Nancy Pelosi

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, just to clarify the point, perhaps this is good news to the gentleman, there would be no Federal dollars spent internationally to perform abortions. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise to mourn the passing of a great American, a man dedicated to the democratic principles that are at the very foundation of our country. Frank Wong died on March 9th after suffering a stroke. He was 79. Mr. Wong founded the Chinese Democracy Education Foundation in San Francisco 13 years ago and was instrumental in coordinating protests and other activities in the Bay Area after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre of pro-democracy demonstrators in Beijing. He was instrumental in the effort to bring the Goddess of Democracy, a replica on the statue created by the student protesters, to Portsmouth Square in Chinatown soon after the massacre. He also hosted many of the student dissidents who came to the United States as political refugees after the tragedy. Mr. Wong was born in China in 1919, and came to the United States in the 1940's to study at New York University. His heart, however, was never far from his homeland, and inspired by the freedoms he enjoyed in this country, he returned to China to become the editor of a Chinese newspaper. His return would not be an easy one. The Chinese Communists were in control, and his ideas for a free and open society ran counter to the prevailing powers. In 1957, Communist Party officials had him arrested for his pro-democracy position and advocacy for human rights. He was sentenced to three years in a re-education forced labor camp. After his release from prison, Frank Wong came back to the United States. Despite his hardship, his belief in the freedom of the human spirit could not be shaken. He remained committed to the principles of democracy and human rights in China. The Chinese Democracy Education Foundation is dedicated to promoting these values, and since its inception has given out 40 awards to individuals and groups which have worked towards achieving these goals. As one who had the privilege of working with Frank, I was always impressed by his courage, dedication to democratic ideals and his gentle manner. It is with great regret and respect that I extend my deepest sympathy to Frank's wife, his children Eric and Joyce and his five grandchildren.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues, Ms. Maloney and Mr. Bilirakis for organizing this Special Order. As I rise to join with them in the celebration of the 177th anniversary of Greek Independence Day, I am reminded of the words of the great 20th century Greek writer and philosopher Nikos Kazantzakis: ``What first truly stirred my soul was not fear or pain, nor was it pleasure or games; it was the yearning for freedom.'' Deep within the Greek soul is this unmistakable blueprint for democratic freedoms. It is what propelled the Greek people to revolt against the scourge of the Ottoman Empire which plunged one of the world's most enlightened societies into a Dark Ages that spanned 400 years. Today, as we celebrate this anniversary we find ourselves revisiting history. The story of Greek Independence is inextricably linked to the terror of Turkish oppression on the island of Cyprus. When the Greeks began their war of independence on March 25th, 1821 the people of Cyprus were singled out for a particular form of bloody retribution, meant to send a message to the rest of occupied Greece. Naturally, the Cypriots were sympathetic to the Greek cause, and were among the first to offer whatever support they could. For this they were sternly punished by the Turkish authorities. The island's Turkish governor was particularly brutal. On July 9th, 1821 he ordered a massacre to begin with the torture and murder of the Archbishop of Cyprus, Kyprianos, his three bishops, and many other members of the clergy and civilians. The Archbishop was hanged from a fig tree outside his residence. The killing and torture continued until December of the same year. This anniversary of Greek Independence is observed, as it has since 1974, with the notable inclusion of Turkey's bloody invasion of Cyprus in that year. Although the Greek and Cypriot governments have shown a willingness to resolve the issues that undermine a stable peace in the region, the Turkish government continues to dodge the critical questions at hand. While we celebrate the principles of democracy given to us by the ancient Greeks; While we commemorate the actions of the brave Greeks who fought for their birthright 177 years ago; we must acknowledge that the island of Cyprus is divided and under siege, and until this act of Turkish aggression is reversed, our joy is muted and our sense of outrage sharpened.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Skeen) for offering this resolution in honor of a very special Member of Congress. I am pleased and saddened to join my colleagues in honoring the memory of Steve Schiff. In this Congress, we have the protocol of referring to each other as the gentleman or the gentlewoman, the gentlewoman from our State, but Steve Schiff was indeed a gentleman from New Mexico. He was a quiet man, so unless my colleagues worked closely with him sometimes, they would not know the full force of his contribution to this body, and it was very, very significant. People have said, I think almost every spokesperson has spoken about his honesty. He was a man of great integrity. I served with for many years, more years than I think we both would like to have served, on the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct with Mr. Schiff, and every single day there we learned from him. As was mentioned, he was a prosecutor. He knew the law; we learned from him every day. And he was a person of very, very, very high standards. He served here with great dignity. With great dignity. I think of many words to describe him: Integrity would be one; dignity another; intellect, a great intellect; and he was very, very proud of the district that he represented. We used to vie to see who had the better district. I, of course, think San Francisco is the best district to represent, but he was certain it was Albuquerque. We both agreed that New Mexico deserved the name ``Land of Enchantment,'' it being a very special place. But he was very, very proud of his very special constituency in Albuquerque, and he served his constituents well. His commitment to public service, his dedication to high ethical standards, and his great intellect were a resource not only to his constituents but to every Member who served with him on any committee. One of the tragedies of today is that I know one person, Ben Cardin, my colleague who also served with us, when we served together on a day- to-day very close basis on our subcommittee, and Ben and Steve spoke the same language; they were both attorneys, the two others of us were not. So they had their own sympatico, and I know that Ben would love to be here to be a comfort to Steve's family, and I know he will be in the future. But I think of all these people here, these two people would be a comfort to each other. I am pleased to join my colleagues in extending my deepest sympathy to Marcia, to the Schiff family, and to say that we all will miss him very much for a long time to come, and though he is no longer physically with us here, his contribution has made an impact on us for as long as we serve in the Congress, and longer.