Louise Slaughter

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel). (Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, just to ask the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), my friend, what part of his book and Bible over there says we file them on Friday and go to the floor on Wednesday. I would like to see it, if the gentleman could cite that for me. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about process this morning, because I think it is important. During my tenure here as a Member of the House of Representatives, I chaired an organization called the Organization on Study and Review, which set the rules of the House. And since the beginning, the inception of this Republic, this House has followed the rules. We set up the committee process because we wanted a full and thorough airing of every bill that came to the floor. As the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) has said, this bill was filed last Friday. It has had no process at all. It has simply gone to the Committee on Rules and directly to the floor, and, Mr. Speaker, it is going on a closed rule. No hearings have been held. As I mentioned, no committee action has been taken. Now, the unfortunate thing here is that the Committee on Rules ignored the committee of jurisdiction. The ranking members of the committee and the subcommittee of jurisdiction asked for an opportunity to review, to amend, and to state their views on the legislation through hearings, markup, and committee reports; the process, Mr. Speaker, by which we operate. They were not allowed to have their wishes heard. Mr. Speaker, one may ask what new, unanticipated crisis has caused the House to abandon its usual legislative process. Why do we have to deal with this immediately without the opportunity for the Committee on Commerce to examine the scientific and epidemiological facts that would enable the House to make an informed decision? It may simply be that, as usual, the House has nothing else to do. But in any case, these questions remain unanswered. This bill would merely continue the existing administration policy. The rule is unusual in several other ways as well. The vast majority, almost all of our rules allow for only one hour of general debate which is controlled by the Chair and the ranking member of the committee or subcommittee of jurisdiction. That is our process, again. This rule allows two hours of debate controlled for the majority by a Member who is not even on the committee of jurisdiction. The control of the minority time is left to a Member ``opposed to the bill.'' The lack of due process, the closed rule, its unusual provisions, and the haste simply to confirm what is already current policy might lead a cynic to believe that this debate is not designed to help Members make a difficult choice about the best public health policy. No, this process and this rule do not foster deliberation, but are more conducive to a 2-hour campaign sound bite designed to label political opponents as less than vigorous in opposing illegal drug abuse. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Commerce and the full House should be thoroughly considering how best to stop the spread of HIV infection, not reaffirming a circumstance that already exists. The spread of HIV continues to rise in this Nation. But in addition to opposing this procedure, I have concerns about the bill made in order by this rule. H.R. 3717 would place a permanent ban on the use of Federal funding for needle exchange programs. Last week, Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala announced that the administration would not, would not use Federal funds for these programs. This decision was made in spite of the fact that studies have demonstrated conclusively that needle exchange programs reduce AIDS transmission and do not, do not encourage illegal drug use. This bill, Mr. Speaker, is a solution in search of a problem. The Secretary has stated in no uncertain terms that the administration will not use Federal funds for needle exchange programs, but here we are today on the House floor taking up a bill that offers a ``me too'' response an already announced decision. With our budget resolution already 2 weeks overdue, the House of Representatives should be using Members' valuable time to consider pressing new business, rather than reaffirming the status quo. Mr. Speaker, I oppose this closed rule because it circumvents thoughtful consideration on an important public health issue. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was honored last Thursday, April 23 to participate in the National Civic Commemoration of the Days of Remembrance, the United State's annual national Holocaust memorial service. The theme of this year's commemoration was ``Children of the Holocaust: Their Memories, Our Legacy.'' The moving ceremony began with a processional and the presentation of the flags of the United States Army Divisions that liberated concentration camps. Following the Presentation of the Colors and the National Anthem, Benjamin Meed, Chairperson of the Days of Remembrance Committee made opening remarks recalling the horror he felt as a child in hiding in Warsaw as other Jewish children in the Warsaw ghetto were brutally burned to death. His Excellency Eliahu Ben Elissar, the Ambassador of Israel to the United States, remarked upon the legacy of the Holocaust from the perspective of the State of Israel's 50th Anniversary. Mr. Speaker, I was deeply touched by the beautiful voice of Staff Sergeant Beverly Benda, accompanied by the U.S. Army Band (Pershing's Own). Sergeant Benda sang ``Oyfn Pripeshik'' (At the Fireplace), a song used in hidden ghetto classrooms to teach children the alphabet. The translation of the end of the song reads: ``When you grow older you will understand that this alphabet contains the tears and the weeping of our people. When you grow weary and burdened with exile, you will find comfort and strength within this Jewish Alphabet.'' Miles Lerman and Ruth Mandel, Chairperson and Vice Chairperson of the United States Holocaust Memorial Council, noted the role of the United States Holocaust Memorial in allowing new generations of Americans to learn about the horrors of the Holocaust--the first step in understanding how it occurred and how we can prevent it from ever happening again. The keynote address by Yale University President Richard C. Levin elaborated on the theme of remembrance as the key to understanding. Dan Napolitano, a teacher at Georgetown Preparatory School, related how his experience as a student and teacher of the Holocaust and the history of anti-Semitism have reshaped his view of himself as a Catholic, a Christian, and a member of the human race. As Josef Hapli and Rebecca Levy read heartbreaking excerpts from Children's Diaries of the Holocaust, pairs of Holocaust Survivors and Members of Congress lit memorial candles. I was honored to light the last candle with my constituent Alex Mutz, a survivor of three ghettos and five concentration camps. Others lighting candles of remembrance were Senator Arlen Specter and Betty Grossman Goodfriend; Rabbi Alfred Gottschalk; Representative Christopher Cannon and Charlene Perlmutter Schiff; Representative Carolyn Maloney; and Representative Jim Kolbe and George S. Pick. Tiffany Nickels of Romani heritage placed a rose among the candles to memorialize the fate of the Roma and Sinti murdered by the Nazis. The Remembrance Program concluded with the singing of the service for the dead, ``El Moleh Rachamim,'' and the Hymn of the Partisans by Cantor Alberto Mizrahi and the recitation of the ``Kaddish'' led by Sigmund Strochlitz. Mr. Speaker, I thaink Chairperson Benjamin Meed for giving me the privilege to play a small role in this remembrance program. It is an experience I will always remember and treasure. I ask all my colleagues to take this occasion to remember the tragedy of the Holocaust and to ensure that our children and our children's children learn about it, so that we can all work together to ensure that it will never happen again.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, Congress desperately needs to reform our campaign finance laws. The Federal campaigns are becoming little more than a money chase to pay for increasingly expensive elections, and voter turnout is at an all time low. The most recent election cycle spent on the Federal election an estimated $1.6 billion, but less than half of the eligible Americans exercised their right to vote. The cost of political campaigns has simply become too high, threatening the integrity of our system of representative government. The American people are discouraged by a system in which money seems more important than issues, and the interests of money seems more important than the concerns of working families. But the legislation the House will vote on today actually increases the amount of money that can be contributed by wealthy individuals and special interests, and it includes a gag rule that makes it even more difficult for working Americans to get information on issues that matter to their families. To add insult to injury, this misguided legislation has been brought to the House under suspension of the rules.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize a true heroine of my community: Phyllis Korn, retiring director of Alternatives for Battered Women, Inc. (ABW) in Rochester, New York. Phyllis Korn has devoted almost twenty years of her career to helping battered women and their children. As director of ABW, Ms. Korn shepherded the organization from being a part-time hotline operated from a church basement to a full domestic violence agency featuring a 24-hour hotline, a 38-bed shelter, children's services, support groups, on-site court advocacy, and other services. Today ABW serves more than 4,000 callers per year and employs 27 staff full-time, 25 part-time, and 35 to 50 volunteers. Under Ms. Korn's leadership, ABW has been a leader in awareness and prevention of domestic violence as well as conference organization and education of local leaders. Ms. Korn is also a founding member of the New York State Coalition Against Domestic Violence and is an Advisory Board Member of the New York State Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence. She has established formal and informal collaborations between ABW and local institutions including hospitals, community health centers, legal services groups, and community organizations, innovations which have allowed our community to treat battered women and families more effectively and with more compassion. Whether counseling battered women or educating law enforcement officers, Ms. Korn has been a tireless advocate for the most vulnerable members of our society. The long list of awards and honors she has received are testimony to the widespread and lasting impact of her work; most recently, she was named 1998 Woman of the Year by the Susan B. Anthony Society in Rochester. I am proud to count her among my constituents and, more importantly, among my friends. Phyllis Korn has touched the lives of thousands of Monroe County citizens, offering a lifeline to women and children with nowhere else to turn. She has left an indelible mark on our community and a legacy for the future. With her as our inspiration, we can all work toward a day when domestic violence is only a distant memory.