Joseph Pitts

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, let me see if I have got this straight. The same White House that hired private investigators to look into the private lives of Judge Starr and his deputies now is offended that the privacy rights of his victim friend, Web Hubbell, has been violated. The same White House that releases documents, subpoenaed documents, no less, one drip at a time, now is complaining that the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight is not being forthcoming in release of documents. The same White House which collected 900 FBI files, just all happened to be Republicans, is a defender now of privacy rights. The same Democrats who took the criminal intercept of a private conversation on a cellular phone last year and then released it to the press is now upset that the perfectly legal and routinely taped conversation of a convicted prisoner has been exposed for all the world to see. Maybe all these people simply wish to divert attention from the greatest scandal of them all: the one in the White House.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley).

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to insert for the record information on some of the most disturbing news that I have heard recently about the egregious torture which was a reality to thousands of prison camp residents in North Korea. I recently met with Mrs. Soon-Ok Lee and Mr. Chul-Hwan Kang, survivors of the horrifying prison camps of North Korea. The two survivors now live in South Korea and desire to share with the world the truth about North Korea. Both Mrs. Lee and Mr. Kang are willing, at some risk to their safety, to testify before this body about their treatment while in the prison camps and about the general situation of the people of North Korea. It is vital that their information is shared with the world. Mrs. Soon-Ok Lee described the torture she endured at the hands of prison authorities. After severe beatings in which she lost many teeth and suffered partial paralysis in her face, she was subject to water torture. North Korean authorities forced her to lie down on her back and then they inserted a special kettle sprout into her mouth. The spout was made so that it expanded in her mouth and she could not breathe without swallowing water. The guards then poured gallon upon gallon of water into the spout thereby forcing it into Mrs. Lee's body. Due to the incredible amount of water flowing into her body, she became unconscious and her stomach became distended. When it was clear that her body could hold no more, the guards stopped, waited for her to awake, laid a board on her stomach and jumped on it. This forced the water back out of her mouth and caused her excruciating pain. She again lapsed into unconsciousness. Prison officials repeated this scenario a number of times both to Mrs. Lee and other prisoners. Mr. Chul-Hwan Kang witnessed similar egregious violations of human dignity. He was in prison from age nine to nineteen. Authorities imprisoned Mr. Kang at such a young age, because North Korean authorities arrest three generations of family members if a person is accused of a crime against the state or public order. When Mr. Kang's grandfather was arrested for spying, they also arrested and imprisoned the 9-year-old boy. While in the prison camp, Mr. Kang, along with most other prisoners, suffered from extreme malnutrition. In order to survive, he ate snakes, rats, and frogs. In addition to suffering from malnutrition, he watched countless executions carried out either by hanging or by firing squad. Inmates were forced to watch all executions. When guards completed some executions such as hanging, prisoners were forced to stone the dead bodies until they were no longer recognizable as human. Mr. Speaker, horrors such as this do not continue indefinitely when the international community is educated, outrages, and spurred to action. The American public must become aware of these egregious human rights violations. It is of the utmost importance that we begin the process of disseminating the information as widely as possible so that peoples of our nation and others can act on behalf of the suffering North Koreans.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, a news account last week detailed a Clinton administration proposal to begin space cooperation with China. Shockingly, the administration's proposal would permit the transfer of missile technology with the potential of enhancing Chinese nuclear weapon strategy, weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Speaker, according to experts, China has already supplied missile test equipment to Iran and other nations that have a clear vendetta against the United States. Why is the Clinton administration allowing transfer of weapons technology to China? Are they naively believing this information is secure? Who are they kidding? Constructive engagement with China is one thing, but providing technology for computer guidance systems, for ICBMs is not only outrageous, it is a direct threat to our national security. This should be investigated. Although we should constructively engage China, our first and foremost concern should be protecting America's interest and prohibiting transfer of weapons technology which could threaten the Nation's security.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, with regard to the House investigation on the use of illegal foreign money in the last election by the DNC, over 90 people involved with the fund-raising have either taken the fifth amendment or fled the country to avoid testifying. This fact alone points to extensive illegal activity. The only way the American people are going to get to the truth is if we grant immunity to some of these witnesses who know firsthand what happened. Why do some Members want to block a full investigation? The Justice Department agreed to immunity for every witness on whom we voted. The Justice Department had no objection. The only reason to vote against immunity is to keep those witnesses from telling the American people what happened. Why would some Members want to be involved in covering up that? The Members should stop voting to block immunity and stop putting up roadblocks so we can get to the truth. The American people deserve the truth. The American people have the right to know what happened and who was responsible.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Madam Speaker, I rise to urge my colleagues to support the D.C. Opportunities Scholarship Act. We have a moral responsibility to put children first in education, including inner-city children in D.C. All children should have the opportunity to attend school where they are safe, in a classroom where their teacher is qualified, and where their parents are involved in their education. According to a Washington Post article I recently read, about 40 percent of second- and third-graders tested in D.C. public schools last spring read too poorly to meet the new proposed standard for promotion to the next grade. This would mean about 5,000 of Washington's 13,000 second- and third- graders might have to repeat their grade for some reason. Five thousand 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 in high schools without ever being able to read a newspaper. Right now, many of their parents are helpless to take action and provide a good education for their children. Let us give them a choice to respond to the educational needs of their children. Let us support this D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Act.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, is there not a single Democrat in this House that is offended by the fact that the White House has hired private investigators to look into the private lives of Federal investigators and smear their political enemies? Is there not a single Democrat in this House that is even bothered that the Independent Counsel is being publicly smeared and vilified by the White House attack team in open violation of the law? Is there not a single Democrat in this House that does not find repugnant the tactics used by the White House spin machine to attack its accusers using tactics that would have made Joe McCarthy proud? Is there not a single Democrat that has had enough of the lies and stonewalling and routine destruction of lives and reputations of any and all who dare to investigate what Attorney General Reno herself has said requires investigation? It was discovered that the White House was illegally in possession of 900 FBI files, all just happen to be Republican, and no one knows anything? Is there not someone on the other side who will speak up about all the abuse by the White House?

