Chris Smith

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Vincent L. Barile, Deputy Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs, who retired after 28 years of service at the Department of Veterans Affairs, VA. Vince began his career with VA in 1975 as a veterans' benefits counselor. In 1976, he transferred to the Budget Service in VA's central office. From 1979 to 1984, he served as a budget analyst in the Veterans Health Administration, where he rose to supervisor of budget formulation and operations. In 1984, Vince joined the National Cemetery Administration, NCA, as the director of budget and planning. In this position he was responsible for the formulation and implementation of the annual budget, all planning activities, and other activities including emergency preparedness, energy conservation and safety programs. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs promoted Vince to Deputy Under Secretary for Management for NCA in 1990. In 2002, Vince was appointed Deputy Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs. In this capacity, Vince oversaw budget and planning, information systems, communications, human resources, administration, contracting, memorial programs, state cemetery grants, and operations and construction for 120 national cemeteries. Vince testified before the Veterans' Affairs Committee frequently on memorial affairs issues, where he brought extensive knowledge and experience to the witness table. When asked what they will remember most about Vince Barile, employees he supervised say that he was a mentor and a teacher. He often conducted impromptu sessions in the hallways, always credited his employees for their work, and helped them find opportunities to learn. As evidence of the high regard he had for his employees, Vince summed up his remarks at his farewell party by saying that his Exceptional Service Award was not his award, but one in recognition of all his employees. He noted that if his career was considered successful, it was because of the people who worked for and with him. He then applauded his staff. With Vince's retirement, VA is losing vast institutional knowledge and a real friend to America's veterans. Thank you, Vince, for your 28 years of dedicated service to the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Nation.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. I thank our cosponsors for being a part of this, including the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Hoeffel), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Wexler), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo), the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), the gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega), the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly), and the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp), a good cross-section of Members, a bipartisan group, supporting House Resolution 109. Mr. Speaker, the Government of North Korea is an historical anachronism, a totalitarianist Stalinist regime under the control of the Korean Workers Party, the so-called Dear Leader, or Kim Jong-Il, a man who demands godlike reverence and enjoys a decadent, opulent lifestyle while hundreds of thousands of children and their parents starve to death. His regime, his dictatorship, Mr. Speaker, is one of the worst systematic abusers of human rights in the world today. Inside North Korea, there are no genuine freedoms of speech, religion, or assembly. The penal code imposes a penalty of death for a wide variety of crimes against the revolution, including defection, attempted defection, slander of party policy, listening to foreign broadcasts, and imagine that, one listens to a radio show and one can be charged with crimes against the revolution, and writing letters or possessing printed material that is considered reactionary. The regime maintains an extensive system, Mr. Speaker, of political prison camps that hold an estimated 200,000 prisoners, including entire families of those suspected of disloyalty toward the dictatorship. As confirmed by eyewitness testimony presented before the Committee on International Relations last year, camp conditions are horrific. Starvation, overwork, and disease kill most of the camp inmates. Others are used as targets for martial arts practice or as guinea pigs for lethal tests of chemical weapons. Christians are tortured to death for refusing to renounce their faith in one who is greater than the Dear Leader. Female prisoners are not allowed to bear additional children, and their newborns are routinely and brutally killed before their eyes, usually by smothering or having their necks broken. Based on reputable reporting, Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 109 recounts the abominable conditions inside North Korea and exhorts the dictatorship in Pyongyang to respect human rights for its citizenry. More immediately, it urges the Department of State to support the introduction and passage of a resolution on human rights abuses in North Korea at the current session of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights in Geneva. At the State Department's suggestion, we included language that urges other members of the Commission to support that effort. While the Commission has censored numerous countries in recent years, North Korea has inexplicably escaped its notice. We hope that oversight will be corrected during this session. I want to thank those 19 bipartisan cosponsors, particularly the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde); the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Asia and Pacific; and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), the ranking member of the committee, for their support. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 109) urging passage of a resolution addressing human rights abuses in North Korea at the 59th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and calling on the Government of North Korea to respect and protect the human rights of its citizens, as amended.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 109 the bill under consideration.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) for her very eloquent remarks and my good friend from California (Mr. Lantos). We need a very strong show of support by our colleagues today, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this resolution. The U.N. committee is meeting as we speak. This issue must be brought so the kind of scrutiny and, I would say, condemnation for these egregious abuses of human rights can be brought to the fore. North Korea has a horrific record on human rights; and it is about time the international community said so in one loud voice: no more.