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I do not oppose this rule; it allows all germane amendments to be offered. However, the rule does include several waivers of House rules that trouble me. The rule waives clause 2(L)(6) of rule XI which provides for a 3-day layover of the committee report accompanying this bill. This House rule allows Members time to study the report and decide whether they would like to offer or support amendments. While this requirement is often waived for pressing budget or appropriations matters, there is nothing in the record as to why the House must take up H.R. 3310 in such haste. Of more concern are the waivers in this rule of the Congressional Budget Act. Some are technical waivers, common for bills considered before the annual budget resolution is passed. However, this rule also waives section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act. Section 311 prevents measures from being considered which exceed the spending limits or lower revenues that have been set by the current budget agreement. The loss of receipts because of this bill are not large, about $5 million annually, but again nothing in the record indicates why a small offset could not have been found that would have allowed the House to consider this bill without violating our Budget Act and its pay-as-you-go provisions. As we all know, strict adherence to pay- as-you-go rules has been a key in our ability to lower the deficit and to balance the budget. Mr. Speaker, I also have questions about some provisions of the underlying bill, H.R. 3310. I support efforts to reduce paperwork requirements on small business, and I have supported the legislation that was passed by Congress to reduce the paperwork requirements such as the Paperwork Reduction Act and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, and the administration has streamlined regulations through its initiative to reinvent government and the implementation of the White House Conference on Small Business Recommendations. There are aspects of the bill that I support. H.R. 3310 would require Federal agencies to publish paperwork requirements for small businesses so that they can know exactly what is required of them. It would require each Federal agency to establish a liaison for small business paperwork requirements to help small businesses comply with their legal obligations, and would establish a task force to consider ways to streamline paperwork requirements even further. It is unfortunate, however, that the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight included other provisions in this bill that could be dangerous to the safety and the health of the American people. This bill would prohibit the assessment of civil penalties for most first- time violations of information collection or dissemination requirements if those violations are corrected within 6 months. The civil penalty provisions in this bill effectively remove agency discretion from regulatory enforcement decisions against first-time violators. Although this provision may sound good on the surface, it could cause serious problems. It could hamper agency efforts to take actions to protect the health and safety of the American people. For example, this bill could make it more difficult to catch drug dealers by weakening the enforcement of the requirement in the financial institutions report cash transactions that exceed $10,000, a requirement that obviously helps law enforcement officials identify criminal activity. The bill can make our highways less safe by weakening the enforcement of reporting requirements on the transportation of hazardous materials. The bill could make medicines more dangerous to take by weakening the enforcement of the requirement that manufacturers report adverse effects. This bill could make it more difficult to protect investors and pensioners by weakening the enforcement of requirements that create audit trails and prevent fraud. The bill could make it more difficult to deter illegal immigration by weakening the enforcement of the requirement that employers document the eligibility of new employees. The bill could make our workplaces less safe by weakening the enforcement of health and safety requirements on the job. While the bill does contain some exceptions to the suspension of first-time paperwork fines, the standards are high. They quote actual serious harm to the public health or safety, unquote, or, quote, eminent and substantial danger to the public health and safety, end quote. In fact, this provision provides no relief to honest businesses doing the best they can to obey the law. It gives an unfair advantage to the small minority of businesses that try to undercut their competition by willfully violating or ignoring the law. If this bill became law in its current form, those businesses disinclined to follow the law would have no incentive to obey the law until they had actually been cited for violation. As has been pointed out often on this floor the past few years, many agencies do not have sufficient resources to regularly check on the businesses they regulate. That means that enforcement of public health and safety protections depends on voluntary compliance. This provision would reward noncompliance with a law. For these reasons, this bill is opposed in its current form by the administration, consumer groups, labor unions, and environmental groups. However, the rule we are debating will allow the House to solve many of the problems in this bill. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney) will offer an amendment that provides for agency discretion in the imposition of civil penalties against first-time violations. The amendment also requires agencies to establish policies or waive or reduce civil penalties for first-time inadvertent violations. Mr. Speaker, I support an H. Res. 396 provision that any germane amendment can be offered under the 5-minute rule. I urge my colleagues to support the passage of the Kucinich-Tierney amendment allowed by the rule. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to House consideration of H.R. 1757, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act. This bill seeks to send our Nation's foreign policy back to the dark ages of women's reproductive health. This act would reinstate the Reagan-era Mexico City policy which seeks to limit the reproductive freedom of women in other nations, but it goes even further than Mexico City in posing arbitrary and cruel restrictions on women's legal health choices. Not only does H.R. 1757 ban U.S. foreign assistance to any organization that engages in any kind of lobbying on the issue of abortion, but it defines lobbying to cover attending conferences or workshops, drafting and distributing materials on abortion laws. It is not enough that the majority wants to deny women access to reproductive health services, now they want to restrict the freedom of assembly and speech for women's health organizations. We have this same debate time and time again on the House floor, and yet still many cannot grasp the critical importance of providing full and balanced information on reproductive health to women in developing nations. This is a matter of life and death for many women. Denying access to vital health information and services will lead to the cruelest birth control of all: death. If we do not fund family planning organizations, women in the developing world will and are suffering. For my colleagues who profess to be proponents of children's health, I would note that the availability of contraception has important health benefits for both women and their families. By spacing births, infant survival improves dramatically and families can ensure that they have the resources to support their children. Studies indicate that spacing births at least 2 years apart could prevent an average of 1 in 4 infant deaths. Studies have also proved time and again that access to family planning reduces abortion. In Russia, where for decades abortion was the primary form of birth control, contraception first became widely available in 1991. Between 1989 and 1995 abortions in Russia dropped from 4.43 million per year to 2.7 million per year, a decrease of 16 percent. Someone must speak for the millions of women around the world who desperately want access to family planning. Pregnancy and childbirth are still a very risky proposition for women in many parts of the globe that often lack electricity, clean running water, medical equipment or trained medical personnel. The statistics are grim. In Africa, women have a 1 in 16 chance of death from pregnancy in childbirth during their lifetime. Over 585,000 women die every year from complications of pregnancy and birth. For each woman who dies, 100 others suffer from associated illnesses and permanent disabilities, including sterility. According to the United Nations Fund for Population Activities, family planning can prevent at least 25 percent of all maternal deaths, and many of these are women with families who then leave their children motherless. How dare we in the United States, blessed as we are with information overload and the best health care system in the world, attempt to deny the only source of information and services to families in the developing world? Who are we to dictate the terms under which these groups provide essential services across the globe? We would be outraged, and rightly so, if the legislative body of any other nation had the audacity to impose its will over organizations operating legally in our country by dictating the terms under which those groups would continue to receive the financial support that they need to operate. I urge my colleagues to vote no on the rule and send this proposal back to the committee for revision. Other reasons that I have, Mr. Speaker, for not voting for this bill is that Democrat Members of this House were completely excluded from any participation in this conference report. Indeed, the Democrat Members were not even shown a copy of the conference report until after it was filed. All Democratic Members refused to sign the conference report, and the partisan procedure undermines the longstanding tradition of bipartisanship on foreign policy issues. For these reasons and all others, Mr. Speaker, I urge a no vote on the rule.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, experts estimate that nearly 5 million school-age children in the United States spend time without adult supervision during a typical week. Too many of these unsupervised children hang out on the street, exposed to drugs and crime, or sit at home with only the television set for company. I recently introduced the America After School Act, H.R. 3400, to expand high quality after- school programs for 5- to 15-year-old students to give these kids a safe place to go when the school day ends. In 64% of families with children under 18, both parents work. A recent study showed that when children were unsupervised for long periods of time early in life, they were more likely to display poor hebavior adjustment and academic performance as early as the sixth grade. Clearly, we no longer live in the time of Ward and June Cleaver. Young people today need productive, supervised activities for the periods when they are not in school. In my district of Rochester, NY, Henry Lomb School #20 has an after school program that serves about 25 students. They could easily triple this number, based on their waiting list and space availability, if only they had enough funding to increase their staff to meet the one- to-ten staff-student requirement. Meanwhile, Adlai Stevenson School #29 has an after school program that has enough funding to serve