Chris Smith

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of H. Con. Res. 116, recommending the integration of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. I believe that these three nations have demonstrated the commitment necessary to become full- fledged members of that organization and will prove to be valuable allies in the war against international terrorism and the effort to promote democracy, human rights, and the rule of law around the world. These are the foundations, of course, for peace and prosperity; and they will be and are even now major players. Mr. Speaker, 11 years ago with the collapse of the Soviet Union, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania threw off the yoke of Soviet domination and regained their independence. Between World War I and World War II, they had been sovereign nations and respected members of the international community. In 1939, however, they were illegally partitioned between Hitler and Stalin as part of the infamous Molotov- Ribbentrop agreement. Based on this agreement, Hitler gave Stalin the green light to seize the Baltic states. I am proud to state and to note that the illegal incorporation of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania into the Soviet Union was never recognized by the United States Government. Now Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are again sovereign nations, respected members of the international community, desirous of joining and contributing to the most successful defensive alliance Europe has ever known. They are working individually and among themselves to improve their defense posture and coordination. All three Baltic states are major contributing forces to the stabilization force in Bosnia. In Afghanistan, an Estonia mine-detecting team is working with our forces near the Bagram air base. They are working assiduously towards membership in the European Union and play a significant role in the deliberations of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which I chair. In the early 1990s, there were OSCE missions to Estonia and Latvia to assist in the resolution of the problem of integrating the non-native populations. These missions, I am very happy to say, have now been withdrawn as the challenges of integration recede further and further into history. I would be remiss, however, if I did not mention a rule of law concern that is relevant to this discussion. During and after World War II, millions of people fled Eastern and central Europe to escape Nazi and Communist persecution. Most of them lost everything they and their families had earned and built up over generations including homes, businesses, and artwork. Since the early 1990's these people or their descendants have tried to regain through legal means the properties that were confiscated. The Helsinki Commission, again a commission that seeks to implement the Helsinki Final Act, has monitored the property restitution and compensation efforts being made by post-Communist governments, and this past July we held our third hearing on that subject. Among the NATO candidate countries where the issue of property restitution has been particularly problematic are Lithuania, Croatia, and Romania. Central and East European governments have done much regarding property restitution; and indeed they have done some very good things, many of these countries. However, there needs to be done more in this area, and we would call upon them again as we encourage them to join NATO and are looking forward to this partnership which strengthens and deters against aggression that this issue needs to be resolved, and it needs to be resolved as quickly as humanly possible.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendments to the bill (H.R. 4085) to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide a cost-of-living increase in the rates of compensation for veterans with service-connected disability and dependency and indemnity compensation for surviving spouses of such veterans, to expand certain benefits for veterans and their survivors, and for other purposes.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4085, the Veterans' Compensation Cost of Living Adjustment Act of 2002, will provide a cost of living adjustment to disabled veterans and surviving spouses. The amount of the increase will be calculated using the same percentage applicable to Social Security benefits. The percentage amount should be announced later on this week and will be around 1.5 to 2 percent. Upon enactment of this vital legislation, all veterans or qualified survivors of veterans who receive disability compensation payments will receive the COLA effective December 1 of this year. Mr. Speaker, the House originally passed this COLA legislation back in May with a number of other very important provisions. On September 26, however, the Senate struck out those other provisions and sent us back the bill that is before us today. While I am urging my colleagues to support H.R. 4085, as amended, I want to assure them that we are continuing to work with our colleagues in the other body to reach agreement on these other vital provisions. Specifically, those provisions would: Authorize dependency and indemnity compensation benefits for the surviving spouse of a veteran who remarries after attaining the age of 65. These surviving spouses would also be eligible for supplemental VA- sponsored health coverage, education, and housing loan benefits to the same extent as if they had not remarried. We also saw a provision stripped out that we again will seek to find another home that reduced the home loan fee charges qualifying members of the Selected