Joseph Pitts

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, this morning I want to share a children's story that has been on my mind for the last seven months which we have all read to our children but I think it is instructive today. Once upon a time, there was an Emperor who loved his kingly clothes, in which he paraded through the palace and through the land so that all could admire him. He was very vain. His closest aides and followers were always nearby to congratulate him on how dashing he looked, how popular he was with his loyal subjects and how good his leadership was for the land. One day, however, the Emperor began parading through the land with his clothes off. He even assured himself and his followers that he was in fact wearing clothes. They just could not see them, because only stupid people could not see the clothes. Because they did not want to be thought of as stupid, his lawyers and followers and supporters agreed, ``Oh, yes, he must be wearing clothes.'' And so they trumpeted throughout the land, ``The Emperor really is technically dressed but the unenlightened among you just cannot see the fine threads from which his garments are made.'' They even attacked those who sought to expose the truth. And so it continues today, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, the Administration ought to be commended for taking strong action against Osama bin Laden and his many followers who are behind the recent terrorist attacks on American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. Osama bin Laden is a traitor to Islam, and he has betrayed the commandments of his faith. Chapter VI, verse 151 of the Koran states, ``Take not life, which God hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law.'' Terrorist attacks on our embassies have taken the lives of hundreds of innocent people, Americans and non-Americans alike. Osama bin Laden, like all terrorists, has engaged in a cowardly act and he does violence to the very religious principles he invokes. He offends the millions of devout followers of Islam who do not believe that the killing of innocent people has any role in a civilized society. The Administration should stand firm against terrorism and strike back against the cowardly murderers who are a threat to free peoples everywhere.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express concern for the victims of the rapes and riots in Indonesia, and to stand with those victims, the Chinese ethnic community, the Christian, and the other religious minority communities. Yesterday I was briefed by Indonesians themselves on what is happening in their country. In the last 3 months, 15 churches have been destroyed or burned since Habibie has been in power. I want to join with those Indonesians and the Chinese people worldwide in condemning these gross violations of human rights, in particular, the raping of ethnic Chinese women. Reliable reports suggest that the attacks on ethnic and religious minorities were orchestrated. Unfortunately, individuals and organizations which are assisting these victims have been harassed, threatened with phone calls, explosives, and even death should they continue to help the victims. Madam Speaker, I urge the Indonesian government immediately to proceed with a thorough investigation to promptly bring to justice all individuals who are associated with or who are perpetrators of these crimes against minorities.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, in a recent survey of its members, the Association of American Educators found that 82 percent of the teachers surveyed supported consolidating Federal education programs, sending those funds in a formula grant to the States, just what the Dollars to the Classroom Act does. I would like to share with my colleagues some comments from teachers who support this approach: ``The Federal Government should quit dictating to local communities what should be taught to children, mainly because the Federal Government is totally out of touch with reality.'' Kansas City, Missouri. ``It is time we realize that no one program can meet the needs of every region.'' Oklahoma City. ``I am all in favor of localizing control of school budgets. Local educators are professionals with the training and experience to make the best decisions for their schools.'' Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. ``When layers of bureaucracy can be eliminated for the benefit of the school and students, then we should all be pleased. However, this calls for added input from the parents and communities involved.'' Charleston, South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, those are the thoughts of teachers around the Nation. Colleagues, it is time to send dollars to the classroom.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, it is with great sadness that I am compelled to rise today to urge the House to support House Resolution 277, because it means that Columbian guerillas are still holding David Mankins, Mark Rich, and Rick Tenenoff as hostages. As we know, in January of 1993 the Columbian guerillas crossed the border into Panama and kidnapped David, Richard, and Mark from an Indian village where they were doing humanitarian work. These three American missionaries have now been held for over 5 years by the guerillas. I believe that is the longest held Americans ever, as hostages. Credible reports suggest that they are still alive. Last year a number of Latin American ambassadors pledged to assist in resolving this hostage situation. In addition, the governments of other countries in Central and South America learned of the case and pledged their support