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, we have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), the distinguished chairman of our Subcommittee on Africa and a leader on issues of human rights relevant to North Korea.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, as the condemned, as I think the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) pointed out so well and it bears repeating, prepare for their execution by stoning, they begin to pray, asking for the inner strength to endure with faith and fortitude what awaits them. They are wrapped head to foot in white shrouds and buried up to their waist, and then the stoning begins. The victims are guaranteed a very difficult and horrific death. In many cases kids have to watch this agonizing death. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, this heinous practice is not limited to Iran, but is employed in so many other countries as well. Under the extremist interpretation of Sharia law, pregnancy alone is considered sufficient evidence to condemn a woman for adultery. Women in these countries who have been raped and want the state to prosecute their case must have no less than four Muslim men testify that they witnessed the assault. Absent these witnesses, these male witnesses, the rape victim has no case. If she cannot prove the rape allegation, she runs the high risk of being charged with adultery, as we all know an offense that is punishable by stoning. Although this heinous practice is disproportionately used against the female population of these countries, it is also used against men and also used to suppress political dissent and the activities of religious minorities. H. Con. Res. 26 is a resolution which reflects the full extent of the problem. As such, it calls on the United States and the international community to condemn the practice of execution by stoning as a gross violation of human rights and urges U.S. officials to work with their global counterparts toward the repeal of all stoning laws. Mr. Speaker, stoning sentences have been commuted in the last year due to the United States' and international pressure. Lives have been saved because we spoke out against this abhorrent practice, a method which, according to Amnesty International, is specifically designed to increase the victim's suffering. Today we have the ability, I would respectfully submit, to save more lives by rendering our strong support for this resolution. This measure can help deter the application of extreme Sharia law and execution by stoning in emerging nations, such as Afghanistan. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for H. Con. Res. 26.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, during the Holocaust, the Jews of Europe were subjected to persecution and, ultimately, targeted for total genocide--not only by foreign occupiers, but also at the hands of erstwhile friends and even their own governments. In the face of this atrocity, Bulgaria stands out for protecting its indigenous Jewish population from the evil machinery of the Holocaust. Despite official allied status with Nazi Germany, Bulgarian leaders, religious figures, intellectuals and average citizens resisted pressure from the Nazis to deport Bulgarian Jews to certain death in the concentration camps of Eastern Europe. Thanks to the compassion and courage of broad sectors of Bulgarian society, approximately 50,000 Jews survived the Holocaust. Once an ally of Nazi Germany in March 1941, the Bulgarian Government and Parliament came under pressure from the Nazi regime and enacted legislation severely curtailing the rights of the Jewish population. In February 1943, a secret meeting between, Hitler's envoy to Bulgaria, and Bulgaria's Commissar on Jewish Affairs, established a timetable for exporting to Germany the Jews in Aegean Thrace and Macedonia, territories then under Bulgarian administration, and deportation of Jews from Bulgarian cities. The deportations were to begin on March 9, 1943. Trains and boats to be used in the deportations were in place, and assembly points in Poland had already been selected when word of the plans was leaked. Almost immediately, 43 members of the Bulgarian Parliament led by Deputy Speaker Dimiter Peshev signed a petition to condemn this action. This, coupled with widespread public outcry from active citizens, political and professional organizations, intellectuals, and prominent leaders of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, led the Minster of the Interior to stay the deportation orders. Later that month, Peshev again took a bold step in drafting a letter, signed by members of the ruling coalition, which condemned the possible deportation of Jews, calling this an ``inadmissable act'' with ``grave moral consequences.'' In May 1943, the plan for deportation of the Bulgarian Jews was finally aborted. King Boris III resisted Nazi pressure to advance the plan, arguing that the Jews were an essential component of the workforce. While some 20,000 Jews from Sofia were then sent to work camps in the countryside for the remainder of the war and subjected to squalid conditions, they nevertheless survived. Tragically, there was no such reversal of fate for the estimated 11,000 Jews from Aegean Thrace and Macedonia, who did not have the protection afforded by Bulgarian citizenship. Already driven from their homes in March 1943, these individuals were transported through Bulgarian territory to the Nazi death camps. Madam Speaker, this month marks the 60th anniversary of Bulgarian resistance to the Holocaust. The people of Bulgaria deserve our commendation for their selfless efforts to preserve such a threatened religious community, and in fact, the number of Jews living in Bulgaria actually increased during the Holocaust. Bulgaria's record of tolerance was distorted by 40 years of communist misrule which culminated in the 1984-89 forcible assimilation campaign against its largest minority, the Turks. One of the first initiatives of the government following the fall of communism in November 1989 was the reversal of this brutal campaign. A return to the wholesale suppression of minority groups as exemplified by the forcible assimilation campaign is inconceivable today, and Bulgaria is a democracy that promotes respect for fundamental rights. Last year, Bulgaria's Ambassador to the United States, Elena Poptodorova, testified before the Helsinki Commission regarding the ongoing efforts of her government to promote tolerance, consistent with Bulgaria's historical traditions. I have been particularly encouraged by Bulgaria's initiatives, in cooperation with leading non-governmental organizations, to promote the integration of Roma and non-Roma in schools. This work deserves the full support of the Bulgarian