Reserve to the same level charged active-duty veterans. We also had a provision dealing with increased veterans' mortgage life insurance coverage from $90,000 to $150,000; and authorized veterans over the age of 70 to continue coverage under the veterans' mortgage life insurance. The House bill, Mr. Speaker, also contained a provision to authorize funding for State-approving agencies, the entities that are responsible for certifying schools' eligibility for participation in the Montgomery GI Bill for the next 3 years. Because of the urgency of continuing their funding, following consideration of H.R. 4085, we will shortly take up legislation that provides a 1-year authorization. Mr. Speaker, as this session draws to a close, I am hopeful that we will see action completed on these and a number of important veterans measures that the House has passed, but that have not been acted on by the other body. Among the House bills still pending in the other body are: Number one, H.R. 3253, the Department of Veterans Affairs Emergency Preparedness Act of 2002, which would expand the Department of VA's role in homeland security, creating new research centers to counter biological, chemical, and radiological terrorism. H.R. 3253 originally passed the House on May 20 and was subsequently amended and approved by the Senate on August 1. After intensive negotiations with our colleagues in the Senate, a compromise agreement was reached by both sides, and the House agreed to the compromise version on September 17. We are now awaiting action by the Senate on this legislation. Number two, H.R. 3645, the Veterans Health Care and Procurement Improvement Act of 2002 passed the House on July 22, which would reform VA health care procurement practices, expand access to VA health care services to Filipino veterans, World War II veterans, and provide additional dental services to former POWs. Number three, H.R. 4015, the Jobs for Veterans Act, passed the House on May 21 and would reform veterans job training and placement programs in the Department of Labor through a new system of incentives and accountability. Number four, H.R. 3423 would reform eligibility for burial at Arlington National Cemetery and was passed by the House on December 20 of last year. This legislation makes a couple of commonsense changes to recognize that reservists who die in the line of duty or who would qualify for burial but for their age at death, deserve the honor of an Arlington burial should they and their families so choose. Number five, H.R. 4940, the Arlington National Cemetery Burial Eligibility Act, passed the House on July 22nd. This is the third time that the House has approved a comprehensive review and overhaul of Arlington's rules, and we will continue to work with our colleagues in the other body on this major legislation. Number six, H.R. 5055, legislation to authorize a memorial marker in Arlington National Cemetery honoring veterans who fought in the Battle of the Bulge. That passed on July 22 as well. We have a preliminary agreement with our Senate colleagues on this and look forward to working with them and taking final action on that before this session closes sine die. Number seven, H.R. 811, the Veterans Hospital Emergency Repair Act, which passed the House on March 27, 2001, and H.R. 4514, the Veterans Major Medical Facilities Construction Act of 2002, which passed the House on May 21, are both extremely important pieces of legislation designed to protect and preserve the invaluable infrastructure of the Veterans Health Administration. For the past several years, VA's construction programs have been seriously underfunded. It is imperative that we take action, prompt action, to ensure that hospitals, clinics, research centers, and other VA medical centers are properly maintained and modernized when necessary. Mr. Speaker, there is still much more important work that we hope to accomplish in the waning days of the 107th Congress. There is already much that has been accomplished. Major new laws were enacted to substantially improve the GI Bill, reinvigorate our Nation's efforts to end homelessness among veterans, to better compensate service-connected veterans and their survivors, as well as dramatically increase funding for veterans health care services. This has indeed been a highly- productive year for veterans legislation in the House, and I salute all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their assistance and their cooperation and for working as a team on behalf of our Nation's veterans. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. GILMAN). (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to join my colleagues, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner), and really the entire committee on both sides of the aisle, in praising the long and distinguished service of Beth Kilker, Elizabeth Kilker. Elizabeth Kilker has served with the committee for almost 25 years. I have been on the committee for 22 years, Mr. Speaker. I have known her. I have admired her. She is always a positive force. She has worked with chairmen and ranking members from Texas, Mississippi, Arizona, Arkansas, Illinois, and now New Jersey. Throughout these years she has been extraordinarily helpful, effective, and always positive, perhaps something she learned at Immaculate Heart Academy in Girardville, Pennsylvania. But she certainly has brought a real sense of class, distinction and is, as I said, a very, very effective person. The committee has not just been blessed, but the veterans themselves have been blessed. They have been enriched by her service, they will miss her, and may God bless everything that she does going forward.