in working to secure the release of Mr. Mankins, Mr. Rich, and Mr. Tenenoff. The commitments of assistance from a number of these governments has been very encouraging. In July of last year, Assistant Secretary of State John Shattuck committed to doing everything possible to secure the release of these three Americans. Unfortunately, despite all these pledges of assistance from other countries, the Americans remain as hostages. Mr. Speaker, American citizens' lives are at stake, and now have been for over 5 years. We must continue our efforts on behalf of these men. I urge President Clinton, Secretary Albright, the State Department, and all other appropriate American officials to work to bring an immediate end to this tragic hostage situation. I urge the House to support House Resolution 277 to pledge our assistance in bringing David Mankins, Mark Rich, and Rick Tenenoff, home to their families. I also again offer my continued to support, assistance and prayers to Mrs. Mankins, Mrs. Rich, and Mrs. Tenenoff and their families as they seek the release of their husbands and fathers. I call on all of my colleagues to stand firmly against terrorism of any kind.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Norton amendment to the D.C. appropriations bill. The amendment would gut the abortion funding ban that has been in place in D.C. appropriations for the past 3 years. Although the gentlewoman might claim that her amendment simply inserts the word ``Federal'' so that the ban would still be in effect if her amendment were passed, in reality the Norton amendment places no limitations on the use of D.C. revenues to pay for abortion on demand. In 1994 and 1995, when then Mayor Sharon Pratt Kelly announced that the District would start paying for abortions on demand, she then authorized the use of $1 million from the Medical Charities Fund which was intended to help poor AIDs patients to pay for abortions. So instead of helping AIDs patients who were in need to live longer healthier lives, the District chose to use those funds to abort babies. Then the District could request more Federal funds to make up for the money they had taken out of the Medical Charities Fund. This type of bookkeeping is wrong. It is a misuse of funds. It is deceptive. We have a responsibility. We cannot shirk our responsibility to D.C. residents. Article I, section 8 of the Constitution authorizes Congress to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over the District of Columbia. Further, Public Law 93-198, commonly known as the home rule law, charges Congress with the responsibility for the appropriations of all funds for our Nation's capital. We are morally responsible for how taxpayer funds are spent in D.C., all funds, not just Federal funds, as the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) may argue. It is our responsibility not to use any taxpayer dollars to fund abortion on demand in the District of Columbia. I urge a no vote on the Norton amendment.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. We have a moral responsibility to put children first in education, including our inner city D.C. kids. According to a Washington Post article, the D.C. school system is, and I quote, ``a well-financed failure.'' Despite spending approximately $9,000 per student, about 40 percent of the second and third graders tested in D.C. public schools last spring read too poorly to meet the proposed standard for promotion to the next grade. This would mean that about 5,000 of Washington's 13,000 second and third graders might have to repeat their grade due to poor teaching, 5,000. Washington, D.C. kids are simply not being taught basic reading skills. I wonder how many of these students will slip through the cracks and graduate from high school without being able to read a newspaper. Many of their parents are helpless to take action to provide a good education. Let us give these D.C. parents a choice, the D.C. children a chance. Support the amendment.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Mollohan amendment. I do not believe politics should play a part in the 2000 census. It is too important to our country. We all know how important polls are to the Clinton administration. They base most of their decisions on polls. But do we want them to base the 2000 census on a poll? I think not. The American people understand that polls are not very accurate and, as we have heard, even President Clinton understands that. He has called the 2000 census scheme a poll. Sometimes it is wrong, he has said. Do we really want to use an inaccurate poll as the basis for representation of all levels of government for the next 10 years? Can the American people really trust a census that is based on a poll taken by the Clinton administration? Mr. Chairman, the American people deserve a census that is honest and reliable, one they can trust, not a population poll. Let me show my colleagues a poll conducted last week by McLaughlin & Associates. People were asked in a scientific survey, a national survey, ``Do you approve or disapprove of the Clinton administration's plan to replace an actual head count with statistical sampling in order to conduct the 2000 census?'' Here are the results. Overall, 19 percent approved, 66 percent disapproved, 14 do not know. Black, 33 percent approved, 52 percent disapprove and 14 do not know. Hispanic, 22 percent approve, 62 percent disapprove, 15 percent do not know. We can see the results. The bottom line is all groups in society, over 50 percent, disapprove. If the Clinton administration likes polling, if they believe polling, he ought to listen to the people. This is an updated, recent poll. I urge my colleagues to defeat the Mollohan amendment.