Government. I am disappointed, however, that the Bulgarian Government has not yet adopted and implemented comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation, even though it pledged to do so in early 1999 in a platform of action on Roma issues, and committed to do so in the 1999 OSCE Istanbul Summit document. Four years have come and gone since Bulgaria made those pledges, and it is past time for those pledges to be honored. I am hopeful the Bulgarian Government will do more to combat violence motivated by racial or religious intolerance. Two cases of such violence, against Romani Pentecostals in Pazardjik, appear to have received only superficial attention from the authorities. Madam Speaker, I also was disappointed to learn of the recent passage of a new religion law in Bulgaria. Several drafts of a religion law had laid relatively dormant until the last months of 2002, when the process was expedited. As a result, it is my understanding that minority faith communities were excluded from the drafting process and assurances to have the Council of Europe review the text again were ignored. The law is prejudiced against certain religious groups and falls well short of Bulgaria's OSCE commitments. The law also jeopardizes the legal status of the Orthodox synod not favored by the Government and its property holdings, as well as threatens fines for using the name of an existing religious organization without permission. New religious communities seeking to gain legal personality are now required to go through intrusive doctrinal reviews and cumbersome registration procedures, and co-religionists from abroad have been denied visas based on poorly written provisions. Bulgaria's leadership on these various issues would be welcomed, especially in light of their plans to serve as Chair-in-Office of the OSCE in 2004. The United States is particularly appreciative of Bulgaria's firm stand against terrorism at this time, and we look forward to continued strong relations between our countries. The proud heritage stemming from the days of the Holocaust serves as a good reminder of the importance of taking stands which are right and true. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that this Congress is able to recognize that heritage and historical fact.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, we learned today of the assassination in Belgrade of the Prime Minister of Serbia, Zoran Djindjic. This is a true tragedy, not only for family and friends of Mr. Djindjic but for all the people of Serbia and, indeed, for all who struggle for human rights and democratic development. Zoran Djindjic became a leader during difficult times in his country. He chose to stand in opposition to Slobodan Milosevic and his regime. That certainly was not the easiest course, and it took courage. Zoran Djindjic also had determination and, after repeated setbacks and obstacles, he played a key role in ousting Milosevic from power in 2000. He subsequently became, as Prime Minister of Serbia, a force for reform, recognizing that Serbia needed to cast off not only the yoke of Milosevic's rule but also Milosevic's legacy of nationalist hatred, organized crime, corruption and greed. Transferring Milosevic to The Hague in 2001 to face charges for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide perhaps best symbolized Djlndjic's continued courage and determination to conquer the sinister forces which seized his country. Zoran Djindjic was still battling resistance to reform in Serbia when his life was taken by the vicious act of cold-blooded assassins. These will undoubtedly be turbulent times for Belgrade, for Serbia, and for Montenegro which is just embarking on a new relationship with Serbia. This tragedy may have reverberations throughout the region, particularly in Bosnia and in Kosovo. It is my hope and prayer, Mr. Speaker, that the people of Serbia will respond to this crime with a loud and united cry: ``Enough is enough.'' In the past, they have seen the lives of journalist Slavko Curuvija and politician Ivan Stambolic snuffed out for their advocacy of a civilized Serbia, in which human rights and the rule of law are respected. Similarly Djindjic, too, was advocating such noble objectives. The very decent people of Serbia deserve a society which respects human rights and upholds the rule of law. That is what the leaders of Serbia must now provide without further hesitation or delay. I take heart in knowing that Djindjic had many colleagues who shared his vision of a reformed Serbia. My deepest condolences go to the family of Zoran Djindjic. I hope that the incredible grief they must now feel will be tempered by the pride they should feel in his accomplishments and service to his country.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Evans, Mr. Brown of South Carolina, Mr. Rodriguez, and Mr. Michaud join me in introducing H.R. 1212, the Veterans' Education Affordability Act, to increase the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) monthly educational assistance allowance to $1,200 for full-time students and repeal the $1,200 pay reduction for MGIB eligibility. The original World War II GI Bill exceeded all expectations and had enormous benefits beyond the immediate ones given to deserving war veterans. College enrollment grew dramatically: in 1947, GI Bill enrollees accounted for almost half of the total college population. This resulted in a need for more and larger colleges and universities. In my home state of New Jersey, Rutgers University saw its admissions grow from a pre-war high of 7,000 to almost 16,000. In the decade following World War II, more than 2 million eligible men and women went to college using GI Bill educational benefits. The result was an American workforce enriched by 450,000 engineers, 238,000 teachers, 91,000 scientists, 67,000 doctors, 22,000 dentists and another million college-educated men and women. Building upon the success of the original GI Bill, Congress subsequently approved a second bill following the Korean Conflict; then a third bill following the Vietnam Conflict; and a fourth bill for the post-Vietnam War era. In 1985, under the dedicated leadership of former Veterans' Committee Chairman Sonny Montgomery, Congress approved the modern version of the GI Bill which is fittingly called the Montgomery GI Bill. The MGIB was designed not only to help veterans make a transition into the workforce through additional education and training, but also to serve as a powerful recruitment tool for our all- volunteer armed forces. With the enactment of Public Law 107-103, the Veterans Education and Benefits Expansion Act of 2001, Congress significantly increased MGIB purchasing power for veterans and servicemembers. I was privileged to author this legislation which increased the MGIB basic benefit in January 2002 from $672 to $800 per month. It further increased the benefit in October 2002 to $900 and will increase the benefit in October of this year to $985--a 46 percent increase from the $672 per month. But according to data furnished by the College Board, for the current academic year the MGIB benefit remains below the level needed for a veteran-student to attend a public, four-year institution as a commuter student. This increase to $1,200 would be another significant step toward a more realistic educational benefit. This legislation would also eliminate the $1,200 reduction in pay required for a servicemember to gain eligibility for the MGIB. We view the $1,200 as an unnecessary GI education tax and a hardship on the most junior servicemembers, many of whom qualify for food stamps. No other federal education program charges such a participation fee and H.R. 1212 will repeal it. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this legislation to help both servicemembers and veterans get the most valuable benefit possible--a quality education and training for the workplace.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, a decade ago we began witnesses to genocide in Europe. By stirring up nationalism, harassing opposition and intimidating the population as a whole to go along with his plans, the regime of Slobodan Milosevic led Serbia into a war of aggression against its neighbors within the former Yugoslavia. Millions were displaced, hundreds of thousands killed and tens of thousands raped or tortured, particularly in Bosnia-Herzegovina. In response, largely at the urging of the U.S. Congress, sanctions were put into place and, ultimately, military intervention was employed to stop Milosevic. In 2000, the voters of Serbia removed Milosevic from power. In place of his regime, an opposition consisting of genuine reformers and true democrats along with a fair share of Serbian nationalists took control of government. Since that time, the ruling opposition fell into polarized camps, making recovery and reform difficult. This situation also created a challenge in U.S. foreign policy. On the one hand, the United States wants to encourage Belgrade and facilitate reform. On the other, the United States must ensure that the legacy of Slobodan Milosevic has been fully shed, a prerequisite for recovery throughout southeastern Europe. The Miscellaneous Tariff Bill, H.R. 1047, considered yesterday contains a provision granting the President the authority to restore normalized trade relations for Serbia and Montenegro. I support this provision; normalized trade relations should be restored. Whatever problems might remain, the fact is that there has been progress since Milosevic was removed from power, and Serbia and Montenegro should not be placed on the same list of states not granted normalized trade relations as Cuba, North Korea or Laos. Other countries with far worse records, including Belarus and the Central Asian states, at least receive the benefits of normalized trade relations on a conditional basis which Serbia and Montenegro is denied. By fixing this, I hope Belgrade recognizes that we want reforms to succeed and recovery and reform take place. Belgrade also needs to know, Mr. Speaker, that restoring NTR does not mean satisfaction with Belgrade's performance to date. While there has been progress, that progress has been too slow, and some issues remain unresolved. Chief among these issues is Belgrade continued resistance to full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, located in The Hague. It is especially outrageous that persons responsible for the crimes committed at Vukovar and Srebrenica continue to be at large and perhaps even protected by Yugoslav or Serbian authorities. While trade relations may not be conditioned on further progress, U.S. bilateral assistance to Serbia is. If there is not a major improvement in Belgrade's cooperation with The Hague by June 15, assistance to Serbia will stop. The Administration must certify progress before assistance continues past that date, and the State Department has made clear that a precondition for certification is the apprehension and transfer of Ratko Mladic, indicted for the massacre of thousands at Srebrenica, and Veselin Sljivancanin and Miroslav Radic, indicted for their role in the massacre of about 200 individuals taken from a hospital in Vukovar, Croatia. As co-chairman of the Helsinki Commission, I urge Belgrade not only to meet their international obligations relating to ICTY not just to the point of obtaining certification for another year. Cooperation should be full. Only then can the conditionality on assistance be removed for good.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. If the gentleman will continue to yield, I said we would clone cells that would become identical to those that they were from, whether it be from you or I or anyone else. They would become an embryo capable of growing, if uninterrupted, into a young person, into an elderly person, and to a natural death.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, on the eve of this debate in July 2001, Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer referred to Mr. Greenwood's legislative approach to human cloning ``a nightmare of a bill.'' He said, ``Mr. Greenwood sanctions, licenses, and protects the launching of the most ghoulish and dangerous enterprise in modern scientific history, the creation of a nascent cloned human life for the sole purpose of its exploitation and destruction.'' The majority of the House, like Mr. Krauthammer, rejected the Greenwood amendment by a vote of 178 to 249. We got it right then, and I do hope that Members today will vote against the Greenwood substitute. The Greenwood substitute, Mr. Chairman, would, for the first time in human history, sanction the creation of human life with the demand, backed by new Federal criminal and civil sanctions, that the new life be destroyed after being exploited. For the small inconvenience of registering your name and your business address, and filling out a form, you would be licensed to play God by creating life in your own image or someone else's. You would have the right to create embryo farms or anything else science might someday allow to be created outside the womb. And in the end, only failure to kill that which you had created would be against the law. We call it, Mr. Chairman, clone and kill. Amazingly, the only new crime created by the Greenwood amendment is failure to kill all human lives created. Federal law would say, create as many as you like, so long as you eventually kill them. Mr. Chairman, the clear consequence, I believe, of the Greenwood substitute is that it would not even stop the birth of a human clone, which it proposes to do with a moratorium. Because his approach would encourage the creation of cloned embryo stockpiles and cloned embryo farms, it would make the hard part of human cloning completely legal and would make the relatively easy part, implantation, illegal. I strongly support the underlying bill and urge rejection of the Greenwood substitute.