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3731) to amend title 38, United States Code, to increase amounts available to State approving agencies to ascertain the qualifications of educational institutions for furnishing courses of education to veterans and eligible persons under the Montgomery GI Bill and under other programs of education administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs, as amended.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the committee, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3731, as amended, which would increase funding for State approving agencies from $13 million to $14 million for fiscal year 2003. Since World War II, Mr. Speaker, Congress has relied on the SAAs to ensure the quality of education and training offered to our Nation's veterans and to protect the integrity of VA education programs. These are the agencies that determine which schools, courses, and training programs qualify as eligible for veterans seeking to use their GI Bill benefits. SAAs also provide a vital role in occupational licensing and credentialing for veterans and in employer outreach. On May 21 of this year, Mr. Speaker, the House passed H.R. 4085, as amended, a bill that included an increase from $14 million available to State approving agencies in fiscal year 2002 to $18 million for fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 2005. The Senate passed a similar measure as part of S. 2237 on September 26, but the bodies have not yet reached final agreement to a compromise on the larger bill containing this provision. Without this legislation, Mr. Speaker, the SAA funding would decrease from the current funding level of $14 million to the $13 million levels on October 1 of this year. This is a stopgap measure for fiscal year 2003 only. My proposal simply puts SAA annual funding back at last year's level of $14 million for fiscal year 2003 in order to provide the SAAs with the resources necessary to fulfill their responsibilities. Mr. Speaker, I join the ranking member, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), in urging every Member of the House to support this stopgap bill while we work on the other legislation. I thank my good friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), for his cooperation on this legislation. We have throughout this session worked together on so many bills, and this is another one, while we work out some details with the Senate, hopefully to significantly boost the amount of money for the State-approving agencies. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 476 and all of America's firefighters, especially those who have died in the line of duty. As a proud Member of the Congressional Fire Services Caucus, I think it is fitting and appropriate that we set aside time to pay tribute to our nation's firefighters, men and women who have dedicated their lives so that the rest of us can sleep in peace. The threat of fire and the calamity an actual fire often creates is a day-to-day concern for all our communities, not to mention the added threats of terrorism now confronting us. In 1992, on behalf of the more than one million firefighters in over 32,000 fire departments nationally, Congress rightly created the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation to lead a nationwide effort to remember our nation's fallen firefighters and their families. Since its creation, this foundation has assisted many family members, helping them overcome the loss of their fallen champions. Within hours of the September 11th tragedy, the foundation established a process that used resources from across the country to provide the critical support that members of the Fire Department of New York City and their families needed. This weekend the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation will honor the 442 firefighters who made the ultimate sacrifice in service to their communities last year, including those lost in the World Trade Center's disaster. Also to be honored are five firefighters from my state of New Jersey who served with pride and honor and who dedicated their lives to protect others in their communities. Willie Barns, George ``June'' Danielson, Jr., James T. Heenan, Alberto Tirado, and Lawrence James Webb are New Jersey's fallen heros. They will be honored for their ultimate acts of valor this weekend. My prayers and the prayers of New Jerseyans everywhere will be with them and their families. Madam Speaker, our firefighters and emergency personnel who stand at the ready to protect and help us around the clock deserve our support and dedication. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote YES on H. Con. Res. 476.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing H.R. 5530, a bill that would strengthen VA's rights under law to collect reimbursement from certain third parties to cover the costs the Department incurs in providing health care to veterans covered by another private or public health plan. A number of these plans either refuse to reimburse, or are prohibited from doing so by current law. My bill, H.R. 5530, would fix this problem by eliminating these barriers to reimbursement for VA care. Those who pay attention to such matters are aware that the VA health care system is seriously under-funded to meet the demands being placed on it by our nation's veterans. As Chairman of the authorizing Committee for the Department of Veterans Affairs, I have worked hard to ensure that VA health care has the resources it requires to provide high quality health care services in a timely fashion. However, today VA health care is in crisis, as increasing enrollment