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Hefley amendment. The President's position is an extreme special interest position. He has taken the back-door approach, not going through the legislative process. We should maintain the proper balance between the legislative and executive branches of government. President Clinton is out of step with the majority of Americans who oppose quotas based on one's behavior or life-style. This executive order would have an impact on the private sector. Companies seeking to contract with the Federal Government or grant recipients would be required to submit to this new Federal edict. To protect themselves from costly lawsuits, companies will have the burden of proving that they do not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. What the President has done is extend the hand of the Federal Government to an interest group with a powerful, well-funded lobby, an interest group that believes that non-job-related behavior should be the deciding factor in hiring or promotion policies in our Government. Let us support the Hefley amendment.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge all parties involved in the 20-year conflict over Western Sahara to fulfill their commitments under the Houston Agreement and the United Nations mandate. The parties negotiated a cease-fire with the understanding that the people of Western Sahara themselves could participate in a free, fair, and transparent referendum to decide their own future either as a part of Morocco or as an independent country. However, the July 10 report by Secretary General Kofi Annan raises particular issues of concern about the referendum process: Obstructions to the UN opening an office in the territory, the lack of progress in the demining of the territory, and the refusal of Morocco to identify 2,000 individuals to vote in the referendum. Mr. Speaker, a free, fair and transparent referendum is vital to lasting peace and increased stability in North Africa. All parties involved in the referendum process should maintain their commitments to the utmost. A failure to hold a referendum would be a failure to all parties involved, including the international community.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to tell my colleagues what America's teachers are saying about the need to get tax dollars to the classroom. The Association of American Educators has found that 82 percent of the teachers surveyed support consolidating Federal education programs, sending those funds in a formula grant to the States, just what the Dollars to the Classroom Act does. I would like to share with my colleagues some interesting comments from teachers who support the Dollars to the Classroom approach. ``The Federal Government should quit dictating to local communities what should be taught to children, mainly because the Federal Government is totally out of touch with reality.'' Kansas City, Missouri. ``It's time we realize that no one program can meet the needs of every region.'' Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. ``I'm all in favor of localizing control of school budgets. Local educators are professionals with the training and experience to make the best decisions for their schools.'' Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Those are thoughts of teachers. The question we need to ask is who do we trust to educate our children, Washington bureaucrats or local teachers, parents, and school officials? Let us pass the Dollars to the Classroom Act. Send $2.7 billion to our classrooms.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the DeGette amendment. This amendment would strike from the bill section 103 which prohibits Federal funding of abortions for Federal prisoners except for the life of the mother or in case of rape. It is outrageous that the pro-abortion advocates want to force the American taxpayers to pay for the abortions of Federal prisoners. Instead of sending the message to Federal prisoners that the answer to their problem is to kill their unborn babies, let us urge them to take responsibility and consider what is best for the child they are carrying. Let us not compound the problem with an act of violence on top of an act of violence. When this issue was debated in 1995, one of the supporters of this pro-abortion amendment asked the Members of the House, ``Who will speak for these children?'' Then she went on to declare, ``We must speak for these children.'' If this is true, we must speak for the children, then I guess those who support this amendment believe that the unborn children of Federal prisoners want to be killed by their mothers. We should not vote for the death of unborn children at the expense of all American taxpayers. I urge a ``no'' vote on the DeGette amendment.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask some questions. Why did the President's defenders begin by insisting that no sexual liaisons occurred in the White House? Then as evidence against the President mounted, why did his defenders shift their position to say that the President's sex life is a private matter? Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, if extramarital sexual liaisons are supposed to be purely private, why are taxpayer funds being used to defend or facilitate or cover-up? Taxpayer funds must not be used by lawyers to defend in a private civil suit or to attack or undermine investigations of allegation of wrongdoings. Taxpayer jobs should not be used in any way for defending or promoting the allegations and accusations of anyone. Mr. Speaker, the people, the American people are waiting for the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, not spin.