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a truly great pastor and great person, Father Oreste ``Rusty'' Pandola, who has been chosen to receive the Thomas D'Alesandro, Jr. Award for 1998. This award is named for my late father, who served as a long time Mayor of Baltimore and as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives. It is presented annually by the Little Italy Lodge to an individual who has made an outstanding contribution to Baltimore's Italian-American community. Just a few days before his untimely death on January 17th, 1997, Rev. Oreste Pandola, SAC, known to everyone in St. Leo's as ``Father Rusty,'' was asked what he would like inscribed on his tombstone. Always ready with a witty reply, he answered, ``Well, I put an elevator in the church and another one in the school. How about, `Going up!' '' With that, he laughed heartily and made his familiar thumbs-up sign. Although he had been suffering a constant battle against the debilitating effects of diabetes, little did anyone realize how soon afterward, those words would come to fruition. Father Rusty was only 54 when he died of a heart attack. He had been pastor of St. Leo's for eight years. One parishioner summed up his leadership by saying, ``He affected the parish unlike anyone we've had in the past. His open friendship, his demeanor, his confidence. He could get people to do things for the church.'' He was a priest who saw the needs of his community beyond the religious aspects, although he certainly was a wonderful shepherd of his flock. He never let personal health problems get in the way of his pastoral duties. After injuring his shoulder in a fall while attending a meeting in New Jersey, he celebrated Mass with his left arm in a sling. Father Rusty enjoyed life, Italian food--especially pasta--and cream donuts, laughed loud at a good joke--even at his own expense--and was not afraid to try new things such as para-sailing. One of his major achievements was the renovation and subsequent re- opening of the church school, closed in 1980, as an adult learning center. A man of vision, he saw a building wasting away and he saw many of the more senior residents of the Little Italy community with idle time and idle minds. He gave birth to the Adult Learning Center, which today bears his name and is in its third year and growing. Father Rusty had a reputation of being involved in activities and interests that went beyond his duties as pastor. He was compassionate, understanding and optimistic. To him, no task was to great. Being happy all the time and being positive in his assessment of things seemed to be natural qualities. ``Piece of cake,'' he would say to someone who felt that a task was too great. ``Hang in there.'' Born and raised in New York, he was ordained a priest in the Pallotines of the Immaculate Conception Province in Brooklyn, NY in 1969, seven years after entering the order. He served as chaplain and teacher of religion at Bishop Eustace Preparatory School in Pensauken, NJ, in 1969. Father Rusty came to Baltimore in the 1970's, serving as vocation director and novice master for his order. He also was the director of the Pallotine Seminary in Hyattsville, MD, and he also served for a time as a Provincial Superior of the Pallotine Fathers. Cardinal William Keeler, Archbishop of Baltimore, called him ``a truly great pastoral leader. He spoke to the people in a way which was at once witty and humorous and also quite profound.'' Reflecting on his avid reading, the Cardinal added, ``If I had to name one person who was knowledgeable about the Bible, who was in tune with today's current problems and was compassionate, it was Father Rusty.'' Rev. Peter Sticco, SAC, the Pallotine Provincial at the time, told the mourners in his eulogy, ``He was your pastor, he was your hero, he was your friend.'' The Rev. Oreste Pandola, SAC, is a worthy recipient and exemplifies the great spirit of Thomas D'Alesandro, Jr. in whose name this award is presented.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, sadly I rise to call to the attention of my colleagues the passing of a good friend of working people in America, Jimmy Herman. Jimmy Herman is one of the most respected and beloved labor leaders in San Francisco history, and he died on Friday. He was the president emeritus of the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union. Jimmy was known for his enormous compassion, commitment to workers' rights and social justice. His life was truly about justice. He was also an extraordinary orator who inspired thousands to take up the cause of workers' rights, justice for farm workers, peace in Vietnam, to name a few. His death marks the end of an historic era in the labor history of the San Francisco Bay area and our Nation. Jimmy devoted his life to building a strong, democratic and multiracial trade union. Since the big strike of 1934, the ILWU has provided democratic and strong representation that gives voice, and that is ``democratic'' with a small ``d'', Mr. Speaker, to the aspirations of working people up and down the West Coast. The ILWU broke down barriers denied members of minority groups by providing access to a decent standard of living. It also provided a powerful means for working men and women to make a contribution to the political and social fabrics of their communities. Under the leadership of Harry Bridges, followed by Jim Herman, the ILWU faced head-on the great political challenges of our Nation, refusing in the 1930s to load scrap metal on ships bound for Japan or to unload cargo in ships bearing the Nazi swastika. Jim Herman led his union in its efforts to oppose the apartheid regime in South Africa, leading his members in refusing to unload cargo sent from South Africa. Jim Herman had a social conscience that did not allow for rest or moral fatigue. His moral leadership played an important role in bringing about a negotiated end to the war in El Salvador. In November 1989, Neighbor to Neighbor, a national grass-roots human rights organization based in San Francisco, launched a boycott of Salvadoran coffee to apply economic pressure on the Salvadoran Government and the coffee growers, many of whom had founded and funded the notorious death squads. The boycott was triggered by the murder of 6 Jesuit priests and the bombing of a Salvadoran trade union federation. My chief of staff in San Francisco, Fred Ross, was the head of Neighbor to Neighbor at that time. So I was well aware of Jimmy's leadership and involvement. Under Jimmy's leadership, the ILWU strongly endorsed the coffee boycott. The members honored picket lines on the docks of San Francisco, Vancouver, B.C., Seattle, and gave the Cindad de Buenaventura ship loaded with 43 tons of Salvadoran coffee a final rejection in Long Beach, forcing it to sail back to El Salvador with its coffee in its hold. The ILWU effectively sealed off the West Coast from shipments of Salvadoran coffee over the next 2 years. Another cause that Jim Herman championed was that of the farm workers led by Cesar Chavez. He was one of the first labor leaders to go to Delano to join the farm workers on the picket line. Later in his life he was a mentor to people at Delancey Street Foundation in San Francisco. I will submit for the Record some of the particulars of his background which is an extraordinary one. On this Earth, God's work for the poor, the disenfranchised for peace and social justice was done with love and compassion by Jim Herman throughout his lifetime. He was truly a warrior for justice. My heartfelt sympathies go out to his two brothers, Rodman Herman and Milton Herman. On a very personal note, I along with the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), the gentleman from California (Mr. Miller) and many other members of the California delegation have lost a friend, a person who loved life, loved politics and all of the art of the impossibilities. Jim Herman's passion for life was matched only by his rage for justice. He is now our shining star, the one with the twinkle of merriment for all to see as night draws near, the twinkle that we will miss in his eye forever. We will miss you, our dear Jimmy, our sweet friend. Born in