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to submit into the record the findings of the Ninth Statewide Investigating Grand Jury's Report relating to the 1993 Special election for the Second Senatorial District Seat in Pennsylvania. This election case serves as a grotesque example of the potential for voter fraud and abuse in our election system. This Grand Jury has taken an indepth look at voter fraud in Pennsylvania and its report should compel us to review voting practices and affirm voter protection and fairness across the country. As the attached information discloses, voter fraud can have broad abuses in the areas of PAC activities, false voter registration, absentee ballot irregularities, election certification processes, and candidate activities at the polling place. Mr. Speaker, in every elective office of the United States, from President to Township Supervisor, we must maintain the integrity of the voting booth. If the voting booths cannot be a place of integrity and if Americans cannot cast their ballots knowing that the winner will ultimately be one who has garnered the most votes in a fair competition, then our democracy is in danger. House of Representatives, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, April 6, 1995. SUBJECT: Public Hearing on the Ninth Investigating Grand Jury's Report Relating to the 1993 Special Election for the Second Senatorial District TO: Members of the House State Government Committee FROM: The Hon. Paul I. Clymer, Chairman, House State Government Committee The following is an overview of the Ninth Investigating Grand Jury's report relating to the 1993 special election for the Second Senatorial District seat. This overview includes a summary of the major issues reviewed by the Grand Jury, as well as findings and recommendations for legislative, executive and administrative action. You may want to pay particular attention to the recommendations. I've also enclosed a copy of the original text of the grand jury's recommendations. As you know, the grand jury's report is the subject of the State Government Committee's April 10 hearing, scheduled for 10 a.m. in Room 140 of the Main Capitol Building. Please bring this information to the hearing with you. If you have any questions in the meantime, do not hesitate to contact Susan Boyle at 772-3465 (2-3465). The Ninth Statewide Investigating Grand Jury's Report No. 2 Relating to the 1993 Special Election For the Second Senatorial District Seat Introduction In December 1993 the Ninth Statewide Investigating Grand Jury began its investigation of allegations of criminal activity with regard to the special election for the Second Senatorial District seat held on November 1, 1993. The investigation began with an inquiry into reports and complaints of allegedly widespread illegalities in absentee voting. Those allegations involved: 1) improper distribution of absentee ballots where no application for such ballot had been made; 2) the distribution of absentee ballots to individuals not entitled to them; 3) use by these individuals of these ballots; and 4) forgery of absentee ballot related documents. During the course of the investigation, other matters of concern came to light. They included: 1) allegations of questionable political action committee (PAC) activities; 2) allegations that WAM grant checks were provided to one of the candidates for distribution during campaign appearances; and 3) allegations that arrangements were made to have one of the candidates travel to Harrisburg to be sworn in before the election board even certified his victory. The grand jury investigated each of these matters. In some instances, where the grand jury found criminal conduct and was able to identify the persons responsible, it recommended the initiation of criminal proceedings. In other instances, the grand jury recommended legislative, executive or administrative action to correct certain problems or perceived problems. Findings--The Stinson Campaign and Absentee Ballots The grand jury found that the campaign of candidate William Stinson made a concerted effort to generate absentee ballots. The campaign's strategy involved the extensive handling of both absentee ballot applications and ballot packages by campaign staff and volunteers. The ultimate goal was to generate a large number of ballot applications and submit them to the Philadelphia Board of Elections immediately prior to the deadline so that the Bruce Marks campaign would not have time to mount its own absentee ballot effort. Individuals, many of whom were in dire need of money, were recruited by campaign staff and volunteers to go door to door and solicit ballot applications. They were paid $1.00 per application generated. Many voters were told that, in filling out the applications, they were signing up for a ``new way to vote.'' A number of the applications generated through this drive were not filled out properly and thus were rejected by the Board of Elections. Because of the sheer volume of absentee ballot applications generated and the fact that most of them were submitted either on or very close to the application deadline, many applicants were never made aware that their applications were rejected by the Board of Elections and thus were disenfranchised. Even more startling, is the fact that Stinson volunteers also rejected absentee ballot applications that were improperly completed. Stinson campaign workers also obtained absentee ballot packages for delivery to applicants. Despite a 1978 memo from then-DA Ed Rendell to City Commissioner Marge Tartaglione indicating that such a practice violates the Election Code, all of the City Commissioners and many of their staff confirmed that the hand delivery of absentee ballots to applicants was a common practice. Findings--Other Absentee Ballot Irregularities The grand jury found that lies and misrepresentations were used by Stinson campaign volunteers, as well as by others who were not affiliated with the campaign, to entice voters to sign absentee voter applications. Many voters who signed applications were not even told why they were doing so. Others were not even asked if they met the qualified absentee elector criteria set forth in the Election Code. Some voters allowed campaign workers to fill out portions of their absentee ballot and/or declaration envelope. In fact, some campaign