Chris Smith

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 188, expressing the sense of Congress that the Government of the People's Republic of China should cease its persecution of Falun Gong practitioners. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, I commend you for introducing this legislation and for the leadership you have shown as Chair of the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights in speaking out against human rights abuses throughout the world. Members of Congress need to be aware of the brutal suppression of human rights and religious freedoms being carried out by the People's Republic of China. From forced abortion and labor camps, to the imprisonment and sometimes even execution of brave Chinese who dare to stand up for their faith or political beliefs, Jiang Zemin's regime is one of the worst violators of human rights in the world. While Christians, Tibetan Buddhists, and Muslim Uighurs are all being persecuted for their faith, the suffering of peaceful Falun Gong practitioners has been especially intense. In 1999, China's dictators launched a brutal campaign to completely eradicate Falun Gong from their country through whatever means necessary, claiming that Falun Gong was a threat to ``social order'' in China. The reason behind this campaign of brutality is clear: by the mid to late 1990s, the number of Falun Gong practitioners began to exceed the number of members of the Communist Party. Like all dictators and totalitarian terror systems, the PRC fears and hates what it cannot control. So it sought to destroy and intimidate those who practice Falun Gong. Falun Gong is not a religion, per se, but rather more like a philosophy. Based on the principles of Truthfulness, Compassion, and Tolerance, Falun Gong uses a series of five physical and mental exercises to assist its members purify themselves spiritually and peacefully resolve conflicts. Whatever one may say about the merits of their beliefs, the evidence is very clear that Falun Gong practitioners are peaceful individuals who want to be left alone to practice their beliefs as they see fit. To carry out the task of smashing those who practice Falun Gong, the Beijing dictatorship created ``610'' offices throughout China to oversee and direct the persecution of Falun Gong through brainwashing, torture, and murder. The State Department Human Rights Report for 2001 has several pages detailing and documenting the plight of the Falun Gong. We know at least 250 Falun Gong have died as a result of torture thus far. Other estimates place the true body count much higher. Bodies of the tortured victims are often cremated immediately to conceal evidence of torture. The report indicated that Falun Gong adherents sent to mental health institutions have been administered psychiatric drugs and electric shock treatments by Chinese authorities. Tens of thousands of Falun Gong practitioners are held in labor camps, prisons, and mental hospitals, where they are forced to endure torture brainwashing sessions. Chinese-American permanent residents are not spared in the PRC's disgusting torture and brainwashing campaign. One American permanent resident, Ms. Teng Chunyan, was arrested in May 2000 and sent to prison for three years solely on account of her beliefs. She was sent to Beijing ``re-education center'' in June 2000. The PRC--in a move that most American POWs from Korea and Vietnam would immediately see through and recognize--put Ms. Teng on public display on November 20, 2001 after its ``re-education'' center had thoroughly broken and brainwashed this poor woman. In the macabre display gleefully published by the Chinese embassy-- which I will include for the public record--Ms. Teng disavowed her affiliation to the Falun Gong and stated that ``I have never been abused since my detention and have not seen any sign of beating or admonishment here. Police in the center are very polite and kind. . . . The re-education center is more comfortable than my home and I am gaining weight here.'' American POWs who endured horrible torture at the hands of Communists would recognize these kinds of forced statements immediately as a pathetic farce. We might never know what kinds of terrible things were done to Ms. Teng and her family to get her to make these kinds of statements under duress. This is just one example of how China uses its state controlled media to inundate the public with anti-Falun Gong propaganda. As my colleagues know, a sizable number of Falun Gong practitioners reside here in the United States. They attempt to raise awareness about the horrors their fellow believers are subject to through meeting with government officials and through holding peaceful protests. Just this past weekend Falun Gong members gathered on the Mall to pass out literature and inform Americans of the great suffering those in their faith are enduring. When Jiang Zemin and other state leaders responsible for this purge are visiting foreign countries, Falun Gong members travel overseas to protest and raise awareness of the brutal persecution. In response, China's persecution against the Falun Gong has moved outside of