sixteen of its students. This is a great start. However, the school has four hundred students. This is another example of the great need to expand after school child care in this country. Other schools in my district report the need for increased funding for transportation, staff, and supplies to provide supervision and constructive activities for school-age children when the school day ends. Because of the lack of funding, schools do not have the resources to provide after-school care for all students every day. They ration the care--two or three days per week for each student. However, a study in my district showed that school attendance was higher on days when students knew they had their after-school program at the end of the day. Clearly, students desire a safe haven after school, as much as their parents desire it for them. In addition, the peak hours for juvenile crime are from 3 PM to 8 PM. We need to get kids off the streets and into safe, productive programs at their schools where they can receive help with their homework, participate in the arts, and expend positive energy on athletic competition. We have learned so much about the development of young minds and the importance of nurturing children at a young age. Expanding after school programs will help more children benefit from supervision and constructive attention from adults. We can stimulate these young minds through tutoring opportunities, arts and computer projects, and drug prevention activities. My bill increases the availability and affordability of quality care for 5- to 15-year-olds before and after school, as well during summers and weekends through the Child Care Development Block Grant program. It also expands the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program, which gives students a safe environment in which to do homework, receive tutoring in basic skills, benefit from college preparatory training and get experience with technology. Students also receive counseling on drug and violence prevention, learn to appreciate the arts and compete in athletics. Finally, H.R. 3400 invests funds into after school prevention programs for areas with high at-risk youth populations. By giving these young people positive alternatives, we can dissuade them from high risk behavior and encourage productivity and positive interactions with both peers and adults. I am proud to be the House sponsor of the America After School Act and look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to improve the care of school age children.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

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

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to thank the gentlewoman from Ohio for yielding me this customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, the proposed rule would allow all germane amendments to be offered, and while I support the open rule, I am somewhat dismayed that the Committee on Rules chose not to allow a related amendment which would have implemented one of the first promises in the majority's Contract With America. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Dennis Kucinich), the subcommittee ranking member, brought to the Committee on Rules an amendment he had offered at the full committee. The amendment would have fulfilled the Contract With America's pledge that Congress should abide by the mandates it places on others. His amendment would have applied the Government Performance and Results Act to the committees of the Congress. It does seem inconsistent that the majority chose not to allow a vote on applying the act's requirements to Congress. If we are serious about holding government accountable and improving its efficiency and effectiveness, we should certainly start in our own back yard. I also have concerns about the underlying bill. I strongly supported the Government Performance and Results Act when it became law in 1993. The goal of GPRA was to make agencies undertake strategic planning and performance evaluations to streamline their operations and to make them more efficient. And I am a firm believer that the government needs to be accountable and continually strive to improve its economy and efficiency. However, H.R. 2883 contradicts this spirit. A central requirement of this bill is the resubmission of strategic plans by all covered agencies by September 30, 1998. The premise of this new requirement is that the plans submitted less than 6 months ago were all so unusable as to be worthless. This is simply not true. The General Accounting Office has concluded that the current strategic plans provide a workable foundation for Congress to use in helping to fulfill its appropriations, budget, authorization and oversight responsibilities. Instead of starting over at square one, the GPRA process should continue under the oversight of the appropriate authorization and appropriations committees of jurisdiction. It is inefficient and uneconomical to require all agencies to repeat work that they have just completed no matter whether their plan was prepared well or poorly. Let us move ahead with the Reinventing Government initiative rather than going backward. Mr. Speaker, while I have reservations about the underlying bill, I do not oppose this open rule. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing today a resolution condemning the global increase in the trafficking of persons and urging increased efforts to combat this violation of fundamental human rights. Trafficking involves the use of deception, coercion, abuse of authority, debt bondage, or fraud to exploit persons through forced prostitution, sexual slavery, sweatshop labor, or exploitative domestic service. Trafficked women are often subject to battering, cruelty, rape, and other forms of physical and mental abuse. The resolution I am introducing today, builds on my efforts over the past several years to bring attention to the problem of the trafficking of Burmese women and children into brothels in Thailand. As we learn more information, it is becoming tragically clear that trafficking knows no national or regional boundaries. Worldwide, four million women and children are trafficked each year, most by criminal syndicates that turn $7 billion in profits annually. Trafficking is particularly aggravated in areas of the world in economic and social upheaval. An unhappy side effect of the breakup of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact is the vast increase in trafficking from Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe and the Newly Independent States. Criminal organizations are capitalizing on the poverty, rising unemployment, and the disintegration of social networks to exploit and abuse women and children. In addition to bringing attention to this troubling situation, the resolution lauds the anti-trafficking efforts of the President, First Lady, Secretary of State and the President's Interagency Council on Women. Working with key non-governmental organizations, they have focused on trafficking as a significant problem and are working to mobilize a comprehensive response. The resolution particularly directs the Departments of Justice and State to continue and increase their efforts to address the trafficking of women into the United States. We must ensure that our legal system can effectively prosecute traffickers and the crimes associated with trafficking, while ensuring the dignity and human rights of trafficking victims. The State Department should continue its trafficking prevention efforts, and its partnership with nations around the globe to combat these heinous crimes. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me and Senator Wellstone, who is introducing the Senate companion resolution, in supporting this resolution. We must put Congress squarely on record in opposition to the abhorrent practice of trafficking. H. Con. Res. -- Whereas one of the fastest growing international trafficking businesses is the trade in women, whereby women and girls seeking a better life, a good marriage, or a lucrative job abroad, unexpectedly find themselves in situations of forced prostitution, sweatshop labor, exploitative domestic servitude, or battering and extreme cruelty. Whereas trafficked women are often subjected to rape and other forms of sexual abuse by their traffickers and often held as virtual prisoners by their exploiters, made to work in slavery-like conditions, in debt bondage without pay and against their will; Whereas the President, the First Lady, the Secretary of State, and the President's Interagency Council on Women have all identified trafficking in women as a significant problem and are working to mobilize a response; Whereas the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing Conference) called on all governments to take measures, including legislative measures, to provide better protection of the rights of women and girls in trafficking, to address the root factors that put women at risk to traffickers, and to take measures to dismantle the national, regional, and international networks in trafficking; Whereas the United Nations General Assembly, noting its concern about the increasing number of women and girls who are being victimized by traffickers, passed a resolution in 1996 calling upon all governments to criminalize trafficking in women and girls in all its forms and penalize all those offenders involved, while ensuring that the victims of these practices are not penalized; and Whereas numerous treaties to which the United States is a party address government obligations to combat trafficking and the abuses inherent in trafficking, including such treaties as the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery, which calls for the complete abolition of debt bondage and servile forms of marriage, and the 1957 Abolition of Forced Labor Convention, which undertakes to suppress and not to make use of any form of forced or compulsory labor: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that-- (1) trafficking consists of all acts involved in the recruitment or transportation of persons within or across borders involving deception, coercion or force, abuse of authority, debt bondage or fraud, for the purpose of placing persons in situations of abuse or exploitation such as forced prostitution, sexual slavery, battering and extreme cruelty, sweatshop labor or exploitative domestic servitude; (2) trafficking also involves one or more forms of kidnapping, false imprisonment, rape, battering, forced labor or slavery-like practices which violate fundamental human rights; (3) to address this problem, the Department of Justice Office of Violence Against Women, with the cooperation of Immigration and Naturalization Service, should submit a report to Congress on-- (A) efforts to identify instances of trafficking into the United States within the last 5 years; (B) the successes or difficulties experienced in promoting interagency cooperation, cooperation between local, State, and Federal authorities, and cooperation with nongovernmental organizations; (C) the treatment and services provided, and the disposition of trafficking cases in the criminal justice system; and (D) legal and administrative barriers to more effective governmental responses, including current statutes on debt bondage and involuntary servitude; (4) in order to ensure effective prosecution of traffickers and the abuses related to trafficking, victims should be provided with support services and incentives to testify, such as-- (A) stays of deportation