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to focus on the schoolchildren of our Nation. Parents in all 50 States are concerned that their children's classrooms are overcrowded, that their kids do not receive enough individual attention from their teachers, that classrooms are not yet connected to the Internet and many schools are not safe and well-supplied, and that basic academics are not being effectively learned. For 30 years, the Federal Government has been trying to improve America's schools by creating big Federal programs. While the goal was admirable, this strategy has failed the schoolchildren of America. It is time for a new approach. We know that effective teaching takes place when we begin helping children master basic academics, when parents are engaged and involved in their children's education, when a safe and orderly learning environment is created in a classroom, and when dollars actually reach the classroom. The Dollars to the Classroom Act addresses the linchpin of these four key education premises, directing dollars to the classroom so that a teacher that knows the name of your child can educate more effectively. Madam Speaker, I urge Members to improve the education of America's kids by supporting the Dollars to the Classroom Act.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, last week I spoke on Morocco's refusal to permit removal by the U.N. of millions of land mines in Western Sahara. Today, I rise on behalf of the POWs of both sides of the war between Morocco and the Western Sahara who were captured or are missing as a result of the 20-year conflict. I personally visited with 84 Moroccan POW's military personnel who have been freed by Western Sahara as a gesture of goodwill and whom the kingdom of Morocco will not permit to return to their country. On my visit to the refugee camps, I met with an organization which tracks missing Sahrawis. 526 Sahrawis remain among the disappeared. They are either prisoners held by Morocco or are missing, all held incommunicado by Morocco. In a country like Morocco, which is a friend of the United States, it is strange to hear reports of such clear violations to fundamental human rights as to not identify POWs and missing people. I urge the Kingdom of Morocco to reconsider their policy and identify all those held incommunicado as well as accept back their own military which have been freed by Western Sahara.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise with my colleagues to pay tribute to the valiant work and lives of two fallen heroes--J.J. Chestnut and John Gibson. The whole community here in Congress is slowly recovering from the shock of the fatal shooting of two honorable Capitol Hill policemen just under a week ago. It is disturbing and sad that this happened. Just 10 short minutes after the House adjourned for the weekend last Friday, bedlam and terror engulfed the Capitol of the United States. An armed gunman entered the Capitol--and who knows what his intent was. Were it not for the valiant efforts of two brave Capitol Police Officers, many lives of staff, tourists, and Members of Congress could have been lost. We cannot quite fathom the implications of the bravery of these two men. Those of us who work here can attest to the commitment of the Capitol Police force. Yet, we're never really ready for something like this. Scripture tells us that ``there is no greater love than this, that a man would lay down his life for a friend.'' Where terror struck, these two men knew exactly how to respond. Officers J.J. Chestnut and John Gibson have paid the supreme sacrifice for their friends by giving their lives. They represent the finest among us--officers who protect our freedom, our Capitol, our system of government, our way of life. It is a great tragedy that they have been slain in the line of duty. But we honor them, we honor their memory, we honor their commitment. Their lives exemplify duty, honor and country. J.J. Chestnut and John Gibson are American heroes. Our thoughts and prayers are with their families and loved ones.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Madam Speaker, today is the day that the House will vote to override the veto of the partial-birth abortion ban. I want to illustrate here why President Clinton's position is the extremist position. This is a baby that could be born. But let me show you what happens. The doctor reaches in and turns this baby around so that the baby is born breech first. The head is still within the birth canal. Then at this time, the doctor inserts scissors into the back of the neck of the baby and then puts a suction tube in to suck out the brains of a live baby. Do you think this baby does not have pain and feel pain? This is a baby that could be delivered as a live baby boy or girl. We need to vote to override this veto of the partial-birth abortion ban which is a horrific procedure in America.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Madam Speaker, abortion is the most violent form of death known to mankind. It is violence against children and it is violence against women. When will liberals begin to truly seek protection for American women? Listen to this statement by Dr. Camilla Hersh, member of the Physicians' Ad Hoc Coalition for Truth, which details the violence of a partial-birth abortion. Consider the grave danger involved in a partial-birth abortion. A woman's cervix is forcibly dilated over several days. This risks creating an incompetent cervix, a leading cause of subsequent premature delivery. It also risks serious infection, a major cause for subsequent infertility. Partial- birth abortion is a partially blind procedure, done by feel, thereby risking scissor injury to the mother's uterus and laceration of the cervix or lower uterine segment. Either the scissors or bony shards of the baby's perforated and disrupted skull bones can roughly rip into the large blood vessels which supply the lower part of the lush pregnant uterus, resulting in immediate and massive bleeding. Let us stop kidding ourselves. Partial-birth abortion is violence. Let us override the President's veto.