Newark, NJ on August 21, 1924, son of a school janitor, Jim Herman went to sea in the early months of World War II. Sailing was a tough, lonely business, ``. . . But it provided the opportunity to read everything in reach, and to talk with people who had seen it all,'' Jimmy once remarked. As a 16-year-old in 1942 he served on a freighter backing up the invasion of North Africa. After the war he was a steward on the Lurline during its majestic cruises between San Francisco and Honolulu. In 1949 he led a walkout that forced the Lurline empty and silent for 6 months in solidarity with an ILWU strike in the massive sugar cane fields of Hawaii. In 1953, he joined Warehouse Local 6 in San Francisco. In 1956 he moved to Ship Clerk's Local 34, where he was elected vice president in 1960 and president 1 year later. He was re-elected every 2 years thereafter, until his election to the presidency of the ILWU in 1977. His leadership was characterized by the continuation of the rank and file style of the leadership which had characterized the ILWU during Bridges' years. Under Jim Herman's leadership, through five sets of negotiations, the daily wage of longshoremen more than doubled, and the maximum monthly pension benefit tripled. In 1988, he steered the ILWU toward affiliation with the AFL-CIO, ending a long chapter of exclusion which had benefited neither the ILWU nor the Nation's labor movement. Throughout his presidency he was the ILWU's ambassador, building and strengthening the union's relationships with maritime and other unions, and within the larger community. Most of all, he kept the ILWU--with its broad and complex jurisdiction in the maritime industry, tourism, warehouse and distribution, manufacturing and processsing--strong and viable in extraordinarily difficult times. The labor movement was his family. ``The labor movement offered me a chance to be part of history, not just a passive observer,'' he has said. ``I'll never be able to repay that debt.'' It's not for lack of effort. Take Jim Herman's mentorship with the young men and women putting their lives back together at Delancey Street. ``He makes me cry,'' says Mimi Silbert, president of the drug and alcohol rehabilitation program. ``Two of three times a week he drops by to have coffee with the residents, talking, getting them interested in the world outside themselves, strengthening their faith in themselves.''

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for the time and his leadership on this issue. I certainly want to join my colleagues in commending the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) for his leadership, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hamilton) for their leadership on this, and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Bereuter) as well, and all others who made this bipartisan, excellent bill possible today, the Tropical Forest Conservation Act. As a member of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs of the Committee on Appropriations, I know full well what the debt of burden does to many of these countries. I also know that tropical forests contain about half the world's earth, plant, and animal species, many of which still have not been identified. They also are extremely effective sinks for carbon dioxide, significantly reducing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Our colleague very eloquently said what has always been clear to us, that everything in nature is connected, whether it is the benefit we receive in the rain forest in terms of pharmaceuticals or whether it is preventing greenhouse emissions from increasing and the greenhouse gases affecting the constituents of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) in Ohio. So it is clear in terms of debt and it is clear in terms of protecting the rain forests, the tropical forests, that we have a need. There is opportunity based on precedent. The Bush Administration's Enterprise for the Americas Initiative presented a precedent and this is an expansion, as that has been indicated, and happily before the President's trip to Africa. The opportunity to reduce the burden of debt in these countries is being done with precedent and in a very wise way. I am very, very pleased and want to make the point that the rule of nongovernmental organizations is very significantly mentioned in this legislation. Under the measure, each beneficiary country would be required to establish a Tropical Rain Forest Protection Fund to preserve, maintain, and restore its tropical forest. These funds would be distributed through competitive grants to local nongovernmental or other organizations with conservation expertise. Further to that, management of the funds would be overseen by international boards consisting of officials appointed by the U.S. Government as well as by the host government; and these boards would include representatives of environmental, nongovernmental organizations active in the beneficiary country, local community groups, and scientific or academic organizations. I think this transparency and this involvement of nongovernmental and community-based groups is very, very healthy. In conclusion, I want to say that this is a very smart approach, because the program established in the bill is intended to specifically target countries that have tropical forests with the greatest degree of biodiversity and that are under the most severe threat. My colleagues have talked about the other criteria, that the country has to have a democratically elected government, not support active international terrorism, must support international narcotics controls, and may not engage in violations of internationally recognized human rights. Under the measure, the President would determine whether or not countries meet the criteria. I am very, very pleased to congratulate my colleagues for this strong bipartisan effort to preserve the rain forest and reduce the debt of these countries.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I wanted to make one additional point, Mr. Speaker, and that is to address the issue of the European Community not supporting the resolution this year. That decision by the EU does not bind the member states of the EU, and it is possible that some of those countries would support the resolution, and I certainly hope so, but it would require leadership on the part of the United States. I wanted to make the point that Wei Jingsheng has driven home to us, and that is that as we are considering this resolution, and many of my colleagues feel much more comfortable dealing with human rights in China at the Human Rights Commission, and I think that is very appropriate, and this is not the time to talk about trade issues or MFN, however Wei Jingsheng would want me to say what he has told me over and over again, and that is that the huge trade deficit, $50 billion this year, that the Chinese enjoys with the U.S., it is a surplus to them, is money that they spend buying, buying, in Europe and other countries that are represented at the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, buying support. They have effectively silenced any voices for support for this resolution, and they do it with our own money. How even more necessary for us to take leadership at the Commission.