with an opportunity to apply for permanent residency, witness protection, relocation assistance, and asset forfeiture from trafficking networks with funds set aside to provide compensation due to victims of trafficking; and (B) services such as legal assistance in criminal, administrative, and civil proceedings and confidential health care; (5) the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Department of Justice Office of Violence Against Women, and nongovernmental organizations should-- (A) develop curricula and conduct training for consular officers on the prevalence and risks of trafficking and the rights of victims; and (B) develop and disperse to visa seekers written materials describing the potential risks of trafficking, including-- (i) information as to the rights of victims in the United States, including legal and civil rights in labor, marriage, and for crime victims under the Violence Against Women Act; and (ii) the names of support and advocacy organizations in the United States; (6) the Department of State and the European Union-- (A) are commended as to their joint initiative to promote awareness of the problem of trafficking throughout countries of origin in Eastern Europe and the independent states of the former Soviet Union; and (B) should continue efforts to engage in similar programs in other regions and to ensure that the dignity and the human rights of trafficking victims are protected in destination countries; (7) the State Department's Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, together with the Department of Justice and the Department of the Treasury, should continue to provide and expand funding to support criminal justice training programs, which include trafficking; and (8) the President's Interagency Council on Women should submit a report to Congress, not later than 6 months after the date of the adoption of this resolution, with regard to the implementation by the Secretary of State and the Attorney General of the duties described in this resolution. Sec. 2. The Clerk of the House of Representatives shall transmit a copy of this resolution to the President, the Secretary of State, and the Attorney General.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to draw attention to a largely unrecognized and undiagnosed disease in our nation: Sjogren's Syndrome. The month of March has been designated as Sjogren's Syndrome Awareness Month. Sjogren's Syndrome is an autoimmune disorder characterized by excessively dry mouth and eyes, although all of the body's glands that excrete sweat, saliva or oil can be affected. About half of all those affected experience Sjogren's Syndrome in connection with another disorder, such as rheumatoid arthritis, lupus or scleroderma. An estimated four million Americans currently suffer with Sjogren's Syndrome, making it the most common autoimmune disorder in the United States according to the October 1997 International Symposium on Sjogren's Syndrome. The vast majority of Sjogren's patients are women and often go undiagnosed. Tragically, Sjogren's Syndrome is incurable. The causes of this disorder have not yet been discovered, although scientists suspect a combination of infectious, hormonal and genetic factors aggravated by stress. Some basic steps can be taken to alleviate the symptoms of Sjogren's, but they are far from a cure. The Sjogren's Syndrome Foundation is fighting to raise awareness and fund research into a cure, but they face a long road. I am proud to receive their 1998 Award for Exceptional Public Health Initiatives for my sponsorship of H.R. 306, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination in Health Insurance Act. I hope my colleagues will join the Sjogren's Syndrome Foundation in working to raise awareness, educate our constituents, and work toward a cure for this devastating disorder.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the America After School Act. This bill increases the availability and affordability of high quality after-school child care. It expands the Child Care Development Block Grant and the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program, while investing juvenile justice funds into after-school prevention programs. In 64 percent of families with children under 18, both parents work. Their children, especially those 5 to 15 years old, need a safe haven during non-school hours. A recent study showed that when children were unsupervised for long periods of time early in life, they were more likely to display poor behavior adjustment and academic performance as early as the sixth grade. Young people need productive, supervised activities for the periods when they are not in school. In my district of Rochester, NY, Henry Lomb School #20 has an after school program that serves about 25 students. They could easily triple this number, based on their waiting list and space availability, if only they had enough funding to increase their staff to meet the one- to-ten staff-student requirement. Meanwhile, Adlai Stevenson School #29 has an after school program that has enough funding to serve sixteen of its students. This is a great start. However, the school consists of a total of four hundred students. This is another example of the great need to expand after school child care in this country. Other schools in my district report the need for increased funding for transportation, staff, and supplies to provide supervision and constructive activities for school-age children when the school day ends. Because of the lack of funding, schools do not have the resources to provide after-school care for all students every day. They ration the care--two or three days per week for each student. However, a study in my district showed that school attendance was higher on days