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of 165,000 refugees living in the middle of the harsh Western Sahara Desert. Just last week I returned from a visit to these refugees. I was deeply impressed with the strength and determination these people showed in their ability to survive in the midst of such a harsh environment. The Sahrawi people are in refugee camps because of a 20-year territorial dispute with Morocco over the land known as Western Sahara. The conflict ended with an agreement that the United Nations peacekeeping force, called MINURSO, will conduct a free, fair and transparent referendum. Unfortunately, as I saw last week, according to the July 10 report from Kofi Annan to the UN Security Council, Morocco continues to obstruct this process by denying the Swedish de-mining contingent the use of their equipment to carry out their task to remove the hundreds of thousands, and perhaps millions of land mines, that have been placed in Western Sahara. Mr. Speaker, I urge the Kingdom of Morocco to review its position as requested by the UN so the process agreed to by both parties can continue and the lives of innocent civilians be spared by permitting the team to de-mine the area.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share the story of Baby Phoenix, first known survivor of a partial-birth abortion. Last week, in the A-Z Women's Center in Phoenix, Arizona, a 17-year-old was scheduled to abort her baby. The abortionist began a partial-birth abortion on what he thought was a 23-week-old baby. However, as he continued the procedure, he realized that he was actually committing a partial-birth abortion on a 6-pound, 2-ounce baby girl. Instead of continuing this procedure in which the doctor would stick scissors into the back of the girl's head and then vacuum her brains out, the abortionist decided to stop the abortion and deliver the 6-pound, 2- ounce little girl. What if this abortionist had continued the partial-birth abortion? Would he have been convicted of killing Baby Phoenix? Absolutely not. Under our Nation's abortion law, the doctor could have continued the partial-birth abortion and delivered Baby Phoenix dead. Our Nation's law protects this infanticide, the right of the doctor to kill a baby just because she is not fully outside her mother's body. Like Baby Phoenix, my son Dan was only 6 pounds when he was born. I remember cradling him in my hands. He was so tiny, but so perfect. Those that oppose the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act support the right to kill babies like these. We should vote to override the President's veto of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act and pass it into law this year.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Johnson amendment to the Interior Appropriations. As my colleagues know, this amendment would restore funding to the National Endowment for the Arts, an organization which has wasted U.S. taxpayer dollars on art which has often been objectionable to Americans. By ending funding to the NEA, we are not ending Federal funding for the arts. Contrary to popular belief, the National Endowment for the Arts is not the sole recipient of Federal funding for the arts. There are an estimated 200 arts and humanities programs or activities funded by and administered through various departments and agencies of the Federal Government, but are not getting one dime of NEA funding. These programs are programs such as the Commission of Fine Arts, the Holocaust Memorial Council, JFK Center for the Performing Arts, the National Gallery of Art, the Smithsonian, and many others. The Federal Government also provides support for the arts through tax expenditures, such as the deduction for charitable contribution to the arts, humanities, culture, on income, gift and estate taxes. Zeroing out funding for the NEA will not end Federal funding for the arts. It simply ends a program which has misused taxpayer dollars with some of the sickening attempts to subsidize blasphemous, offensive and pornographic depictions. In addition, I might point out that the NEA administrative overhead and bureaucrats earn about twice as much as the artists they seek to subsidize, and much of their subsidy goes to just a few large cities in our country. I do not know if this is what is called fleecing of America, but it is objectionable, and I urge the defeat of this amendment.