workers went so far as to tell voters how to vote. Even more disturbing, a number of registered voters indicated that their signatures--on either the absentee ballot applications or the ballots themselves (or both)--had been forged. Findings--False Voter Registration The grand jury found instances in which individuals who did not live in the Second Senatorial District were registered to vote there. In a number of cases, these voters used the registration address of the home of the judge of elections or committee person. Findings--Effects of Fraudulent Activity on the Voting Process The above-referenced fraudulent activities had a significant impact on the electoral process, according to the grand jury. The most egregious effects include: * voters were, at best, mislead, at worst, disenfranchised; * fraudulent votes were cast and counted; * by personally delivering ballots to voters, campaign workers were able to accompany the absentee voter into his personal voting space. Findings--Election Certification Process The grand jury found that, although the Philadelphia City Commissioners and the State Senate did not violate criminal law in their certification and swearing in of candidate Stinson, the handling of these processes was rather ``unusual.'' Candidate Marks' absentee ballot challengers were not permitted to testify before the City Commissioners during their certification meeting. The challenges, said Commissioner Talmadge, should have been made by poll watchers at the polling place, as required by the Election Code. The Commissioners apparently certified Stinson first, after hearing only one witness. In the meantime, Stinson had been instructed to go to Harrisburg the night before so that he would be readily available to be sworn in. In fact, Marks was in the process of appealing the Commissioners' ruling when Stinson was sworn in. The grand jury suggested that this chain of events might lead one to believe that everything was prearranged and that the various decisions made in the certification process were based on partisan politics. Findings--Political Action Committees The grand jury examined the activities of both the FDR Federation PAC and the Committee of 17 PAC. The FDR Federation PAC put out a brochure which was targeted to Jewish voters in the Second Senatorial District and which featured a number of Jewish candidates, including Bruce Marks. Witnesses involved with this PAC admitted that it was established specifically for the purpose of putting out the brochure. The PAC had two members, neither of whom played an active role in making policy decisions relating to the brochure. Decisions relating to the PAC and the brochure were made by Senate Republican campaign staff. The grand jury did not consider the FDR Federation PAC a true PAC as defined in the Election Code. Rather, its members agreed, the PAC served as a front for the Senate Republican Campaign Committee. The Committee of 17 PAC was created by William Stinson. Not only did the PAC's officers fail to register the PAC and file campaign expense reports in accordance with law, but Stinson's wife forged a number of checks by signing the PAC treasurer's name. The grand jury compared this PAC to the FDR Federation PAC, in that no one associated with the PAC had any idea what its purpose was and that it was controlled by a third party; in this case William Stinson. Findings--Candidates' Activities at the Polling Place The grand jury learned that candidate Stinson was involved in a number of questionable activities on election day. Not only did he open and close voting machines for his mother, who is the judge of elections for the 33rd Ward, 13th Division, but he allegedly opened and read a number of absentee ballots. The grand jury asserted that these activities are prohibited by the Election Code and, thus, recommended that Stinson be charged with certain violations of the Code. He was subsequently tried and found not guilty. Recommendations for Legislative, Executive and Administrative Action The following is a list of recommendations for legislative, executive and/or administrative action made by the grand jury. The recommendations are based on the findings summarized above. 1. The Office of Attorney General should continue to investigate the allegations brought to light in the grand jury report. 2. The Election Code should be amended to specifically prohibit the payment of monetary incentives to individuals who solicit absentee ballot applications and/or distribute absentee ballots. 3. The elected office of City Commissioner of the City of Philadelphia should be abolished. The ``ministerial acts'' of registering voters, approving applications for absentee ballots and counting votes should be performed by civil service employees, not partisan politicians. 4. The Election Code specifically provides that any elector whose absentee ballot application is rejected by notified immediately of such action. To the extent that there is any ambiguity in the language of this section of the Code, the grand jury recommends that the Election Code be amended to require that this notification be made directly to the elector. 5. The Election Code should be amended to prohibit anyone other than employees of the City Commissioners' office from delivering absentee ballots to voters and delivering completed ballots to the Board of Elections. 6. The Election Code should be amended to establish a procedure whereby an absentee elector could designate an ``agent'' to deliver his or her absentee ballot application, obtain the absentee ballot from election officials, return it to the elector and/or return the completed ballot to election officials upon its completion. 7. The General Assembly should review existing classes of absentee voters and determine if additional classes of voters should be permitted to vote by absentee ballot. 8. The General Assembly should review the laws relating to challenges to absentee ballots and consider establishing a procedure for dealing with allegations of massive or organized absentee ballot fraud. Present law provides adequately for individual challenges but not for allegations of mass fraud. 9. The grand jury asserts that, under no circumstances should a candidate or members of his or her immediate family be involved in the opening/closing of polls or the canvassing of votes, and recommends that the General Assembly amend the Election Code to specifically criminalize such activities. 