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Let me finish. You asked me a question.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. But over time there would be the creation of human embryo farms.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank the gentleman for continuing to yield, Mr. Chairman, and respond that it will happen over time, as financial inducements are provided. As some of our colleagues pointed out earlier in the debate, when money is provided, some women may be induced to sell their eggs; and many thousands, if not tens of thousands of eggs will be produced over time. There will be a magnet provided to these women, especially the poorer women, to offer up their eggs for this kind of operation.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I would just say to my friend, Mr. Chairman, that once this process is sanctioned and encouraged legally Federal dollars or other dollars might follow, and embryos will be cloned, this, I believe over time, human embryo farms, this science, will be certainly doable. And it is doable. We know that.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following for publication in the Record.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Belarus Democracy Act of 2003, which is intended to help promote democratic development, human rights and the rule of law in the Republic of Belarus, as well as encourage the consolidation and strengthening of Belarus' sovereignty and independence. I am joined by Congressmen Hoyer, Hoeffel and Congresswoman Slaughter, as original cosponsors. When measured against other European countries, the state of human rights in Belarus is abysmal--it has the worst record of any European state. Through an illegitimate 1996 referendum, Alexander Lukashenka usurped power, while suppressing the duly-elected legislature and the judiciary. His regime has repeatedly violated basic freedoms of speech, expression, assembly, association and religion. The democratic opposition, nongovernmental organizations and independent media have all faced harassment. Just within the last few months, we have seen a number of events reflecting the negative trend line: the passage of a repressive law on religion which bans religious activity by groups not registered with the government and forbids most religious meetings on private property; the bulldozing of a newly-built church; the incarceration of leading independent journalists; and the continued harassment, as well as physical attacks on the political opposition, independent media and non-governmental organizations--in short, anyone who, through their promotion of democracy, would stand in the way of the Belarusian dictator. Moreover, we have seen no progress on the investigation of the disappearances of political opponents--perhaps not surprisingly, as credible evidence points at the involvement of the Lukashenka regime in their murders. Furthermore, growing evidence also indicates Belarus has been supplying military training and weapons to Iraq, in violation of UN sanctions. Despite efforts by the U.S. Government, non-govermental organizations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and other European organizations, the regime of Alexander Lukashenka continues its hold onto power with impunity and to the detriment of the Belarusian people. One of the primary purposes of this bill is to demonstrate U.S. support for those struggling to promote democracy and respect for human rights in Belarus despite the formidable pressures they face from the anti-democratic regime. The bill authorizes increases in assistance for democracy building activities such as support for non-governmental organizations, independent media including radio and television broadcasting to Belarus, and international exchanges. The bill also encourages free and fair parliamentary elections, conducted in a manner consistent with international standards--in sharp contrast to recent parliamentary and presidential elections in Belarus which flaunted democratic standards. As a result of these elections, Belarus has the distinction of lacking legitimate presidential and parliamentary leadership, which contributes to that country's self- imposed isolation. In addition, this bill would impose sanctions against the Lukashenka regime, and deny highranking officials of the regime entry into the United States. Strategic exports to the Belarusian Government would be prohibited, as well as U.S. Government financing, except for humanitarian goods and agricultural or medical products. The U.S. Executive Directors of the international financial institutions would be encouraged to vote against financial assistance to the Government of Belarus except for loans and assistance that serve humanitarian needs. The bill would require reports from the President concerning the sale or delivery of weapons or weapons-related technologies from Belarus to rogue states. Mr. Speaker, finally, it is my hope that this bill would help put an end to the pattern of clear, gross and uncorrected violations of OSCE commitments by the Lukashenka regime and will serve as a catalyst to facilitate Belaras' integration into democratic Europe in which democratic principles and human rights are respected and the rule of law is paramount. The Belarusian people deserve our support as they work to overcome the legacy of the past and develop a genuinely independent, democratic country based on the rule of law and democratic institutions.