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. I thank the committee for its hard work in bringing this resolution to the floor. Indeed, as my colleague the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis) mentioned, the President announced a decision last Friday, and he said that we were behind the curve. I think indeed that the White House, anticipating a strong vote in this body, tried to preempt the actions of the House of Representatives, knowing that the Senate voted 95 to 5 in favor of this resolution. The administration wanted to cut us off at the pass, and that is why we are not late but they took the action that they did. Nonetheless, I commend the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis), the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hamilton), the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), and all those who worked to put this resolution together for the administration to reconsider its ill-advised decision, and for the following reasons. First of all, Mr. Speaker, it would be a very sad, sad occurrence that in this, the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that we would give a victory to the authoritarian regime in China by not pursuing a resolution condemning China's human rights practices at the U.N. Human Rights Commission. There is no real progress to report on stated pieces of the administration's human rights policy, including, and these are the criteria the administration uses, ensuring access to Chinese prisons for the International Red Cross, promoting a dialogue between his holiness the Dalai Lama and the Chinese government and obtaining the release of political and religious prisoners. The Clinton administration has hung its decision on the slim reed of the agreement by China, the announcement by China to sign the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. How can it be that this administration would say that because the Chinese say they would sign this document we would not pursue the resolution at the U.N. when the U.S. itself has taken action at the same venue, the same commission, against Nigeria, Iran, Sudan, Iraq, Rwanda, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Yugoslavia and Equatorial Guinea. These countries signed that covenant and the administration, recognizing that that signature is not of itself worth much unless there is ratification and implementation, has in the past pursued a resolution against, for condemnation against these countries at the same venue. When President Clinton delinked trade and human rights in 1994, he said very, very specifically that he would pursue the issue at the Human Rights Commission, that he would use multilateral fora, including the U.N. commission, and would press, would press for the passage of a resolution, appointed a rapporteur to report on China's human rights violation. When my colleague says we would like to select fights that we can win, I would beg respectfully to differ. To the people in China and many of their representatives in the dissident community, both in China and in the U.S., namely, for one, Wei Jingsheng, have said that it is very, very important for the U.S. to continue to push for this; whether we win or lose, the Chinese people must know that we stand with them. He has himself said, I urge, this is from Wei Jingsheng, many members in this body fought for his release from prison, we had hoped it would not be exile from his country, as the Chinese have executed, but release from prison and the ability to speak freely in China. But nonetheless the exiled Wei Jingsheng says, in a letter to Members of Congress, I urge my friends in the United States Congress to clearly show the Chinese people the basic values of the American people. I urge my friends to pass a clear resolution calling upon your Representatives and the Commission for Human Rights in Geneva to hold fast in their position. It is not only for the sake of the American people, but for the whole of humankind. The values of democracy, freedom and human rights far exceed the value of money. He further says, many Chinese, Wei Jingsheng further says, many Chinese people regard the Human Rights Commission in Geneva as a barometer to measure the support given by the international community to the Chinese people in their struggle for human rights and freedom. In addition to the voice of the dissidents in support of this resolution, in addition to the promise made by President Clinton to pursue this resolution when he delinked, in addition to the fact that this is the 50th anniversary of the universal declaration of human rights, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution urging the administration to reconsider because the basis of their decision was the Chinese promise to support this other convention, to sign this other convention. I call to my colleagues' attention, and they may have seen it, I hope so, over the weekend in the newspapers the reports that the Chinese government, that we all remember when President Jiang Zemin was here, he and President Clinton had as the crowning glory, the moment of their summit the agreement by the Chinese that they would no longer sell technology for weapons of mass destruction to Iran. On the strength of that agreement, that written agreement, the Clinton administration recently certified that on the basis of promises, not performance, that the Chinese were in accord, in compliance with the accords in terms of the nuclear arena and that would allow business in the United States to sell nuclear technology to China. Already the Chinese have violated that agreement. When they were caught, the administration tried to hold, to prevent that information, as I mentioned, the Chinese government in violation of a signed agreement with President Clinton, which was the flagship issue of the summit, in violation of that the Chinese government was transferring the technology to the Iranian government, a lifetime supply of materials for the enrichment of uranium. When the Chinese were caught the administration tried to suppress the information to make sure nobody found out about it. When it was made public, the administration declared victory and said, look, we stopped the Chinese from doing what they said they were not going to do in the first place. The point is their agreements mean nothing. We have to urge the administration to reconsider its decision. I urge my colleagues to vote aye.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment to H.R. 992 offered by Representatives Watt and Rothman. H.R. 992 would weaken existing environmental laws and increase the number of court cases initiated to challenge longstanding environmental protections. It would leave to the courts the interpretation of environmental laws by expanding court jurisdiction and authority to challenge government regulations. As the bill stands, it would allow developers to shop the courts until they located the most favorable venue for the most favorable treatment of their arguments and to be heard in either the U.S. District Court or the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. One court might rule in one way affecting the same law that another court might act on with an entirely different interpretation. Contradictory rulings would lead to widespread confusion of the intent of laws developed and approved by Congress. The Watt-Rothman amendment offers a more reasonable approach to the court shopping spree provided under the bill. Under Article I of the Constitution, the Court of Federal Claims does not have the authority to revoke federal statutes or to provide relief other than monetary. The Watt-Rothman amendment addresses the question of constitutionality and effectively eliminates the current ``shuffle'' between courts by consolidating claims within a single court, the U.S. District Court. The Watt-Rothman amendment also preserves expedited review which is important to determine the validity of federal regulations in an expeditious manner. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the Watt-Rothman amendment.