialists, academics and advocates have emerged. Together, they are contributing to a process of promoting and developing universal norms and thereby contributing to implementation of the universal human rights for all. The on-going international discourse on disability rights in the process of elaboration of an international convention demonstrates our common foundation--a fundamental aspiration of the humankind to establish an integrated community of its members based upon the principles of the universality of human rights--the fundamental freedoms, the dignity and worth of every human person. As we strive to promote and protect the rights of persons with disabilities through the work on an international convention, we are embarking upon a significant endeavour in translating the universality of the human rights into reality and taking a concrete step toward a just and equitable society.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor and pride that I pay tribute to an extraordinary woman, Jane Baker. For the past twenty years Jane has been an inspiration to those who wish to make positive change in their communities, as she has dedicated herself to serving both San Mateo city and County, located in my congressional district, through the various public service positions she held. Jane Baker was born in Hamilton, Ohio, and after graduating from Purdue University, she and her husband Bill moved to San Francisco. Shortly after moving to California, Jane hosted and produced a television cooking-show that aired in San Francisco and San Jose, where she demonstrated easy meals that one could make on an average night for the average family. By 1963, the Bakers had settled in San Mateo, where they have resided ever since. Mr. Speaker, Jane had always participated in community events, being very active in her local Parents Teacher Association (PTA) and the Girl and Boy Scouts. Her commitment to save open space on Sugarloaf Mountain in San Mateo from overdevelopment prompted her to run for the San Mateo City Council in 1973. Her historic victory, at that time only the second woman ever elected to a City Council seat, was made more dramatic by the fact that she captured more votes than two male incumbents. Jane's traditional smashing ways continued when she became the first-ever female mayor of the city of San Mateo. During the twenty years that Jane Baker served on the San Mateo City Council she remained devoted to public service and although people encouraged her to run for higher offices, such as State Senate and Congress, Jane declined because she recognized the value of local government and the closer relationship to the public that comes with it. Jane Baker's commitment to community service did not merely stop at being an elected official, as her drive and energy led her to serve on many boards and commissions. The number of boards and commissions that Jane served on is incredible. She represented the cities of San Mateo on the Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission and served as Chair from 1993 to 1995. Jane also chaired the San Mateo County Transportation Authority for two years and was a member of the Joint Powers Board-CALTRAIN. Additionally, she served on the Association of Bay Area Governments for ten years, from 1975 to 1985. In addition to her dedication to local government service, Jane was an active member of various statewide and national organizations. The litany of those organizations is too large to list in its entirety, but includes; the Board of Directors of the National League of Cities, the State Job Training Coordinating Council, the American Association of University Women, California Elected Women for Education and the Women's Association of the First Presbyterian Church of San Mateo. As one would expect, Jane Baker has been honored for her numerous achievements by many of the organizations, including being named Safety Woman of the Year by the San Mateo Safety Council. She was also chosen as an Outstanding Graduate by the Purdue University School of Consumer and Family Services and inducted into the San Mateo County Women's Hall of Fame in 1999. Mr. Speaker, Jane Baker was often hailed as a maverick mayor because she wasn't afraid to speak her mind. In an era where women were often seen and not heard in City Hall Jane helped shatter the glass ceiling. A true pioneer for women's rights, Jane Baker has diligently served San Mateo for over 20 years. I know that I will not be the only one to miss her presence in our city government. I extend my very best wishes to her and hope she finds the future as rewarding as her years of public service.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of Cinco de Mayo and in recognition of the many contributions that Mexicans and Mexican- Americans have made and continue to make in my congressional district in California and across our nation. The Cinco de Mayo holiday commemorates the May 5, 1862 victory of an ill-equipped and vastly outnumbered Mexican army, under the command of General Ignacio Zaragoza, over Napoleon's army at the Battle of Puebla. Although Napoleon eventually installed his brother as regent over Mexico, the triumph of the Mexican people over the French in this battle has come to symbolize the fight for freedom and justice in the Hemisphere--a fight that many dissidents in Cuba continue to wage intensely against Castro's brutal regime. Mr. Speaker, the recent diplomatic furor involving our friend and ally Mexico and the regime of Fidel Castro in Cuba is an appropriate issue in the context of Cinco de Mayo. I want to pay tribute to President Fox and the Mexican government for their principled stand on human rights. I find it absolutely appalling that one year after 75 Cubans were tried in kangaroo courts in Havana, sentenced to prison terms ranging from 6 to 28 years, and imprisoned in rat-infested, dank cells, Castro's totalitarian machine is still trying to crack the backs of Cuba's internal opposition by continuing to lock up some of its most renown leaders. These 75 individuals are suffering indescribable horrors at the hands of Cuban authorities simply because they sought to express their disagreement with Castro's government, provide an independent media voice, stock their shelves with banned literature, represent the interests of independent labor, and otherwise improve the lot of their fellow citizens. In other words, these soldiers of freedom were thrown behind bars because they practiced their professions or attempted to exert their political rights and civil liberties. Recently, Chairman Hyde and I led our Committee's consideration of H. Res. 563, which was sponsored by my good friends and colleagues, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida and Bob Menendez of New Jersey, among others. H. Res. 563 recognized the reprehensible state of human rights in Cuba. It also called upon the international community to pass a resolution denouncing Cuba's human rights record at this year's session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. Two weeks ago, the Commission passed a resolution, sponsored by Honduras, which condemned the imprisonment of the 75 dissidents and urged Cuba to allow a special representative of the Commission to visit Cuba and report on the state of human rights in the island country. Havana so far has resoundingly rejected the request of the international community and reportedly refused to accept the Commission's special representative. Mr. Speaker, Mexico joined the United States and twenty other countries in voting for this resolution deploring human rights violation in Cuba. In the weeks that have followed, Castro has vilified President Fox and his Administration for the courageous stand that Mexico took in Geneva as a defender of freedom in the Hemisphere--a stand similar to General Zaragoza at Puebla. Mr. Speaker, although we in this House and across the globe disagree on how best to bring about change in Cuba, we stand together in solidarity with those who endure torture, incarceration, and deprivation because they refuse to submit to the boot of an authoritarian regime. I am proud to call my friends in neighboring Mexico our allies in this unfortunately never-ending struggle against tyranny. Amigos, desde cinco de mayo de 1862 hasta cinco de mayo de 2004, la lucha continua!