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce, along with my colleague Representative Cardin, Representative Wolf, Representative Hoyer, Representative Lantos, Representative Wamp, Representative Slaughter, Representative Aderholt and Representative Hastings, this resolution expressing the sense of the Congress that the sharp escalation of anti-Semitism, including violence, throughout the region of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, OSCE, is of serious concern to the U.S. Congress and the American people. We should make a concerted effort in our respective countries to end this disturbing trend. Anti-Semitism is a disease that has bedeviled previous generations of Jews throughout the centuries and formed a black spot on human history. As the 20th century witnessed the nadir of extreme violence against the Jewish community and their institutions, we must take extraordinary steps to ensure this plague does not infect the 21st century to contaminate future generations. Yet our work is cut out for us, as this past year Europe witnessed a profound increase in vandalism against Jewish cemeteries, synagogues and cultural property, as well as mob assaults, fire bombings and gunfire. This year already a Jewish rabbi was stabbed twice in his Paris synagogue by an assailant. Thankfully, he was released from the hospital the same day. Certainly our own country is not immune, as acts of vandalism and violence continue to sporadically occur. As these incidents made graphically clear, silence is not an option when we are witnesses to insensitivity and violence. The Helsinki Commission, which I co-chair and on which Mr. Cardin serves has taken the lead in voicing concern and working for real change. On May 22, 2002, the Commission held a hearing to raise specific attention to the growing problem of anti-Semitic violence in the OSCE region. From that hearing a number of initiatives emerged. At the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Annual Session in Berlin last July, I introduced and successfully secured unanimous approval of a resolution denouncing anti-Semitism and calling for all OSCE governments to do more. Mr. Speaker, for the Record, I submit the text of the OSCE PA resolution. In addition, the U.S. delegation co-sponsored an unprecedented special session with the German delegation to further discuss the alarming trend with our fellow parliamentarians. In December, the Commission co-hosted here in Washington a parliamentary forum on anti- Semitism with German parliamentarians, also attended by a prominent member of the Senate of Canada, Jerry Grafstein. At the conclusion of this event, myself and the German co-chair, Gert Weisskirchen, signed a letter of intent highlighting specific areas for further work and pledging to enlist the support of other parliamentarians from OSCE participating States. I have submitted a copy of the letter of intent, for the Record. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce this resolution, and I am eager for the House to go on record in support, making sure both the Congress and our government are doing everything possible to see an end to this scourge. I am especially pleased that the resolution calls for all OSCE participating States to ensure effective law enforcement and prosecution of individuals perpetrating anti-Semitic violence, as well as urging the parliaments of all participating States to take concrete legislative action at the national level. In sum, I look forward to working with my colleagues to continue our steadfast efforts to see an end to anti-Semitic violence. Resolution on Anti-Semitic Violence in the OSCE Region 1. Recalling that the OSCE was among those organizations which publicly achieved international condemnation of anti- Semitism through the crafting of the 1990 Copenhagen Concluding Document; 2. Noting that all participating States, as stated in the Copenhagen Concluding Document, commit to ``unequivocally condemn'' anti-Semitism and take effective measures to protect individuals from anti-Semitic violence; 3. Remembering the 1996 Lisbon Concluding Document, which highlights the OSCE's ``comprehensive approach'' to security, calls for ``improvement in the implementation of all commitments in the human dimension, in particular with respect to human rights and fundamental freedoms'', and urges participating States to address ``acute problems'', such as anti-Semitism; 4. Reaffirming the 1999 Charter for European Security, committing participating States to ``counter such threats to security as violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief and manifestations of intolerance, aggressive nationalism, racism, chauvinism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism''; 5. Recognizing that the scourge of anti-Semitism is not unique to any one country, and calls for steadfast perseverance by all participating States; The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly: 6. Unequivocally condemns the alarming escalation of anti- Semitic violence throughout the OSCE region; 7. Voices deep concern over the recent escalation in anti- Semitic violence, as individuals of the Judaic faith and Jewish cultural properties have suffered attacks in many OSCE participating States; 8. Urges those States which undertake to return confiscated properties to rightful owners, or to provide alternative compensation to such owners, to ensure that their property restitution and compensation programmes are implemented in a nondiscriminatory manner and according to the rule of law; 9. Recognizes the commendable efforts of many post- communist States to redress injustices inflicted by previous regimes based on religious heritage, considering that the interests of justice dictate that more work remains to be done in this regard, particularly with regard to individual and community property restitution compensation; 10. Recognizes the danger of anti-Semitic violence to European security, especially in light of the trend of increasing violence and attacks region wide; 11. Declares that violence against Jews and other manifestations of intolerance will never be justified by international developments or political issues, and that it obstructs democracy, pluralism, and peace; 12. Urges all States to make public statements recognizing violence against Jews and Jewish cultural properties as anti- Semitic, as well as to issue strong, public declarations condemning the depredations; 13. Calls upon participating States to ensure aggressive law enforcement by local and national authorities, including thorough investigation of anti-Semitic criminal acts, apprehension of perpetrators, initiation of appropriate criminal prosecutions and judicial proceedings; 14. Urges participating States to bolster the importance of combating anti-Semitism by holding a follow-up seminar or human dimension meeting that explores effective measures to prevent anti-Semitism, and to ensure that their laws, regulations, practices and policies conform with relevant OSCE commitments on anti-Semitism; and 15. Encourages all delegates to the Parliamentary Assembly to vocally and unconditionally condemn manifestations of anti-Semitic violence in their respective countries and at all regional and international forums. Letter of Intent an action program: confronting and combating anti-semitism in the osce region As members of the German Bundestag and U.S. Congress and participants in the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, we wish to express our deep concern regarding the significant increase in the number of anti-Semitic incidents in many countries of the OSCE. We condemn anti-Semitism in all its forms. Anti- Semitic