10. The General Assembly should amend the Election Code to ``better define'' the terms ``political committee'' and ``political action committee'' and to make it a crime to use one political committee or PAC to hide the activities of another political committee or PAC. 11. The General Assembly should be amended to more clearly provide for the duties and responsibilities of PAC officers, particularly the chairman and treasurer. In particular, the Election Code should identify the officer responsible for registering political committees and for filing all of the reports required of such committees. 12. The General Assembly should enact legislation prohibiting governmental officials or employees from requesting that their subordinates engage in political activity. 13. The four caucuses of the General Assembly which distribute WAM grants should take steps to prohibit the distribution of such monies by non-incumbent candidates for public office for political purposes.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Education is currently spending Federal tax dollars funding the closed captioning of the Jerry Springer Show. Unbelievable. Since when does this talk show have anything to do with teaching our kids basic math, reading, writing, science, or history? Not only does the Jerry Springer show not improve American education, but over the past few months, it has done seven shows on premarital or adulterous relationships with titles such as ``I am Having Your Man's Baby''. They have produced another seven shows on the Ku Klux Klan, such as ``I am a Breeder for the Klan'' and ``Christmas with the Klan''. They had eight shows on prostitution, such as ``I am a 13 Year Old Prostitute'' and ``My Wife wants to be a Call Girl''. If you believe that Federal education tax dollars should be made available to kids in classrooms instead of providing access to programs on prostitution, racism and polygamy, then I urge the Members to support the Dollars to the Classroom Act. This bill block grants 30 Federal education programs requiring 95 cents of every dollar go to classroom use.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, although the Liberals just hate to bash the IRS, ordinary Americans who pay taxes have no other choice. Consider this: In Fortune Magazine recently it says that there were 119 million returns filed in the tax year 1996. Those returns triggered 28 million error notices. It turns out that one in 11 of those error notices was itself in error. So the IRS is routinely wrong about your being wrong. Now, I did not learn arithmetic using ``whole math'' like our lucky kids today, but I come up with about 2.5 million IRS errors, 2.5 million times when the IRS is accusing you of being a tax cheat, when, in fact, you are just one more falsely accused taxpayer by the IRS. The IRS is a place that does not operate under the same rules as society does. The IRS can accuse, make demands, confiscate, shut down, and make you prove that the IRS is wrong. And when the IRS is wrong, well, tough luck. Mr. Speaker, it is time to rein in the IRS.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, what is it about 1960s liberals and their absolute incapacity to distinguish between good science and bad? Again and again we see the same pattern where left-wing politics trumps science when it comes to regulation, environmental policy, secondhand smoke, safety and risk studies, global warming and, now, free needles for illegal drug users. It is always the same story: bogus science and new government programs. Many commonsense Democrats do not support this newest outrage. Soccer moms taking their kids to school certainly do not favor this policy. The President's own drug czar does not support this policy. Experts who have studied the problem do not support this policy; experts, that is, who believe that politics should not get in the way of good science. No, Mr. Speaker, the people who fail to fight the drug war and who make excuses for that failure to protect kids from drugs are the ones behind this disastrous policy.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, can we talk about education in this country without talking about the most important recipients of education, our kids? Someone should explain to us how Federal studies like ``Channeling Your Donna Reed Syndrome'' or ``Cement, the Concrete Experience'', even studies on researchers researching their research techniques have anything to do with kids learning their ABCs or basic skills. This is exactly the kind of waste that is produced in the bloated bureaucracy here in Washington, D.C. Mr. Speaker, instead of sending our Federal tax dollars to parents, teachers and local educators, the dollars get lost in the abyss of the bureaucracy and on Federal studies. The Committee on Education and the Workforce estimates that, on the average, only 65 cents of every Federal education dollar gets into the classroom. We now have the opportunity to send our Federal education tax dollars directly to the classrooms of the Nation. The Dollars to the Classroom Act ensures that 95 cents of every Federal education dollar goes directly to the classroom, to the hands of someone who knows your child's name. Mr. Speaker, this means microscopes, computers, books and not bureaucrats. Let us send the dollars to the classroom.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on behalf of three American missionaries who have been held hostage for over 5 years by FARC guerillas. In January of 1993, Colombian guerillas crossed the border and kidnapped David Mankins, Richard Tenenoff, and Mark Rich from a Panamanian Indian village. During the first year of captivity, FARC intermittently contacted New Tribes Missions to demand payment of a $5 million ransom. But, in 1994, the guerillas cut off all contact. According to the New Tribes Missions authorities, there are credible reports that the three Americans are still alive. Last July, Assistant Secretary of State John Shattuck committed to doing everything possible to secure the release of these three Americans. In addition, a number of Latin American countries have pledged their assistance to resolving this hostage situation. Mr. Speaker, American citizens' lives are at stake. I urge President Clinton, Secretary Albright, the State Department and all other appropriate American officials to work with other countries to help bring an end to this tragic situation.