and rising health care costs have resulted in hundreds of thousands of veterans being forced to wait months, even more than a year, to see a VA doctor. A VA report recently said that over 300,000 veterans are now waiting over six months to be seen in VA primary care. This is not acceptable. America's veterans did not ask us to wait while they finished high school, apprenticeships or college before being trained and sent into the European Theater of World War II as replacements for troops killed or taken prisoner of war at the Battle of the Bulge. They did not ask the U.S. Government to delay our call-up of WWII veterans in 1950 to go into the frozen confines of Korea to fight Chinese Communists along the 38th Parallel, or whether they could somehow postpone the horrible suffering caused by extreme cold weather at the Chosin Reservoir. They were called, they answered, and they served. This is the way of America's citizen soldiers. Now, many of these veterans are calling on their government to fulfill their promises and provide them health care through VA--many in their final years. They should not be told to wait because we lack the resources. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5530 would correct a number of deficiencies in VA's ability to recover the costs of care provided to veterans covered by other health plans. Since 1986, VA has had statutory authority to collect from traditional insurers such as Blue Cross-Blue Shield, Aetna, Mutual of Omaha and many others. These funds are used by VA to supplement appropriated funds to maintain high quality health care. VA also collects from so called ``Medi-gap policies'' that are an important adjunct to the Medicare program. But VA is unable to collect from the massive managed care sector, accounting now for over two-thirds of all health plans in the United States, including the managed care plans within Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan. Nor can VA collect from the Medicare program with nearly 40 million eligibles. My legislation would require these federal programs to pay VA for care it provides to covered beneficiaries. This would increase the amount of money VA could collect by hundreds of millions of dollars each year--providing funds that are desperately needed to reduce these intolerable waiting lists and promote better use of all available health care resources. I urge my colleagues to support and cosponsor this bill that will be an important supplement to a cash-strapped VA health care system charged with caring for many of our nation's heroes.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of the Houses of Worship Political Speech Act, introduced by my good friend, Walter Jones. For too long, the separation of church and state has been tilted too far towards one extreme and has restricted the free speech rights of religious communities in America. HR 2357 attempts to restore balance and reasonableness by amending the Internal Revenue Code to permit churches and other houses of worship to fully participate in the democratic political process. I believe that the First Amendment's prohibition against the establishment of an official religion akin to the Church of England in the UK was never meant to mean that communities of faith were barred from a robust participation in all aspects of our nation's political life. America's system is weaker and less representative when important voices are excluded from the political dimension. Prior to 1954, pastors and religious leaders spoke freely about candidates and political issues that directly affected the interests of their congregations. The anti-slavery and abolitionist organizations and the civil rights movement are examples of church-inspired political agents of change in our society. In fact, churches played a central role in dismantling the Jim Crow laws that so egregiously violated the civil rights of African Americans. Our society would have been much worse off if historically black churches and clergy were prohibited from sermonizing or distributing materials. The origins of current law, which this bill seeks to correct, are very instructive. In 1954, Senator Lyndon Johnson added language to pending tax legislation to prevent two non-profit groups that opposed him in 1948 from speaking out against him in his 1954 re-election. The vexing perception is that the IRS is empowered with sweeping powers to strip a church's tax-exempt status if clergymen express particular views on a candidate. That is clearly wrong and the framers of the Constitution would be appalled at this abuse of power. Priests, pastors, rabbis, or any religious leader should not be bullied into silence by the IRS. LBJ's capricious and punitive tax proviso has been used in an arbitrary manner to silence political speech in America's houses of worship. The Church at Pierce Creek in Vestal, New York, for example, came under IRS' sanction when it published an ``open letter'' to then- candidate Bill Clinton in 1992. The church took issue with Mr. Clinton's stances on several compelling moral issues. Even though the church leadership cited biblical passages to buttress its argument, the IRS revoked its tax-exempt status in 1995. The American Center for law and Justice, which represented the Church at Pierce Creek, has subsequently documented more than 500 instances where candidates had appeared before churches. Yet no enforcement action was taken in those cases perhaps suggesting a double standard. Mr. Speaker, I ask that these instances be made a part of the record. Approximately two years ago, former President Bill Clinton stood in the pulpit of the Alfred Street Baptist Church in Alexandria, Virginia--just