bigotry must have no place in our democratic societies and needs to be actively opposed by all 55 participating States of the OSCE, including by members of Parliament. The sorry lessons of the past have demonstrated that the virus of anti-Semitism, when not successfully resisted, will lead to terrible tragedy for the Jewish people, and promote prejudice and intolerance towards other minority groups. We affirm our commitment to work together closely to fight anti-Semitism and encourage colleagues in our respective legislatures, and in the legislative bodies of other OSCE participating States, to develop a series of specific measures to counter anti-Semitic actions and attitudes. In executing our action plan we will make full use of all appropriate OSCE institutions and instruments. Actions that we intend to pursue are the following: A. Persuade other Parliaments in OSCE participating States to adopt resolutions condemning anti-Semitism as the U.S Congress and the German Bundestag have already done. B. Energize governments and other elected officials at all levels in OSCE participating States to condemn forcefully and publicly anti-Semitic acts, when they occur. C. Encourage all OSCE countries to enact appropriate criminal legislation to punish anti-Semitic acts and ensure that such laws are vigorously enforced. D. Call upon governments in OSCE participating States, if they have not already done so, to adhere to international instruments which, by addressing the problem of discrimination, may counter anti-Semitic attitudes and actions. E. Promote educational efforts throughout the OSCE region to counter anti-Semitic stereotypes and attitudes among younger people and help identify the necessary resources to accomplish this goal. Encourage teachers, social workers and members of the clergy to focus on anti-Semitic attitudes and behavior of younger people and support the development of curricula for teacher training. F. Consider what concrete actions may be possible within the OSCE to discourage the proliferation of anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi and other racist material over the Internet, while preserving the right to freedom of expression. G. Encourage religious leaders in OSCE participating States to work more closely together and consider the past experiences of certain religious institutions in dealing with the experience of the Holocaust. H. Create an OSCE parliamentarian-based ``Coalition of the Willing'' to address anti-Semitic propaganda that appears to be increasing rapidly in a number of OSCE partner countries. Explore the possibility of using the OSCE's partnership with the southern and eastern Mediterranean countries for promoting this goal. We pledge to meet again in conjunction with the February 2003 Winter Session of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly in Vienna to evaluate progress and seek the active support and cooperation of our parliamentary colleagues from other countries. On this occasion, we will also determine how we can best utilize the July 2003 Rotterdam Annual Session of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly to further our common goal of combating anti-Semitism throughout the OSCE region. Signed in Washington, D.C. on December 10, 2002. Christopher H. Smith, Member of Congress. Gert Weisskirchen, Member, German Bundestag.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, Vaclav Havel is sometimes called the ``conscience of the Czech Republic.'' In fact, he could be called the conscience of the world. As both playwright and president, he has set an example for his country men and women and inspired others around the globe. As a Member serving on the Helsinki Commission, I first became aware of Vaclav Havel and his stance as a leader of the Charter '77 human rights movement. At a time when most Czechoslovaks preferred to keep their heads low, he held his up. When others dared not speak out, he raised his voice. While others hid from communism in their apartments and weekend cottages, he faced it down in prison. In recognition of his extraordinary leadership and courage, the Commission leadership recommended him for the Nobel Peace Prize in February 1989. Vaclav Havel once wrote of the ``power of the powerless'' and, on November 17, 1989, when the Velvet Revolution began, the world saw that power manifested in reality. Mr. Speaker, Vaclav Havel is a man who has always been guided by the courage of his convictions. Remarkably, his courage did not fade upon his assumption of the presidency. Indeed, he is all the more heroic for his remaining steadfast to his commitment to human rights even from the comforts of the Prague Castle. From the beginning of his tenure, as he addressed his country's communist and totalitarian past, he was a voice of reason, not revenge. In 1993, he rightly identified the situation of Roma as ``a litmus test for civil society.'' Throughout his presidency, he has pardoned those facing criminal charges under communist-era laws that restrict free speech and have yet to be repealed. In 2001, he spoke out against the parliament's regressive religion law, which turned the clock back on religious freedom. He has raised human rights issues from Cuba to China. And, he has reminded other world leaders of our shared responsibility for the poor and less fortunate. H. Con. Res. 22 pays tribute to Vaclav Havel's singular compassion, integrity, and vision. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting a man who has given so much to his country and the world.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I rise today to pay tribute to Judge Guy H. McMichael III, who is retiring after a lifetime of public service, including more than 25 years at the Department of Veterans Affairs. Judge McMichael's career includes stints in the Army, as a Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, on the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and at the VA under five Administrators, four Secretaries and five different Presidents. Judge McMichael graduated from Harvard University and received a law degree from the University of Michigan. He served in the Army for two years and later was in private practice for four years, while also serving as a Deputy Prosecuting Attorney for the State of Indiana. In 1971, he became General Counsel for the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, where he remained for six years until joining the VA following the election of President Carter. When Judge McMichael first came to the VA with Administrator Max Cleland in 1977, he brought a healthy distrust of what people said and what they did. His discernment and skepticism was resented by some, but over the years, his ability to persuade others of the importance of