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, the current situation at the White House has, at some point, caused each of us to pause and ask how has this soap opera changed the debate in this country? What do people care about? Is it really just the economy, stupid? Or do American citizens, as I know each of us wants to believe, hope for a truly honest and moral individual in the White House and, for that matter, in all positions of leadership. Whatever happened to the expecting leaders who exemplified ideals of fidelity, character, honesty, and trustworthiness. If our children are not seeing these traits in us from the White House to the Halls of Congress, can we expect them to hold this high and timeless standard for themselves? How unfortunate, the first thing that Americans now think of when we hear the name, President Clinton, has nothing to do with an African safari or balanced budget. What message is Bill Clinton sending to America? By his silence, is Bill Clinton condoning improper behavior? When will the Americans finally hear the truth? Character counts. It is that simple.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Madam Speaker, this whole presidential scandal is a sad, unfortunate situation, but it will not end until Bill Clinton comes forward and tells the American people the truth. We have heard enough from the presidential political hit men and spin doctors. It is time for Mr. Clinton to come forward so that we can put this behind us and move forward. Madam Speaker, the presidency belongs to the American people, not to one individual. Being President is more than a privilege, it is a profound responsibility, a sacred duty. The individual who sits in the White House is less important than the honor and integrity of the institution itself. Mr. Clinton owes it to the American people, to the proud tradition of the presidency, and to the country to come forward and tell the truth so that we can return to the Nation's business. The truth.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I have some questions to ask today. Is it not strange that this White House can find and release in a matter of hours a half-dozen private letters written years ago by a volunteer, but it takes months and even years to find official documents officially requested by official government agencies? Is it not strange that the pundits and spin doctors representing Bill Clinton have so much to say when no one elected them, while the President continues to say nothing? Is it not strange that the President invokes executive privilege to keep his aides from telling what they know when he says he has nothing to hide? Is it not strange that every person who dares to speak up about Bill Clinton's behavior is smeared and slandered by the White House attack team? I think we need to ask more questions.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to my colleagues who are fighting to get U.N. reforms and those who are fighting to protect the rights of the unborn. I urge them to vote yes on H.R. 1757, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act. This bill has a version of the pro-life Mexico City policy supported by pro-life organizations, by pro-life leaders like the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), which will end all U.S. subsidies to organizations that lobby for legalized abortion in developing countries. This bill denies funding for the United Nations Population Fund if they support China's forced abortion or population control programs. Further, the bill scales back U.N. arrearages from the administration's request and conditions the funding upon U.N. reforms. The bill has a number of U.N. reforms which are very important. In year number one in order to receive the $100 million appropriated in fiscal year 1998, the U.N. must not require the United States to violate the U.S. Constitution or any U.S. law, it must not attempt to exercise sovereignty over the United States or require the U.S. to cede authority, it must not make available to the U.N. on its call the armed forces of any U.N. member nation, must not exercise authority or control over any United States national park, wildlife preserve, monument or private property of a U.S. citizen without that citizen's permission, must not amend its financial regulations to permit external borrowing. In year two, in order to receive the second arrears payment, the U.N. must reduce the U.S. dues from 25 to 22 percent of the total budget, must reduce U.S. peacekeeping assessments from 31 to 25 percent. In year three, they must agree to reduce their staff by 1,000 persons, agree to a no growth budget, must agree to hold no more global conferences, among other reforms. Mr. Speaker, we have a number of reforms in addition. Let us not lose this opportunity to reduce taxpayer forced abortions. Let us not use the chance to save babies overseas. This is a vote that is going to be scored by the National Right to Life Committee. That is important for the pro-life vote. I urge all the Members to vote yes on H.R. 1757 and save the lives of children overseas.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, it is time for a little quiz. What is the difference between a community outreach event and a fund-raiser? We really would like to know. But maybe the Vice President can help us. How about this one? What is the difference between a finance-related event and a fund-raiser? Or how about the difference between an event for donor maintenance and a fund-raiser? It is a time for the Vice President to come clean about the legal event, whatever euphemism we want to use to describe it, that was held on April 29, 1996, in California. Maybe the Vice President can help us with the problem we are having trying to understand how an event organized by Maria Hsia, who is a fund-raiser, which raised $55,000, is not a fund-raiser? Mr. Speaker, we do not need an MBA, we do not need a CPA, we do not need a Ph.D. in economics to see when a professional fund-raiser raises $55,000 at a finance-related event we are talking about a fund-raiser. Leaving the shredded documents and money laundering aside, what exactly is the Vice President's explanation about this sordid affair?