a few miles from this building--and openly urged parishioners to vote for then-Senator Chuck Robb and Vice President Al Gore. Mr. Speaker, why is it permissible for Bill Clinton to make partisan speeches in churches, while other church leaders are gagged if they critique Bill Clinton? In a national poll conducted this summer by The Poling Company, 84 percent of men, and 77 percent of women agreed that the First Amendment should protect religious leaders from being penalized for political speech. I want to remind my colleagues that the separation of church and state stemmed from Americans' desire to have church and state operate independently from one another, in order to avoid the establishment of a state church. The affairs of states however often compare with, contradict or comply with the moral imperatives found in Holy Writ. Nothing in this legislation demands that a church get involved in the political dialogue of our nation. Issues of war and peace and other important issues shouldn't be the exclusive preserve of the political elite. The Jones bill would simply allow them that opportunity should they choose to speak about those matters, without the coercive power of government putting their tax-exempt status at risk.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, if the gentlewoman will yield, they would do everything to help that woman survive and, in the process of trying to heal her and to attend to her botched abortion, they would probably remove the baby who is probably already dead. We are talking about doing everything to save both lives. That is what the hospitals and the emergency rooms throughout this country are about. That is not what this issue is all about.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, to their everlasting credit, 86 percent of hospitals in America do not do abortions. Why? Because they are all about saving life, nurturing, and healing. Pregnancy is not a disease; the unborn child is not a wart or tumor to be killed. Chemical poisoning, literal dismemberment, abortions, are violence against children. This is all about protecting the right of conscience. NARAL let the cat out of the bag on one their web sites. They said, Maryland NARAL is launching this hospital provider project to increase access to abortion services by requiring Maryland hospitals to provide abortion. They want to compel hospitals of conscience to do abortions--it's that simple. Not all of the hospitals are religious. There are people who are not religious who have deep, moral convictions, and they believe that abortion takes the life of a baby. We ought to be nurturing. We should not compel our places of healing to become killing fields.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, since Roe v. Wade, there have been in excess of 42 million unborn children killed by the abortionists, through chemical poisoning, through dismemberment, and most of those are for socioeconomic reasons: Abortion on demand. The baby was unwanted therefore he or she was expendible. What the abortion lobby is attempting to do is to expand the number of places where those children can be destroyed. Our hope is that Members will vote for this rule. There will be a motion to recommit, there will be an up-or-down vote on a motion that is from the pro-abortion side. I would hope that Members would vote ``no'' on that motion to recommit and then vote ``yes'' on the Bilirakis bill.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, the Brown motion states that this bill shall not be construed as authorizing any institution to withhold medically appropriate services from a patient. What are those ``services?'' They are abortion services, Mr. Speaker. The problem with the Brown motion is it does not define medically appropriate, it leaves it up to further definition. Perhaps some Attorney General or health commissioner in a government that happens to be pro-abortion would say that is what medically appropriate means, or NARAL might say that is what appropriate means, and we are talking about abortion. That is what is on the table here, and I hope all Members understand that. This killer motion, will enable the killing of babies. It absolutely reverses the intent of conscience protection and undermines the very law that was passed a few years ago, and takes us further back than we are already right now. I urge Members to vote ``no'' on this gutting motion. I want to remind Members that 86 percent of the hospitals in America do not perform abortions. Thank God for that. They protect and preserve and cherish the lives of babies and their mothers--all their patients. They would be compelled under the Brown motion, forced, coerced, or empower others the ability to force them to perform abortions. This debate is all about conscience. The Bilirakis bill is a great bill, it is an important bill, it is a human rights bill that says conscience means something. We ought to take this step. Vote for it. Vote down this gutting motion.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, this just says to opt out of the killing of unborn babies. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding time. I want to compliment him on his leadership as well as his courage in offering this bill today. Mr. Speaker, a moment ago, the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia talked about this being the umpteenth time that we have dealt with the abortion issue. Frankly, I am very proud of the fact that prolifers have refused to roll over, those of us who have a moral and a conscientious objection to the killing of unborn children and the injuring of their mothers, do whatever we can, whenever we can to preserve at least some of the lives who otherwise would be destroyed by the violence of abortion. Let us not forget what we are talking about. Abortion either dismembers unborn children or it chemically poisons unborn children and it does it in a horrific way. It is a painful, violent death imposed upon children and it also is injurious to mothers, especially in a psychological way and in long-lasting physical ways. What we are dealing with today, Mr. Speaker, is conscience protection for hospitals and those institutions that protect and preserve and nurture life so that they will not be coerced into performing abortions or referring for abortions. I would remind my colleagues that Olympia Snowe, who is not a pro- lifer, said when this was up in 1996 that an institution or an individual who does not want to perform an abortion should not be compelled to do so in a way that is contrary to their beliefs. Unfortunately, while the intent of the legislation signed by the President in 1996 was clear, the language apparently was not, or at least in the eyes of some, and some courts and some attorneys general have been trying to compel health organizations, hospitals, to be involved in abortions. Some courts and pro-abortion groups are so extreme that they want to force hospitals to do abortions against their will. The whole board of directors, the hospital staff could say we will not participate in this anti-life child battering enterprise but they could be compelled by a State or by some court to do so absent the enactment of this legislation. In my own home State of New Jersey, Elizabeth General Medical Center agreed to consolidate with St. Elizabeth's Hospital and no longer perform abortions. Subsequently a New Jersey Superior Court judge reviewing the consolidation issued an outrageous judgment that brought the pro-abortion organizations into the equation and approved a settlement to place $2 million in a trust for the performance of abortions and abortion referrals. In other words, they got money from the pro-lifers to enable the killing of unborn children. This debate is all about human rights, I say to my friends, about child violence. We can mask it, we can sanitize it and we do. We do it quite well. We are Members of Congress. We are politicians. But the fact of the matter is that killing unborn children is violence against children, and dismemberment and chemical poisoning in no way can be construed to be a benign act. It kills babies. Look at the ultrasounds and the great progress that has been made in refining ultrasounds. Today you can see a baby in great detail before birth. The abortionist looks at that same reality--that same baby and kills that baby. I think it is to their credit that 86 percent of all the hospitals in America are all about lifesaving and nurturing and healing--they refuse to do abortions. They are not about killing babies. They are not about putting poisons into their amniotic sacs in order to procure a baby's death. They are not about dismembering the arms and the legs and the torso and the head--decapitation is commonplace in the abortion mills all over America, with 42 to 43 million dead babies and counting a horrific loss of life. Now we see the abortion lobby, and NARAL makes it very clear, they have a plan when there are consolidations to make sure that these hospitals who are now pro-life, whether they are religiously affiliated or not, to provide abortions. NARAL says it very clearly on one of their websites and we know that this is part of an aggresive strategy, to expand abortions where they are absolutely not wanted. Babies are precious. Their mothers are precious. Let us promote lifesaving, nonviolent alternatives to abortion, not the enabling and the killing of babies. Someday every Member who has been voting for abortion will rue the day. They will wake up in the middle of the night and say, how could I? Just like looking back in antiquity we look back and say how could people like Washington and Jefferson and others have had slaves? There was a blind spot then. There is a blind spot today. Abortion is violence against children. Brown enables it and expands it. Vote for the Bilirakis bill and against the Brown motion to recommit.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, in a ceremony on Wednesday, September 18, 2002, in the Committee on Veterans' Affairs hearing room, Dr. Douglas Noffsinger, Chief, Office of Audiology and Speech Pathology, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California, and Dr. Rory Cooper, Director, Rehabilitation Research and Development Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA, each received an Olin E. Teague Award for their efforts on behalf of disabled veterans. The Teague Award is presented annually to a VA employee (or employees) whose achievements have been of extraordinary benefit to veterans with service-connected disabilities, and is the highest honor presented by VA in the field of rehabilitation. Dr. Noffsinger was selected to receive this prestigious award in honor of his significant contributions to the rehabilitation of veterans with hearing loss, one of the most common disabilities resulting from military service. His efforts have been multi-faceted and include cutting-edge research, establishing national practice algorithms for selecting and fitting hearing aids, and developing guidelines to assure that all veterans needing hearing aids have equal access to treatment. Dr. Noffsinger is commended for his leadership role in formulating national clinical practice guidelines for selecting and fitting hearing aids that have been accepted as official policy by the professional associations