China's own borders. A few weeks ago, Falun Gong practitioners--U.S. citizens--were denied visas to travel to Iceland during Jiang Zemin's visit to that country. An Icelandic newspaper known as ``The Morgunblad'' wrote that it ``has reliable sources that Chinese authorities have demanded from the Icelanders that Falun Gong members not be in the country during the visit.'' They even reportedly demanded that no Falun Gong protesters be seen from the Saga Hotel where Jiang Zemin was staying. Persecution of Falun Gong in China is horrific enough itself. The fact that China is now exporting its repression to weaker foreign nations under the guise of ``safety'' and ``public order'' is even worse. We must not forget that Iceland has been a strong democratic ally of the United States and a founding member of NATO. The fact that peaceful American citizens attempting to travel to a fellow NATO nation were detained and harassed, had their names placed on an Icelandic government ``blacklist'' and their tickets revoked, presumably at the behest of thugs in Beijing, is an outrage and must not be tolerated. The cancer of China's repression is spreading all over the world. The PRC is not content to beat and torture and silence those inside its own borders. Now it is seeking to bully other nations into doing its bidding. When will this country wake up and stand up to this kind of nonsense? I call upon all members of this body to support H. Con. Res. 188. I call on the administration to step up its efforts to speak up for the Falun Gong and out against the actions of the Chinese government immediately. Teng Chunyan: I Am Pleased to Shake off the Spiritual Shackle of the Falun Gong Cult (11/20/01) ``I hope that my experience help transform those obsessed Falun Gong followers,'' said Teng Chunyan on November 20 surrounded by media at a Beijing-based re-education center. With her short hair neatly combed and eyebrows noticeably trimmed, the confident 38-year-old woman looked at least ten years younger than her age. ``The reeducation center is more comfortable than my home and I am gaining weight here,'' said Teng smiling shyly. The beaming Teng, who has received systematic training in Chinese herbal medicine, cannot be compared with the Falun Gong devotee she once was. Teng came to China from the U.S. many times between February and May of last year to collect information on the Chinese Government's handling of Falun Gong issues for Beijing branches of foreign news agencies and introduced Falun Gong followers to foreign reporters. Teng was born in Harbin, capital of northeast China's Heilongjiang Province and went to the United States in 1990. She was detained by police when she tried to enter China via the Luohu Port in Shenzhen in May 2000 and was sentenced to a 3-year term of imprisonment according to Chinese law. Her belief in the Falun Gong cult began to waver after she was sent to a Beijing-based re-education center in June 2000. Recalling her former devotion to Falun Gong, Teng said that persuasion from family members and friends could not lessen her blind enthusiasm for the cult. ``I completely rejected contacts with the outside world and only believed in the Falun Gong cult and its propaganda which is flooded on the cult web site,'' Teng said. Teng started to doubt the credibility and motives of the cult web site when she found that her re-education center roommate Yao Jie, who was reported dead by the web site because of her conversion, was actually living a normal life. ``What helped to change your belief in Falun Gong?'' asked a reporter. ``Truth can never be concealed for long. I saw with my own eyes police patiently helping educate Falun Gong followers and trying their best to save lives of believers who tried to commit suicide,'' said Teng. Teng has also talked with many former Falun Gong followers and was deeply impressed with their experiences. ``My personal experiences made me reconsider the so-called facts published by the cult and I completely changed my mind,'' said Teng. When asked about her conversion process, Teng said: ``true belief conversion can never be forced.'' ``I am pleased to shake off the spiritual shackle of the Falun Gong cult and return to a normal life.'' Teng Chunyan is now an active member of the re-education center dancing troupe and is busy preparing for an upcoming art performance organized by the center. ``I have never been abused since my detention and have not seen any sign of beating or admonishment here. Police in the center are very polite and kind,'' said Teng. Jin Hua, vice director of the re-education center, said that police in the center are required to treat every Falun Gong follower in the center equally, and discrimination is absolutely forbidden. Jin said: ``We encourage Falun Gong followers to communicate with their family members. ``They can write to or call their family members as well as meet with relatives once a month.'' The 75-year-old father of Teng Chunyan came from Heilongjiang Province last week to visit her and was relieved to see his daughter regaining energy and vigor. ``I am happy now,'' Teng said. ``Justice will finally defeat evil.''