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following for the Record. Statement by Congressman Joseph R. Pitts on Lethal Drug Abuse Prevention Act, (H.R. 4006), July 14, 1998 Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of H.R. 4006, the Lethal Drug Abuse Prevention Act of 1998. This bill will prohibit the dispensing or distribution of a controlled substance in order to cause or assist suicide or euthanasia. Mr. Chairman, I strongly believe that we can and must do better for our disabled and ill citizens than kill them. You cannot solve problems by getting rid of the people to whom the problems happen. When a teenager says her life is not worth living because she has lost her boyfriend, we don't say, ``Well, that's her choice.'' We recognize it as a cry for help, as a view that can and will be changed. Statistics show that of those who attempt suicide and are stopped, less than 5% have gone on to kill themselves five years later. What a tragedy it would be for the more than 95% who survived if we had turned our backs and not tried to stop them from taking their lives. Sadly, that is exactly what opponents of H.R. 4006 seek to do. I know that it will be said it is different for those who are terminally ill. But a study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry found that of the 24% who are terminally ill who said they wanted to die, all were suffering from clinically diagnosable depression. Depression is an illness, and it distorts judgment. We should treat it in terminally ill individuals as much as in others. Let no one suppose, however, that this is an issue that applies only to the terminally ill. Authorizing assisted suicide for those with terminal illness is only the tip of the iceberg. We can see what happened in the Netherlands. In 1981, a Dutch court said that under certain conditions, a doctor could assist a terminally ill person's suicide. In 1982, another court extended that to elderly people who were not terminally ill, but in chronic bad health, a decision upheld by the Dutch Supreme Court in 1984. In 1986, the Dutch Supreme Court said that people with disabilities could be killed. In 1989 Holland moved from voluntary assisted suicide to nonvoluntary euthanasia when the Supreme Court said that doctors could give lethal injections to children born with Down syndrome. In 1991 a Dutch court legitimized killing a 25 year old woman with mental illness, and in 1994 the Supreme Court said that a woman, with no physical illness or disability, but who was depressed because of the death of her last remaining child, could be killed. Once you accept the view that death is a solution to human problems, it becomes very hard to draw lines. Gradually, it will be seen as an answer to more and more problems, for less and less weighty reasons. We in America must not start down that road. My colleagues from Oregon argue that Congress has no business in this area, that it should be left entirely up to the state of Oregon. They miss the point that we are talking about federally controlled drugs. Under existing federal law, it is generally illegal to dispense or distribute these drugs unless you have a special license or ``registration'' from the federal government. If you are a medical practitioner or pharmacist, you are granted that federal registration to prescribe certain of these federally controlled substances for a legitimate medical purpose. Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act in the first place because drug abuse is a national problem. A state cannot nullify the federal law if it chooses, as a matter of state law, to legalize the use of heroin or LSD. The same Attorney General who overturned the ruling of the professionals at the federal Drug Enforcement Administration on this matter has successfully gotten injunctions to close cannabis clubs in California that were selling marijuana for supposed medicinal purposes as authorized by a California referendum. Mr. Chairman, you can't have it both ways. If my distinguished colleagues from Oregon really want to assert states' rights, they should be pushing for the complete repeal of the federal Controlled Substances Act. But while it is in effect, for the federal government to permit the dispensing of otherwise prohibited federally controlled drugs to kill patients means the federal government is affirmatively facilitating assisted suicide. The American people don't want this to happen, by a margin of more than 2 to 1. A Wirthlin Worldwide poll in March found that 65% oppose allowing the use of ``federally controlled drugs for the purpose of assisted suicide and euthanasia.'' Mr. Chairman, the Declaration of Independence describes life as something that is ``inalienable''--a right so fundamental that it cannot be given away even voluntarily. The principal author of the Declaration, Thomas Jefferson, wrote in 1809 that ``The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government.'' Our country stands at a crossroads between the way of death and the way of life. I urge that this subcommittee lead us in the life-affirming direction by reporting out the Lethal Drug Abuse Prevention Act of 1998.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, reports of the riots in Indonesia last month tell of mass rapes targeted at the Chinese and non-Muslim women. There are several reports that some military leaders helped to organize the terrorizing of the ethnic and religious minorities. One 18-year-old woman reports that the apartment complex where she lived was invaded by an angry Muslim mob. The mob found this woman and her family, tied them up with bed sheets, knocked the father unconscious, and proceeded to brutally rape all the women. This woman's sister was raped by five men who all said, ``Allahu Akbar'' before they raped her. The young woman's sister tried to fight against the rapists. In the end, one of her rapists sliced open her stomach and brutally killed her. There are many reports detailing the same situation for other women in Indonesia. Mr. Speaker, the horrors done to the Chinese and the Christian communities must not be allowed to continue under any government whatsoever. The Indonesian Government should use its power to stop these terrifying human rights abuses and investigate the allegation of any military involvement in these atrocities.