that represent all private and public sector audiologists. Rory A. Cooper, Ph.D., was recognized with a Teague Award for his major contributions to the rehabilitation of paralyzed individuals, in the design of the modern wheelchairs, for his promotion of the understanding of secondary disabilities among wheelchair users, and for his persistent efforts to improve the availability of high quality products and services to veterans who use wheelchairs. Dr. Cooper's work has affected thousands of veterans by elevating the quality of the wheelchair produced by manufacturers and provided by the VA and other third party payers. Dr. Cooper is one of the world's foremost authorities in wheelchair design and technology. His impact on the lives of people with disabilities has been, and will continue to be, truly profound. Mr. Speaker, the name Olin E. ``Tiger'' Teague is synonymous with exemplary service to the Nation's veterans. The late Congressman Teague served on the Committee on Veterans' Affairs for 32 years, 18 of those years as its distinguished chairman. No one who worked with him on veterans' issues ever had to ask why he was called ``Tiger.'' He set the standards by which we can best serve all veterans. I know my colleagues join me in offering our deep appreciation to Dr. Noffsinger and Dr. Cooper for their concern, dedication, and innovation in meeting the special rehabilitation needs of veterans. We congratulate Dr. Noffsinger and Dr. Cooper for the excellence of their work and for the distinguished award they received.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the managers may have until midnight, Monday, September 23, to file a conference report on the bill (H.R. 1646) to authorize appropriations for the Department of State for fiscal years 2002 and 2003, and for other purposes.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I just want to begin by thanking my very good friend and colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), for his work on this legislation. We have served together on the Committee on Veterans' Affairs for longer than 20 years; and he as been a true advocate for veterans, and on this legislation, like on the others, has been a great friend and ally as we work in tandem to try to bring good, solid pieces of legislation to the floor. So I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans) for that good work. I want to thank Michael Durishin and Susan Edgerton, who are two of his top staffers, who again worked very, very tirelessly with our own staff here on the majority side; and again, these bills, the details of which are very much worked over and vetted, would not happen without that kind of cooperation. So I do want to thank them as well. The gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), who just spoke, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner), the chairman and the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Health, and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) also, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, worked on this legislation as well; and I want to thank them. I want to thank our own staff, Pat Ryan, Kingston Smith, Jeannie McNally, Peter Dickinson, Kathleen Greve and John Bradley, who all had input into this legislation, and, we have held hearings on it. One of them was one of those day-long hearings. We had four panels. We heard from experts, and again, I think we all were astonished at the lack of response when it came to these capabilities. As I alluded to earlier in my comments, I thought when I sat in those meetings in Trenton and Hamilton and Mercer County, where there was this befuddled look on the part of very well-meaning experts in the field about what do we do about anthrax, has it been spread through cross-contamination, what are the risks, how often and how long and to whom should Cipro or Doxycycline be administered. There were a million and one questions and very few answers because those questions had not been considered in advance; and that is what this legislation is all about, to establish centers of excellence that seek to find out, if this kind of event happens, what is prescribed, what is the consequence. Just today in The Washington Times, there was an excellent op-ed piece by a doctor who heads up the emergency room physicians, pointing out that the first responders, as they rush in to help in a situation, smallpox, anthrax, sarin, just name it, will not have a clue what it is they need to do to prepare themselves, to protect themselves and preclude contamination. So it is very important that these details be worked out in advance, coordinating with other agencies of the government. The VA has shown in the past it has a unique perspective and an expertise to bring to bear on this. Madam Speaker, I also thank our Senate colleagues. Senator Rockefeller worked on this and got legislation passed. It was a very cooperative effort. They added some very meaningful language to the bill, so we ended up with a very good hybrid that will go to the President for signature. I also thank Senator Specter, the ranking member. In addition, I appreciate the efforts of the Senate staff, Bill Tuerk and Kim Lipsky, David Goetz and Bill Cahill, and I especially thank Julie Fischer, who has been Senator Rockefeller's top aide, who worked with the other side of the aisle to craft a good bill. This bill has been endorsed by the administration. Now we will work on getting this bill signed, implemented, and then we will do oversight on its implementation.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 526) providing for the concurrence by the House with an amendment in the amendments of the Senate to H.R. 3253.