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share another tragic story of human rights violations abroad, this time in the country of Honduras. For more than 34 years and with millions of dollars, women of Honduras have been victims of an overzealous population control movement. They have been subjected to sterilizations and mass contraceptive pill distribution without caution or required exams or information, funded entirely by U.S. taxpayers. Mr. Speaker, now we find that these Honduran women have been the subjects of a human experiment, this time with the Ovrette contraceptive pill, which has been used without any information about its potential side effects to the women taking the pill. Instead of warning women that the effects of the pill were undetermined and that it should not be taken while breast-feeding, the USAID-led effort chose to strongly push the use of the pill among the women. At the same time, the government decided to monitor unsuspecting women to see what the effects of Ovrette might be. To make matters worse, while this was going on, Ovrette was not even registered with the proper authorities, as is the law. Mr. Speaker, this would not take place in America. It should stop in Honduras.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge Members to join the Religious Prisoners Congressional Task Force. The task force will advocate on behalf of persecuted religious prisoners around the world by appealing directly to independent national leaders. Minority religious believers often suffer beatings, torture, extended incarceration, even death at the hands of their governments unless intervention is made. Reputable human rights organizations report that advocacy with key government officials changes prisoners' life for the better; it alters prison conditions, stops torture, and secures release. Amnesty International documents one prisoner's statement. ``When the first 200 letters came, the guards gave me back my clothes. Then the next 200 letters came, and the prison director came to see me. When the next pile of letters arrived, the director got in touch with his superior. The letters kept coming and coming, 3,000 of them. The President was informed. The letters still kept arriving, and the President called the prison and told them to let me go.'' Mr. Speaker, as citizens of a country founded on the principle of freedom of religion, we must work to ensure that international human rights standards are upheld by all countries of the world and that religious liberty is a fundamental human right. We can only intervene on behalf of religious liberty if Members act.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, once again we are told that the White House is cooperating fully with Judge Starr and other investigators assigned by Attorney General Reno to discover the truth about allegations of wrongdoing. Their idea of cooperating fully is somewhat laughable. Consider recent revelations about how the White House is cooperating fully with the independent counsel. The White House hired private investigator Terry Lenzner to dig up dirt on Federal investigators. The White House has spread false rumors to reporters including a false allegation about the conduct of a Starr investigator during a 1994 trial. The White House has repeatedly leaked information to the press and then turned around and blamed Starr's office for leaks. Mr. Speaker, two questions need to be answered. One, what money paid for the private investigators, tax dollars or private funds? And, two, who got the results of the investigation, the dirt? Mr. Speaker, I do not know what others think, but I am getting tired of falsehoods. Regardless of what the polls say, the American people deserve better, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to begin a discussion with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey), the House majority leader, on the importance of values to our Nation. I thank him for giving me the opportunity to speak today on this issue of vital importance for the survival of our Nation. Mr. Speaker, moral principles are the foundation of a good society. It is a simple fact that our democracy, the greatest government in history, was founded in large part so that Americans could practice and maintain a strong moral code in their way of life. The first people to colonize this Nation did so for the freedom of religion, not freedom from religion, freedom of religion in order to freely follow a code of ethics to which they were firmly devoted. From the time of the Pilgrims we have associated the creation of America with the privilege and responsibility of applying moral principles. Even the modern anti-tax movement can trace its roots directly back to a moral principle present in colonial times that every penny and every power that government gets comes at the expense of personal freedom and personal opportunity. In fact, this principle helped spur the American Revolution. Mr. Speaker, we have a founding document in this Nation, a birth certificate, if you will, called the Declaration of Independence. This declaration is different from many others that have been issued around the world. The primary difference is the preamble that distinguishes it from all other declarations of independence. This preamble has certain principles that I would like to mention. The fact that, and I would like to quote it, the fact that these principles are highlighted, I think, are instructive. This is what it says: We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed and that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness. Now, that is not the whole preamble, but in that part of the preamble we see that these principles that we are endowed by our Creator, that all men are created equal and that we are endowed by the Creator with certain inalienable rights, that these are God-given rights, rights not given to us by government, rights that the government cannot give and rights they cannot take away, they are God given rights and the purpose of government is to secure these God given rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. With rights also must come responsibility. Our Nation is built on the principle of liberty. Our government exists with our consent. We choose to augment, revise and improve