when students knew they had their after-school program at the end of the day. Clearly, students desire a safe haven after school, as much as their parents desire it for them. In addition, the peak hours for juvenile crime are from 3 PM to 8 PM. We need to get kids off the streets and into safe, productive programs at their schools where they can receive help with their homework, participate in the arts, and expend positive energy on athletic competition. We have learned so much about the development of young minds and the importance of nurturing children at a young age. Expanding after school programs will help more children benefit from supervision and constructive attention from adults. We can stimulate these young minds through tutoring opportunities, arts and computer projects, and drug prevention activities. I am proud to sponsor the America After School Act and I urge my colleagues to join me in improving the care of our nation's children. Following is a summary of the bill and a list of original cosponsors: Summary of the America After School Act Promoting Safe After School Activities ($7.25 billion over 5 years) Title I: Child Care and Development Services Expand the Child Care Development Block grant (CCDBG) to increase the availability and affordability of quality before and after school health care, and summer and weekend activities for school age children to promote good health and academic achievement and to help avoid high risk behavior. Programs must demonstrate inclusion of disabled children;-- grants to schools, community-based organizations, child care, youth, and community centers, or partnerships in low-income areas.--costs: $5 billion over 5 years. Title II: The 21st Century Community Learning Center Program Expand the 21st Century Community Learning Center Program by: Increasing the supply of before and after-school programs in a cost-effective manner by using public schools and their existing resources, such as computers, libraries, and gymnasiums, through a one-to-one matching provision that can be met by using in kind or cash resources. Streamlining the application process and strengthening fiscal accountability mechanisms by including the local education agency in the application process, but keeping the responsibility for running the program at the school level.-- costs: $1 billion over 5 years. Title III: Crime Prevention Program Direct half of the $500 million new juvenile justice funds to after school prevention programs, instead of just enforcement programs. Offer grants on a matching basis to the public and private agencies that conduct after-school prevention programs to high crime neighborhoods and areas with significant numbers of at-risk youth. Grantees must coordinate with state or local juvenile crime control programs.--costs: $1.25 billion over 5 years. Original Cosponsors: Gary Ackerman, Rosa DeLauro, Barney Frank, Martin Frost, Darlene Hooley, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Dale Kildee, John Lewis, Zoe Lofgren, Robert Matsui, Marty Meehan, Connie Morella, Richard Neal, Major Owens, Nick Rahall, Max Sandlin, Robert Underwood, Henry Waxman.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this open rule and urge my colleagues to support it so that all alternatives and potential improvements to this legislation may be considered. Law enforcement officials around the country report that gang-related witness intimidation is now endemic in a growing number of areas. Witnesses' refusal to testify is a major concern, because it undermines the administration of justice, while simultaneously eroding public confidence. H.R. 2181 addresses the problem of gang-related witness intimidation by establishing a Federal offense for traveling in interstate or foreign commerce with the intent to delay or influence the testimony of a witness in a State criminal proceeding. Such intimidation is increasingly interstate in nature and now poses a severe impediment nationally to the prosecution of violent street gangs and drug-trafficking organizations. In 1994, a survey of 192 prosecutors found that intimidation of victims and witnesses was a major problem for 51 percent of the prosecutors in large jurisdictions. That is over half. Prosecutors interviewed for the 1996 National Institute of Justice Report on Preventing Gang and Drug-Related Witness Intimidation estimated that witness intimidation occurs in 75 to 100 percent of violent crimes committed in neighborhoods with active street gangs. Increasingly, gangs are promoting community-wide noncooperation through public humiliation, assaults and even the murder of victims and witnesses. This type of community-wide intimidation cannot be allowed to undermine our judicial process by threatening our witnesses and our juries. I strongly support the witness notification relocation provisions in the legislation, as well as the goals of the witness intimidation provisions. But, nevertheless, despite the laudable goals of the bill, provisions were included that allow for the death penalty for witness intimidation. The committee voted 17 to 7 against an amendment that would have deleted the death penalty provisions. I find this death penalty provision troubling, because this past February the American Bar Association passed a resolution declaring that the system for administering the death penalty is unfair and lacks adequate safeguards. The resolution declared that executions should be stopped completely until a greater degree of fairness and due process can be achieved. My fear is that the proliferation of new death penalty offenses that we keep churning out only works to guarantee that executions will indeed become more haphazard. I do not oppose this open rule, however. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.