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today, Americans for a Free Cuba gathered on the Senate steps to officially open the Cuban Political Prisoners Initiative display in the Senate Russell Office Building. They will be storming the halls of the US Senate tomorrow, urging Senators not to vote for lifting the travel ban on Cuba. The Business and Agricultural communities have used their vast resources to make their case for lifting sanctions on Cuba at a summit here in Washington, but we know that their case is based on their own self-interest. They have failed to acknowledge or fully consider that lifting sanctions would empower Castro to cling to power and continue his reign of terror over millions of suffering people. The members of the Americans for a Free Cuba have heroically made the case for those Cubans who cannot speak for themselves because of Castro's brutal and restrictive regime through their silent vigil and demonstration. This is a regime that prohibits freedom in almost every way possible while punishing and imprisoning all opposition. The compelling stories of Cuban defectors clearly demonstrate that many will do whatever they can to escape the dreadful conditions brought about by their totalitarian ruler. Both the people and political prisoners in Cuba as well as those who cherish freedom are counting on Americans to stand up to Castro and keep the pressure on through the embargo. Thankfully, President Bush is behind The Americans for a Free Cuba 100 percent. I commend President Bush for the strong and unwavering stance he has taken against the Castro regime. The President has made it clear that the United States will work with Cuba only after Castro takes concrete measures to improve the abysmal human rights situation in his country. I support the President's demand to Castro that he must free political prisoners, legalize political activity, permit free elections, and cease discriminating against Cuban workers before Congress should even begin to consider lifting economic sanctions. Administration officials have vowed a Presidential veto to any version of the Treasury-Postal Appropriations bill that weakens trade or travel sanctions on Cuba. The Cuba Political Prisoners Initiative was initially launched in April when over a dozen members of Congress, from both political parties, adopted a dozen political prisoners. These prisoners each have a unique story but all share in a common suffering because of their love of freedom. While the Cuba Political Prisoners Initiative was launched this Spring, it will not end until every single Cuban political prisoner is free. I am sending out a letter signed by my colleagues who are part of this initiative to Sergio Vielra de Mello, the new UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, urging him to follow through on the resolution this commission adopted in April that called on the Cuban government to improve its record on human, civil, and political rights and allow the UN and other representatives to examine human rights conditions in Cuba. Twenty former political prisoners were amongst those gathered on the Senate steps today. They are the heroes for freedom that endured the horrors of Castro's Cuba and lived to tell about it. Also in attendance was Maritza Lugo Fernandez a former Cuban political prisoner joining us today who was jailed more than 30 times before she was exiled by the Castro regime. Her husband, Rafael Ibarra Roque, is still a political prisoner in Cuba and is the prisoner I have adopted. Before going to prison, where he has been since 1994, Mr. Roque's home was raided by Castro's thugs, who seized virtually everything he owned of value including the family car, the stove, a television, and even his pets. He was arrested and charged with ``sabotage,'' but no credible evidence whatsoever exists that he committed this crime. Those close to the case know his real ``crime'' was having the courage and audacity to speak out against the regime and demand the same freedoms Americans--and other freedom loving people hold to be self-evident and a basic foundation for society. Mr. Roque has been sentenced to twenty years in the wretched Combinado del Este Prison in Havana where political prisoners are subjected to especially brutal treatment. The State Department's 2001 Human Right's report on Cuba speaks of political prisoners suffering beatings, intimidation, and sexual abuse. These abuses are carried out not only by prison officials but also by state security agents posing as prisoners. Unfortunately Mr. Roque's case is not an exception but rather the norm for human rights activists in Cuba. Hundreds of others whose only crime is their love of freedom languish in Castro's prisons and the Cuban people on a whole have suffered under the terror of his rule for over 40 years. The Cuba Political Prisoners Initiative display that we have opened in the Senate Rotunda is somber but will serve as an important reminder of the hundreds of innocent Cubans languishing in Castro's prisons for all Senators, Senate staff, and visitors who pass by it each day. I am confident that when the American people and members of Congress hear the true facts about the great human rights abuses occurring in Cuba, and fully consider the great harm Castro seeks to do our nation through working with terrorist states and harboring fugitives of justice, they will agree that keeping sanctions on Cuba is our only option. The challenge of fighting for human rights in Cuba remains great. However, we must never give up and we must never, ever forget those who are persecuted for carrying the torch of freedom.