our laws and the very structure of our government routinely. With this privilege comes a mandate that we tend to liberty with care and caution and prudence. We have another founding document, the one that we all swear to support and defend. It is called the U.S. Constitution. And that Constitution is the oldest national Constitution in the world, the granddaddy of them all. And it begins with these words: We the people of the United States in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. We the people, as one of the prime ministers who spoke to this Congress in past years said, the most important words in the English language, the most important three words, we the people. And in those days when kings were sovereign and people were subjects, to say that we the people are sovereign and we only give you the government certain limited powers, that we the people do ordain, was a revolutionary concept. Of course we know that our Republic, our constitutional form of government cannot work in a vacuum and it should not work in a back room. It requires citizens to be involved with their representatives in order to represent them adequately. But when we take a look at other forms of government, we realize what a powerful and beneficial system we have. When other nations were created, the citizens were thought to be subjects. They were so much chattel from which the hierarchy could prosper, and around the world governments created just a few decades ago and some longer than that, centuries ago, forced men and women to be pawns for the state. The people live at the discretion of the government. But not in America. In America the government lives at the discretion of the people. As we see when we look around the world, our democracy truly is a blessing. Now, it is easy to argue that things have run amok. We have too much taxation. We have an overly large Federal bureaucracy. We have an administration that takes power away from families. It is pretty clear that we have taken the benefits of democracy and used them to support bad policies. But it is not the system that is flawed. It has been a lax approach to following the moral principles which created this Nation and made it strong. In 1776, in my home State of Pennsylvania, our State Constitution decreed in its preamble, and I quote, we the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty and humbly invoking his guidance, do ordain and establish this Constitution. In that same period, the 18th century philosopher Montesquieu wrote, and I quote, the deterioration of every government begins with the decay of principles upon which it was founded. And in current times we have seen that very decay in our moral principles. We have stopped advocating biblical principles upon which this Nation was founded. Instead, we have adopted relativist stances which are far easier to defend, but which are far more difficult for the progress and security of our Nation. Thus we have seen the decay. We live in a society where infidelity is either glamorized in the media or accepted as benign and inconsequential by our politicians. Tonight, 4 out of 10 children who go to bed will go to bed in a home in which their father does not reside in America. Tonight, drug abuse is on the rise among our youth, and child crime is more prevalent today than at any other time in the history of our Nation. As we have walked away from the moral code which binds this Nation together, we see our society fraying at the edges. We must get back to those values that created our Union for the sake of our Union. George Washington, our first President, was a man of great moral character. It was his capacity for self-discipline and willingness for service to the American Nation which ultimately allowed this Nation to be founded. George Washington said this, and I quote: ``We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of heaven can never be expected on a Nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained.'' Washington's message was clear: We as a Nation can thrive by the adherence to a fundamental moral code. It gave Washington the vision to lead us into the era of democracy. Conversely, as we have seen, we as a Nation can fall with the disregard of that code. This Nation was founded on the premise that fidelity to God was honorable and ought to be encouraged, not hindered, by government. Sadly, we now have portions of the government fighting alongside elite liberal factions in order to portray faith in God as a radical, irresponsible act. While the founding fathers used prayer as a guiding influence in their fight for freedom, we now hide behind false legal pretense to deny our responsibility to gain inspiration and direction from prayer. The first act of the very first Continental Congress in 1774 was to pass a resolution as they met in Carpenter's Hall. They did not meet, the first Continental Congress, in the old statehouse in Philadelphia. They did not want to plot against the Crown on Crown property. They met next door in Carpenter's Hall, 57 men, and their first act was to pass a resolution calling on each session, every day, to begin with prayer, to be led by a local clergyman. They had heard a false rumor that Boston had been cannonaded. The next day they invited the vicar of Christ Church in Philadelphia, the Reverend John Dushay, to come and lead the prayer. And in those days, when they had prayer, it was not like we have a 1- or 2-minute prayer, his session lasted over 2\1/2\ hours. He first read from Psalm 35. And if my colleagues will remember the rumor of Boston being cannonaded, and in the day of slow communication they did not know it was false, and so we can understand his reading. And John Adams, who was there, wrote to his wife Abigail. There are a lot of letters that they exchanged. And he described this scene, and it is portrayed in a picture on the wall in Carpenter's Hall, if anyone visits there. He said, Washington and Rutledge and Lee, and he named some others on their knees; beside them the old gray pacific Quakers of Philadelphia; and then behind the old pacific Puritans of England, with tears in their eyes. And he ended, ``It was enough to melt a heart of stone.'' The first act of the first Congress on their knees in prayer. Something that might be a little foreign to