being honest brought integrity to almost all parts of the VA that he touched. That a man who was the Administrator's right hand during the Carter years would stay on and perform such exemplary service for an additional 23 years is quite remarkable. In 1981, Administrator Robert P. Nimmo appointed Guy McMichael to the VA Board of Appeals as an Administrative Judge. He was appointed Chairman and Chief Administrative Judge in l990, and has remained in that position until his retirement this year. Over the past several years, Judge McMichael has also filled several important positions on a temporary basis, including Acting Chief of Staff, Chief Information Officer, and Acting Under Secretary for Benefits. Mr. Speaker, Judge McMichael's legacy is that of a man who served his nation with compassion and distinction, and advanced the interests of veterans. Truly, he saw his work for veterans as a mission, one that he could devote the full talents God blessed him with. Veterans are better off because he served them as long as he did.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, as you may know, this week marks the 29th Anniversary of National Catholic Schools Week, a week dedicated to honor the achievements and successes of the more than 2.6 million children enrolled in the 8,114 Catholic Schools throughout our country. Today is National Catholic Schools Appreciation day. It is fitting then that today I introduce legislation designed to ensure the Federal Government appropriately assists parents with the financial burdens associated with their child's education. My legislation, the Education, Achievement, and Opportunity Act will provide refundable tuition tax credits for the educational expenses incurred by parents for elementary and secondary school. The legislation would provide parents sending their child to an elementary school with up to $2,500 in tax relief, while parents with children in a Catholic or parochial high school could claim up to $3,500 in assistance. The tax relief contained in my proposal can be utilized by parents to pay for a variety of educational expenses that are frequently incurred on behalf of their children. Most significantly the tax credit is designed to help with the cost of tuition. But, beyond this, the tax credits can be used to help meet the costs of other educational needs: (1) computers, educational software, and books required for courses of instruction; (2) academic tutoring; (3) special needs services for qualifying children with disabilities (within the meaning of the Americans With Disabilities Act); (4) fees for transportation services to and from a private school, if the transportation is provided by the school and the school charges a fee for the transportation; and (5) academic testing services. Parents know the interests and needs of their children better than anyone else. If we are truly going to ensure that ``no child is left behind,'' in our national education agenda, then we must make sure our children have every tool at their disposal to academically succeed. The wealthy in America already have the choice to send their child to the school that best suits them. But middle and working class families often do not. Between tuition costs and out-of-pocket expenses like tutoring, computers, and transportation, the costs can add up and pose an enormous obstacle to the child's lifetime leaming opportunities. In my own district in New Jersey, a parent who feels a Catholic elementary school is best suited for their child, will pay somewhere between $1,840 and $2,566 in tuition costs per child, per year. If you want to send your child to a parochial high school in the central New Jersey area, a parent is looking at an average tuition bill of $5,571 per student, per year. In other areas of the country, the costs are very similar. Without federal support, many parents struggle--and in some cases forgo--a Catholic school education, or any education in a spiritual setting, because the costs are so high. Learning in a religious setting is not for every one, and America's public school system is critical to providing educational opportunities for all. We must continue to vigorously support our public schools at both the federal and local levels. At the same time, however, we should support those who seek the benefits of Catholic school and choose a religious setting as the best, educational environment for their children. In effect, parents of Catholic school children pay twice--they pay their fair share of taxes necessary to support the public school system, and they pay tuition at the school their children actually attend. I urge my colleagues to join me in addressing this inherent unfairness and work for the passage of my tuition tax credit program as the best way to help offset the double payment endured by those who send their children to Catholic and parochial schools. In America today, we have 59 million youngsters in elementary and secondary school across the U.S.; about 10 percent of these students are enrolled in private, parochial and rabbinical schools. Those families who are already sending their children to such schools, and others planning to send their children to them, would benefit enormously from my proposal, because they are often struggling to make ends meet. It is important to note that my education proposal is a tax credit, rather than a voucher, so the total amount of education resources available for all school age children will increase. Under a voucher system, if a school loses enrolled students to a competing school, that school may lose funding and have fewer resources available for their educational program. Under my plan, that outcome is avoided. It is a ``win-win'' scenario, whereas some have argued that voucher programs can become a zero-sum situation with ``winners and losers.'' A tuition tax credit for education is a benefit that should be available to all, no matter what their race, creed, or national origin. And make no mistake: the public school system will and must continue to remain the backbone of our nation's education system. But we must never forget that the public school system was created to serve students--not the other way around. If a student is performing poorly, parents should have the opportunity to augment the child's education with help from the federal government. If we are to truly make good on our promise that ``no child is left behind,'' we must ensure that Catholic schools are included in this national promise and goal. A child is a child, regardless of which school system they are enrolled. The children enrolled in Catholic, private, and rabbinical schools deserve nothing less than our full support and compassion. I urge my colleagues to support the Education, Achievement, and Opportunity Act.