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, every day all across America we tell children that education is very important to their future. But we send them a contradictory message in the condition of American schools. If we truly want to convince children of the importance of education, we must improve the schools at which they learn and reduce class size. Just a few weeks ago, the Democratic leadership of the House and the Senate joined with President Clinton in rolling out a Democratic agenda which calls for smaller classes, it calls for 100,000 new teachers to teach in these smaller classes, and an initiative to repair old schools and build new schools. This initiative of President Clinton's which I hope the entire Congress will join in calls for a $20 billion initiative on tax-free bonds for local communities to rebuild their schools. The schools our children learn in are in some cases environmental hazards. In many cases the classrooms are overcrowded. In all cases there is need for reconstruction. Send a clear, consistent message to children that education is important by placing an importance on their schools.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and commend the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Miller) for the bipartisan substitute they are offering to the Solomon amendment. I rise in support of the underlying legislation to grant self-determination to the people of Puerto Rico and in opposition to the Solomon amendment, and in support of this amendment. English and Spanish are already the official languages of the Government of Puerto Rico and have been since 1902. English is taught in public schools from kindergarten through high school. And it is my understanding that 95 percent of Puerto Ricans who achieve education beyond high school are fluent in both languages. I want to be clear to my colleagues and read directly from the Burton amendment: In the event that a referendum under this act results in approval of sovereignty leading to statehood, upon accession to statehood the official language requirements of the Federal Government would apply to Puerto Rico in the same manner and to the same extent as throughout the United States. Let us support this amendment, which treats Puerto Rico the same as every other State, if Puerto Rico chooses to become a State. The Burton substitute also recognizes that it is in the best interest of the United States and Puerto Rico to promote the teaching of English and sets the goal of enabling students to achieve proficiency by the age of 10. Mr. Chairman, my friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), whom I hold in the highest regard, is acting in a very unSolomon like mode with this amendment today. It is not wise and it is not fair. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my opposition to the Republican majority's attempt to control the electoral process. H.R. 1428 could keep millions of Americans from voting. American citizens, could be selectively removed from the voter lists. This kind of federal interference in the local electoral process would have a chilling effect on millions of new citizens who would be frightened away from this most sacred expression of the people's will. This Republican bill will lead to discrimination against racial and ethnic minorities. Citizens could be purged from the voter rolls soley on the basis of an ethnic-sounding surname or the fact that they live in a predominantly minority neighborhood. Sadly, it appears this legislation is part of a larger Republican effort to suppress Hispanic voter turnout. This campaign began with the year-long, million-dollar investigation into Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez's defeat of Republican Bob Dornan in California's 46th district. This bill will not work. Both the INS and Social Security have already said they cannot confirm the citizenship of most Americans. We need to remove obstacles to participation not build fear into the electoral process.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us rightly acknowledges the importance of parents who are fortunate enough to stay at home with their children. But this is only part of the story. Had this resolution actually gone through committee, we would also have addressed the importance of working parents who do not have the choice to stay at home. All parents must be supported in their child care choices. While we all want to support parents who want to stay at home, we must acknowledge that many parents must work to keep their families out of poverty. More parents work than have ever before, and more families rely on the mother's income to make ends meet. Many mothers are essential in helping support their families financially. A national study found that 55% of employed women provide half or more of their household income. In California, the average earning of a two-parent family with both parents working full time at the minimum wage is about $21,000. This is hardly enough to put food on the table, let alone afford quality child care. Child care is a universal need. No parent must be discriminated against in our efforts to provide safe, quality child care for families who need it most. But we must work together to achieve this, not pit families with different needs against each other. I urge all my colleagues to work together on crafting a comprehensive child care proposal that addresses the needs of all families for safe, quality, affordable care for our most precious hope for the future--our children.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished Ranking Member for giving me this opportunity to speak in opposition to H.R. 2846, the prohibition on Federally sponsored national testing. As my colleagues know, this legislation would prohibit the development and the administration of volunteer national testing without specific statutory authority. This is a controversial issue, clearly; and there are Members on both sides of the aisle who have questions about testing. But that is not the issue before us today. Last year, members of the Committee on Appropriations spent weeks diligently working with the author of the legislation, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the authorizer, to craft an acceptable compromise to this language. But that never, in fact, belonged in an appropriations bill in the first place, that the National Academy of Science would continue its studies on development of the test. The National Assessment Governing Board has recently determined that, even if we should decide that the voluntary testing should proceed, the test cannot be sufficiently developed and ready to be administered until the year 2001. Mr. Chairman, the purpose of the proposed test is to help our students learn and to improve their performance. A voluntary national test will determine whether our children possess the basic skills they need to achieve and help their parents and teachers help them learn. But a bipartisan compromise was worked out in good faith 3 months ago to resolve this controversial issue. We do not need another resolution. What we do need is to focus our efforts on making educational opportunity possible for all other children by rebuilding schools in desperate need of repair, reducing class size, and creating after- school programs. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 2846.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, on roll call vote 9, I inadvertently voted ``aye.'' I intended to vote ``no.''