us today. But heroes like Washington, Adams and Lincoln used their lives to demonstrate their effort to respond to their responsibilities as men of faith. They fought for the concept of freedom with their demonstrations of honor and integrity, and, as a result, a great Nation was born, developed and survived great challenge. Abraham Lincoln, during a time when our Nation struggled to recreate itself, affirmed his devotion to the core principles begotten by faith. He said, and I quote, ``Intelligence, patriotism, Christianity and a firm reliance on Him, who has never yet forsaken this favored land, are still competent to adjust in the best way all our present difficulty.'' Our Constitution embodies core moral principles. It creates a system where individual effort and integrity are rewarded. In it, men are free to support those with similar moral convictions. It rewards those who incorporate their faith-based responsibilities of honesty, hard work, devotion, fidelity and charity. It works to create a system which works for and through morality and responsibility. The founders of our Nation recognized the importance of faith and honesty in government, requiring officeholders to publicly swear an oath before assuming governmental responsibility. And this was not a simple act of pomp and circumstance. This was a declaration of a bond with their Creator. It was a demonstration that honesty and faith are prerequisites for governing. According to Sir William Blackstone, who was the great jurist, and he was the one who wrote the commentaries that all lawyers back in those days studied to become attorneys, he said this: ``The belief of a future state of rewards and punishments, the entertaining just ideas of main attributes of the Supreme Being, and a firm persuasion that he superintends and will finally compensate every action in human life, all which are revealed in the doctrines of our Savior, Christ, these are the grand foundations of all judicial oaths, which call God to witness the truth of those facts which perhaps may be only known to Him and the party attesting. All moral evidences, therefore, all confidence in human veracity must be weakened by apostasy, and overthrown by total infidelity. Wherefore, all affronts to Christianity, or endeavors to depreciate its efficacy, in those who once professed it, are highly deserving of censure.'' Mr. Speaker, the freedom to which we owe so many is a direct result of adherence to divinely inspired moral values. These values made us a great Nation. And as we have recently seen, there is an inverted relationship between our Nation's success and its rejection of traditional values. The further we avoid making the tough choices of honesty, fidelity, honor, self-reliance and the incorporation of our faith into our daily lives, the further we slide down the path of relativism. As we face a new millennium, we must work to come back to those principles. Our Nation cannot afford to slide much further. Redemption can come from reacquainting ourselves with these morals, but this action must occur soon. For the sake of our Union, we cannot wait. I thank the gentleman for letting me participate tonight and yield back to him.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share the stories of a Kenyan doctor who describes the use of U.S. funded population control dollars in Africa. Dr. Stephen Karanja states, ``Our health sector has collapsed. Thousands of Kenyan people will die of malaria whose treatment costs a few cents, in health facilities whose stores are stacked to the roof with millions of dollars worth of pills, IUDs, Norplant Depo-provera, most of which are supplied with American money.'' He goes on to say, ``Some of these contraceptives, like Depo-provera, cause terrible side effects to the poor people of Kenya, who do not even have competent medical check-ups before injection.'' He continues, ``A mother brought a child to me for pneumonia, but I had no penicillin to give the child. What I have in the stores are cases of contraceptives.'' Colleagues, we should reexamine our spending priorities. We are overfunding family planning and underfunding child survival. We should focus our efforts on saving lives.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, while Republicans are working to sunset the tax code and consign it to the ash heap of history, the President has announced that to do so would be irresponsible. Leaving the President's relationship with young interns aside, I think it is time for the President to come clean about another very disturbing matter: Just what is the President's relationship with the IRS? I am sure that the President would say that there is no improper relationship with the IRS, but the facts suggest otherwise. After all, why would the President defend the current tax code, all 7 million words of it? Why else would the President think that overhauling the tax code would be an irresponsible scheme? Does the President really believe that a flat tax would not be simpler, more fair, more transparent than the current tax code? Mr. Speaker, it is time for the President to tell us the truth about his improper relationship to the agency that presides over the most corrupt, most unfair, most outrageous tax code in American history.

Mr. PITTS

Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring another example of wasted Federal education tax dollars to your attention. Through the Department of Education, we funded an education study entitled, ``The Development of Critical Television Viewing Skills in Elementary School Students.'' Our kids do not need Federal assistance to watch television to develop, ``television viewing skills.'' Rather, they should be learning to read and write, finding solutions to math problems and perform science experiments. While American schoolchildren lag behind the rest of the developed world in basic academic skills, our Federal education dollars are paying for our children to watch television effectively. If my colleagues believe that Federal education dollars should be made available to kids in classrooms instead of funding studies like this one, I urge them to cosponsor the dollars to the Classroom Act, which will require 95 cents of every Federal dollar to be used in the classroom where learning basic skills occur.