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to our distinguished colleague, Congressman Dellums. The unwavering determination and fighting spirit of this political hero will be sorely missed when he leaves this body. First elected to Congress in 1970 as an advocate for peace, Mr. Dellums remains as passionate and dedicated to his ideals today as he was almost three decades ago. Never one to shy away from the tough issues, Ron has gained the respect of all those he has encountered because of the strength of his convictions, his commitment to democracy, and his ability to disengage from partisanship. Congressman Dellums carries the distinguished honor of being the only Member to chair two standing committees. For seven Congresses he chaired the District of Columbia Committee and recently served as chairman of the Armed Services Committee, since renamed the National Security Committee. Currently, Mr. Dellums is the ranking Democratic Member to the National Security Committee. Through his tenure on the National Security Committee, Ron has become an expert on defense issues, an important resource for all those committed to peace. Ron's contribution was fittingly recognized last week when Secretary of Defense William Cohen presented him with the Distinguished Public Service Medal, the military's highest civilian award. I was fortunate to attend that ceremony, an event made more momentous when you consider that when Congressman Dellums was first elected to this body he was an outspoken opponent of the Vietnam war. Congressman Dellums' contributions to this House are legion. We will miss particularly his humble spirit, his tenacity, his eloquence and humor, and his unbending commitment to improving our country. I join with all of my colleagues in wishing our friend well as he moves on to his new challenge.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report and commend the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Callahan], our distinguished chairman, for his leadership in reaching consensus on this bill which has been controversial in the past. I commend also the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], the chairman of the full committee, and the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], the ranking Democrat on the full committee, for their leadership in reaching resolution on some of these controversial issues. As our chairman pointed out, all of the members of the committee, Democrat and Republican, fully participated in many of the issues before us. I believe that we have a good bill before us, and am pleased to point out some of the positive accomplishments in the bill as I join the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Callahan] in commending the staff of the subcommittee as well as the personal staffs of Members who worked so hard to bring us to this point. Some of the positive accomplishments in the bill, Mr. Speaker, include retaining of the traditional amount of funding for the Middle East, with an additional $225 million in assistance for Jordan and appropriate authorities that allow the administration the flexibility to negotiate in that region. Full funding for the International Development Association, IDA, at $1.034 billion which includes payment in full for our arrears package. The IDA program is the soft window of the World Bank that provides funding for the poorest of the poor countries and projects. I am very, very pleased with the dollar amount in the bill. Our chairman is a tough fiscal conservative and a strict disciplinarian. He watches every dollar spent. I think the priorities established in funding the IDA were important, and I commend him for supporting that increase. There is $650 million in a separate child survival account which I call the Callahan child survival account. It includes an increase of $50 million for fighting infectious diseases, including tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and malaria. It includes full funding for the refugee assistance, disaster assistance, and full funding for the Peace Corps. Our chairman has pointed out the creation of a new fund for assistance to the countries of the South Caucasus in the New Independent States. The fund would provide a total of $250 million, with close to $90 million each for Armenia and the country of Georgia. Additional assistance is made available for Nagorno-Karabagh, and there is additional money left in the fund when the Minsk process, I hope, brings peace to the region and is concluded successfully. Our chairman has referenced, and I will too, the provisions for assistance to Russia expressing our concern about Russia's proliferation of missiles to Iran as well as our concern about freedom of religion in Russia. In cooperation with Senator Smith in the Senate we were able to reach an appropriate compromise on that language. We have added funds to the request for the Export-Import Bank and fully funded the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, OPIC. As my colleagues know, part of our function as the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs is to fund exports, the insurance and financing of exports, growing our economy by increasing our exports abroad. OPIC and Export-Import Bank are created for that purpose. We also fund the TDA, the Trade Development Agency, administration in this bill. Both of the promotion programs, Export- Import and OPIC, are therefore robustly funded and fully authorized. Total funding in the bill is at $12.8 billion plus $300 million in international bank arrears, which is very close to the administration's request. Through the Congress working its will through the committee process, we were able to grow the funding that started out at a much lower figure in this House. I think we are at an appropriate level now. As our chairman suggested, there is a compromise on the Mexico City language. The international family planning provisions of this legislation represent, I think, an appropriate compromise which enables us to reduce the number of abortions worldwide by providing the funding for international family planning with conditions which I consider onerous but acceptable; that is, monthly monitoring; I mean, excuse me, monthly metering of the funding. That is, in any given month, no more than 8.34 percent of the total amount is able to be obligated; that is, one-twelfth of the annual appropriation. In addition to that, language requiring the full pursuit of war criminals in Bosnia and Croatia as a condition for further assistance to those countries was included. I thank our colleagues, the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Cardin] and the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer], for their leadership on these issues. And again, in addition, appropriate restrictions on aid to Cambodia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are included. I am concerned, however, Mr. Speaker, that the committee did not include funding and authorization for the New Arrangements to Borrow. The New Arrangements to Borrow, or NAB, is a set of emergency credit lines, a kind of reserve tank for use by the International Monetary Fund in the event of serious temporary threats to global financial stability. The multilateral burden-sharing aspects of this new mechanism are impressive. The U.S.'s $3.5 billion would leverage over $20 billion in commitments from 24 other countries. The $3.5 billion in budget authority for the NAB is not scored as a budget outlay and thus neither increases the deficit nor crowds out other Federal programs. Recent events in Southeast Asia illustrate the continuing risk to the stability of global financial markets and demonstrate the importance of the IMF to the American regional and global interest. The Asian crisis clearly highlights the need for sufficient emergency resources to safeguard stability and protect the financial system and the American economy from the damaging ripple effects of widespread shocks. The NAB, the New Arrangements to Borrow, in other words known as NAB, is a necessary addition to these resources. Simply put, our national interests and global leadership insist that we support the authorization and the appropriation. However that provision is not in the legislation. But all in all, I am very, very proud to join with our distinguished chairman, the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Callahan], in supporting this legislation and urge its passage and urge an aye vote from our colleagues. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey], a distinguished member of the subcommittee. (Mrs. LOWEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone], who has been a leader on the issue of the Caucasus region, particularly Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I too want to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Leach] in regard to the IMF replenishment and the U.N. arrearages. I hope that before this Congress adjourns, that those issues will be appropriately addressed and successfully addressed. I believe that our chairman, the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. Callahan], as I mentioned, has provided great leadership in this legislation, which is almost a match of the administration's request in terms of funding in order to promote U.S. global leadership, promote our exports, maintain the peace, alleviate poverty, and to maintain the peace, I think I said that twice, but it deserves mentioning more than one time. Mr. Speaker, in the interests of time, we are not going to hear from all of the Democrats on the committee, but I want to acknowledge the distinguished service of the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Yates] and the gentleman from California [Mr. Torres], who did not speak, in addition to the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] and the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey]. But I know I speak for them and our Republican colleagues on the committee when I extend our best wishes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Foglietta], a member of our subcommittee who today left our committee and was sworn in as the U.S. Ambassador to Italy. I think every Member of this House is very proud of the service of Mr. Foglietta here, wishes him much success in his new endeavor personally, and especially for our great country. With that, I urge our colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], the ranking member of the full committee; longtime chair of the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs; and I thank him for his leadership in helping us bring this consensus bill to the floor.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I intend to yield back so that he can close, because he has worked so hard on this issue. But I will take a little bit of the time, if I may. I thank my colleague the gentleman from California [Mr. Royce] for his leadership in bringing this important bill to the floor. It is appropriate that this piece of legislation be the last in this series of China bills, because it is a banner issue that we treat the people in Asia, Radio Free Asia in Asia and in China the way we conducted our approach to people in Eastern Europe throughout the cold war. The gentleman from California [Mr. Cox] was instrumental in putting a package together which had great consensus in this body. There were some of us who thought we could do more, but my colleague can prove us wrong by making these bills long, and then making these issues policy. The leadership of the gentleman from California [Mr. Cox] and the gentleman from California [Mr. Royce] and the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] and others enabled us to call to the attention of our colleagues and to our country the concerns that we have about the United States-China relationship. Most certainly we believe in engagement, but it must be effective engagement, that instead of contributing to an increased trade deficit and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction with impunity and ignoring of the repression in China, instead, that effective engagement would make the world safer, the trade fairer, and people freer. And Radio Free Asia, the Radio Free Asia part of this package is further to the point of making people freer. So many people have told us, and I know that my colleagues have addressed this, that in the course of the cold war their consolation was Radio Free Europe, that people in the outside world had not forgotten them, that we did respect their aspirations to live in a freer society. It was true then in Europe, it is true now for Asia, and we reject the notion that democratic freedoms and individual human rights are Western values. Indeed, they are universal values written on the hearts of men. The people in China who aspire for a freer China have quoted Thomas Jefferson, really quoted Thomas Jefferson. They have lived his words, not mocked them, as President Jiang did when he came here. They have fought, risked their personal lives, the security of their families, and, indeed, their lives for principles that we as a country have advocated. We say that promoting democratic values is a cornerstone of our foreign policy. If indeed it is in the world, it must be also in China. Radio Free Asia is the mechanism for us to give some encouragement to those who take such risks for freedom. Those people are the legitimate heirs of our Founding Fathers. For that reason, I commend my colleague for his leadership.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for yielding me this time, and I commend the gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Fowler] for her leadership on this important issue. I just want to return to the dialog where the gentleman from California [Mr. Rohrabacher] started his remarks. I wanted to commend the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Taylor] though, too, for his comments, because it is true, we should be doing more. But this is the very least we should do, where we can come together and hopefully get some action on the Senate side and put these bills on the President's desk. This gives us a chance to demonstrate the need for this legislation and to make a statement of our national values and concerns in our relationship with China. As I have said over and over, I believe we will have a brilliant relationship with China, economically, diplomatically, culturally, politically, and every way, but that can only happen when the Chinese Government respects its own people, stops proliferating weapons of mass destruction to rogue states, and plays by the rule in our trade relationship. I believe we should have engagement with China, but it must be effective engagement, that makes the trade fairer, the world safer, and people freer, and not the destructive engagement that we have now that not only coddles dictators but extends unwarranted hospitality to them. For example, when President Clinton toasted President Jiang Zemin, he was toasting the leader of the Chinese military that at that very moment was brutally occupying Tibet, continuing its proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to rogue and unsafeguarded states, repressing dissent in China, and a military that had in the past year and a half threatened with missiles the election in Taiwan, a military that had exported illegally AK-47 type rifles into the United States, selling them at a very cheap price on the streets here, making them the weapons of choice for gangs, all of this in violation of our law, but we again looked the other way or pulled the plug on the investigation too soon. I want to call to my colleagues' attention a photograph that we have not had on the floor in a long time, because, frankly, I think it is too sacred to bring before this body, which has over and over again rejected our appeals for a change in U.S.-China policy because of repression in China and Tibet. But, Mr. Taylor, respecting and admiring your dissatisfaction with what is going on here too, because, frankly, I am dissatisfied too, it is a cluster of fig leafs that we are dealing with, but they have more to them than that. As one who has been critical of fig leaf approaches here, I do commend our colleagues for the thoughtful attention they have paid and the reasonable solutions they have come up with so they can get almost unanimous support in this body for these initiatives. But the gentleman is right. I had the bill on this floor that would limit MFN, revoke MFN for products made by the People's Liberation Army. That is what we should be doing here today. We do not have the votes for it, the President will not sign it, it would not pass in the Senate probably, and that, I think, is the least we can do. But I bring this photograph back today in hope that the gentleman from California [Mr. Cox] and the gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Fowler] and the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon] and so many others who have worked on this package, that we can be serious about what we are doing and this is not perfunctory. This is the photograph of the lone man before the tank. We all identified with him and admired him, and we immediately forgot the cause that he was standing there for. But I bring it here today in discussion of the People's Liberation Army, because this is the People's Liberation Army. They rolled out the tanks against their own people in the streets of Beijing on June 3 and 4 of 1989. Fast forwarding to the present, this is the same People's Liberation Army that, according to the Office of Naval Intelligence in a March 1997 report, an unclassified report, stated that discoveries after the Gulf War clearly indicate that Iraq maintained an aggressive weapons of mass destruction procurement program. A similar situation exists today in Iran with a steady flow of materials and technologies from China to Iran. This exchange is one of the most active weapons of mass destruction programs in the Third World and is taking place in a region of great strategic interest to the United States. It is in our strategic interest to stop the proliferation by the Chinese military, the People's Liberation Army, of these weapons of mass destruction to Iran. Between June of 1989, and we can go back further than that, but just taking from then to the present, and now, the Chinese military has been engaged in the activities that many of us have described relating to Taiwan, Tibet, China itself, proliferation, et cetera. They are the guardians of China's repressive dictatorial regime. They and the People's Armed Police, which are part of the military, stand guard atop the watch towers of the laogai, the Chinese gulag, and are executioners of prisoners, some of them for harvest of their organs for profit. The People's Liberation Army acts with swift brutality, as evidenced in Tiananmen Square as we see here, to crush any attempt to introduce democracy or promote basic human rights in China. Indeed, when President Jiang, the leader of that military, who got a 21-gun salute from our administration by the military of this repressive regime, when he was here, he rejected the notion of economic reform leading to political reform and stated that political conformity and economic reform are complementary to each other. I was trying to get his exact words. He rejected the notion of people's evolution, and yet this administration and many in this body continue to say that that is what is happening in China. Recently, huge worker demonstrations in Sichuan Province were brutally repressed by the People's Armed Police. Workers, believers, intellectuals, and students are rounded up and confined to reeducation camps in a continuing attempt by the Chinese authorities to break their spirit and prevent the establishment of independent organizations. But this is why the legislation of the gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Fowler] is so necessary. Chinese military-owned companies are selling huge amounts of goods in the United States, including toys, exercise weights, camping tents, and fish for fast food restaurants. Among American companies that buy products from wholesalers or distributors who get goods from them, I will invite my colleagues to read the People's Liberation Army, where to find PLA companies in the United States, what products they sell, and who are the PLA's customers. I think my colleagues would find this very informational and a compelling reason to support the legislation of the gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Fowler]. I thank the gentlewoman for presenting it.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for his leadership on this bill and for yielding me the time. I rise in support of the Labor-HHS conference report. In particular I commend the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] for negotiating an excellent bipartisan bill, a bill in which the subcommittee can take considerable pride. This conference report is a refreshing change from last 2 years when the bill had been the focus of deep ideological disputes and a vehicle for sending objectionable legislative riders to the President. Thankfully, thanks to the leadership also of our chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], as well as the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], we have returned to the bipartisan tradition which has historically characterized this bill. As our former chairman Mr. Natcher would say, this is a good bill. While this is a good bill, it is good because of the excellent work again, as I said, of the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] and the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], who fought very hard to forge this bipartisan legislation. We were given many difficult challenges by the Committee on the Budget, so that many problems that, ironically, it may have forced this responsible bipartisan bill. I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] in particular for doing such an excellent job in reflecting progressive values in these negotiations. With regard to labor programs, the bill makes significant investments in job training, Job Corps, Job Youth and adult training. At the same time, the bill adequately funds worker protection programs, and, unlike, the last 2 years, does not include riders designed to weaken the protection of American workers. I am particularly pleased under an agreement negotiated by the gentleman from Illinois [Chairman Porter] and the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], OSHA will be able to continue its important work in developing an ergonomic standard and will be able to assist business in the next year to adopt important changes in work environment designed to prevent repetitive stress injuries. With regard to health, the bill is a significant improvement over the budget agreement. In addition, the bill provides huge increases in AIDS drug assistance programs, and also will make a difference between life and death for thousands of Americans living with HIV disease. I am also particularly pleased with the compromise in the legislation about the needle exchange program which the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter] addressed in his remarks. This compromise, I think, will enable the needle exchange programs which are part of a HIV prevention program and which do not increase the use of drugs to proceed, and it retains for the Secretary the discretion, unless Congress works its will between now and next spring, to lift the prohibition on needle exchange programs, as long as, as I say, they are part of a program to prevent HIV and drug abuse. With regard to education, I am pleased that so many of the President's important education priorities have been accommodated in this bill. I am particularly pleased with the funding for the bilingual education and the investment and support services and professional development to improve the quality of these programs. I am also pleased with the high priority placed on direct financial assistance to students for higher education. For all these reasons, this is a great bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.