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, as the sponsor of H.R. 3838, I rise to urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation that will amend the Congressional charter of the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW). As Chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, I was pleased to introduce this bill on March 4, 2002, at the request of the VFW to allow Members of the armed forces who have received hostile fire or imminent danger pay to be eligible for VFW membership. Mr. Speaker, I want to especially commend the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Sensenbrenner; the Committee's Ranking Member, Mr. Conyers, the Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims; Mr. Gekas; and the Subcommittee's Ranking Member, Ms. Jackson-Lee, for their attention to this matter in moving the bill through the committee and to the floor for House consideration. This bipartisan amendment to the VFW charter simply allows the organization to keep up with the times as the nature of our Nation's military operations has changed. The VFW's charter currently requires a veteran to have received a campaign medal in order to join the organization. But the dangerous contingency operations our servicemembers have participated in over the past twenty or so years have not resulted in the award of campaign medals. Servicemenbers doing their duty in global hot spots have faced the type of risks that should qualify them for VFW membership. My bill would remove this barrier to membership in a way that is consistent with the type of military service the VFW has always required. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3838 would also address a technical problem the VFW has occasionally encountered with the language of its charter regarding its purposes as an organization. The VFW has maintained a tax-exempt, nonprofit status, but some states do not want to qualify it as a tax- exempt charitable organization despite its long history of charitable work in communities across America, because its charter does not contain the word ``charitable''. Well, Congress can and should fix this relatively simply problem by inserting the word ``charitable'' as one of its purposes in order to silence anyone who insists on elevating form over substance. Mr. Speaker, with roots that go back more than a century to the Spanish-American War, the Veterans of Foreign Wars has an admirable history of helping its fellow veterans, their communities and their Nation. This legislation will help to ensure that the VFW continues to perform these services in the 21st century and beyond. H.R. 3838 deserves the support of every House member and I urge its approval.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding me time, and I rise in very strong support of H. Res. 393. I want to commend its sponsor and all of the Members who are taking part in this very important debate. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, along with the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), who is on the floor and will be speaking momentarily, we returned back from the OSCE, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Parliamentary Assembly. Every year, parliamentarians from the 55 nations that comprise the OSCE meet to discuss issues of importance. This year the focus was on terrorism, but we made sure that a number of other issues, because certainly anti-Semitism is inextricably linked to terrorism, were raised in a very profound way. Yesterday, two very historic and I think very vital things happened in this debate. I had the privilege of cochairing a historic meeting on anti-Semitism with a counterpart, a member of the German Bundestag, Professor Gert Weisskirchen, who is a member of the Parliament there, also a professor of applied sciences at the University of Heidelberg, and we heard from four very serious, very credible and very profound voices in this battle to wage against anti-Semitism. We heard from Abraham Foxman, the National Director of the Anti- Defamation League, who gave a very impassioned but also very empirical speech, that is to say he backed it up with statistics, with information about this rising tide of anti-Semitism, not just in Europe, but in the United States and Canada as well. He pointed out, for example, according to their data, 17 percent of Americans are showing real anti-Semitic beliefs, and the ugliness of it. Sadly, among Latinos and African Americans, it is about 35 percent. He pointed out in Europe, in the aggregate, the anti-Semitism was about 30 percent of the population. Dr. Shimon Samuels also spoke, who is the Director of the Wiesenthal Center in Paris. He too gave a very impassioned and very documented talk. He made the point that the slippery slope from hate speech to hate crime is clear. Seventy-two hours after the close of the Durban hate-fest, its virulence struck at the strategic and financial centers of the United States. He pointed out, ``If Durban was Mein Kampf, than 9/11 was Kristalnacht, a warning. ``What starts with the Jews is a measure, an alarm signalling impending danger for global stability. The new anti-Semitic alliance is bound up with anti-Americanism under the cover of so-called anti- globalization.'' He also testified and said, ``The Holocaust for 30 years acted as a protective Teflon against blatant anti-Semitic expression. That Teflon has eroded, and what was considered distasteful and politically incorrect is becoming simply an opinion. But cocktail chatter at fine English dinners,'' he said, ``can end as Molotov cocktails against synagogues. ``Political correctness is also eroding for others, as tolerance for multi-culturism gives way to populous voices in France, Italy, Austria, Denmark, Portugal and in the Netherlands. These countries' Jewish communities can be caught between the rock of radical Islamic violence and the hard place of a revitalized Holocaust-denying extreme right. ``Common cause,'' he concluded, ``must be sought between the victimized minorities against extremism and fascism.'' I would point out to my colleagues one of those who spoke pointed out, it was Professor Julius Schoeps, that he has found that people do not say ``I am anti-Semitic;'' they just say ``I do not like Jews,'' a distinction without a difference, and, unfortunately, it is rearing itself in one ugly attack after another. I would point out in that Berlin very recently, two New Jersey yeshiva students, after they left synagogue, they left prayer, there was an anti-American, anti-Israeli demonstration going on, and they were asked repeatedly, are you Jews? Are you Jews? And then the fists started coming their way and they were beaten right there in Berlin. Let me finally say, Mr. Speaker, that yesterday we also passed a supplementary item at our OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. I was proud to be the principal sponsor. The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) offered a couple of strengthening amendments during the course of that debate, and we presented a united force, a U.S. force against anti- Semitism. I would just point out this resolution now hopefully will act in concert with other expressions to wake up Europe. We cannot sit idly by. If we do not say anything, if we do not speak out, we allow the forces of hate to gain a further foothold. Again, that passed yesterday as well. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to become much more aware that this ugliness is rearing its ugly face, not just in the United States, but Canada, in Europe, and we have to put to an end to it. Hate speech and hate crimes go hand in hand. Mr. Speaker, I urge support of the resolution. United States Helsinki Commission--Anti-Semitism in the OSCE Region The Delegations of Germany and the United States will hold a side event to highlight the alarming escalation of anti- Semitic violence occurring throughout the OSCE region. All Heads of Delegations have been invited to attend, as well as media and NGOs. The United States delegation has introduced a supplementary item condemning anti-Semitic violence. The Resolution urges Parliamentary Assembly participants to speak out against anti-Semitism. 12:30 pm-2:00 pm, Monday, 8 July The Representation of Lower Saxony In der Ministergaerten 10 10117 Berlin--approximately a 15-minute walk from the Bundestag and across from the Holocaust Memorial construction site. Co-Hosts Prof. Gert Weisskirchen, Member of the German Bundestag and Professor of Applied Cultural Sciences, Universitat Heidelberg. Representative Christopher H. Smith, Head of United States Delegation to the OSCE-PA and Co-Chairman of the United States Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. Presenters Mr. Abraham H. Foxman, National Director, Anti-Defamation League. Dr. Shimon Samuels, Director for International Liaison Simon Wiesenthal Center--Paris. Dr. Wolfgang Benz, Director of the Center for anti-Semitic Research at the Technical University of Berlin. Dr. Julius Schoeps, Professor Modern History, University of Potsdam & Director of the Moses Mendelssohn Center for European-Jewish Studies.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing today the Belarus Democracy Act of 2002, 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. 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 blatantly and repeatedly violated basic freedoms of speech, expression, assembly, association and religion. The fledgling democratic opposition, non-governmental organizations and independent media have all faced harassment. There are credible allegations of Lukashenka regime involvement in the disappearances--in 1999 and 2000--of opposition members and a journalist. There is growing evidence that Belarus is a leading supplier of lethal military equipment to rogue states. A draft bill is making its way in the Belarusian legislature that would restrict non-traditional religious groups. Several days ago, on June 24, two leading journalists were sentenced to two and 2\1/2\ years, respectively, of ``restricted freedom'' for allegedly slandering the Belarusian President. Despite efforts by Members of Congress, the Helsinki Commission which I co-chair, the State Department, various American NGOS, 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 most assuredly did not meet 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 will 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 Belarus' integration into democratic Europe in which democratic principles and human rights are respected and the rule of law prevails.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, over the past several weeks, Uzbek authorities have increased the harassment and suppression of religious groups viewed as a threat to the government's control of society. Uzbek authorities have systematically sought to stifle all aspects of religious life, including Muslim and Christian. It is currently believed that nearly 7,000 individuals are jailed for alleged crimes related to their religious affiliation or beliefs. Human rights organizations estimate that during the past year Uzbek courts convicted roughly 30 people a week under trumped-up charges. Unfortunately, the list keeps growing. At the end of May, police arrested Yuldash Rasulov, a well-known human rights defender and devout Muslim. Rasulov's work through the Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan focused on government actions against Muslims choosing to worship outside the government-approved religious system. According to Human Rights Watch, officials charged Rasulov with ``religious extremism,'' claiming he recruited Islamic militants to work toward overthrowing the state. Notably, a search of his home reportedly found nothing of an incriminating nature. Since being arrested, Rasulov has been held in incommunicado detention. Authorities also targeted Musharaf Usamnova, the widow of a prominent Muslim activist Farhod Usmanov. Her husband was reportedly murdered in an isolation cell while in government custody in 1999. Uzbek officials arrested Musharaf in April, bringing over 50 men to ensure her capture, and her situation is unknown at this time. Soon thereafter, the government arrested several other women who were protesting the long prison sentences given to relatives and Muslim activists. The court sentenced these women to jail terms, some up to four years. Adding to the concern about the treatment of these individuals is the rampant torture throughout the Uzbek ``justice'' system. Once in custody, many are savagely tortured and beaten in hopes of securing self-incriminating statements or evidence against other suspects. To ensure convictions, police authorities plant evidence on innocent individuals, such as weapons, drugs or banned religious propaganda. Judges hand out harsh prison sentences, despite claims of pervasive torture. Furthermore, prison conditions are abominable, infested with disease and pestilence. Individuals imprisoned on religious offenses are reportedly treated extraordinarily harsh; persons wishing to pray are subjected to further beatings and harassment. Incommunicado detention and disappearances of individuals also occur. Also of serious concern are the extrajudicial executions that transpired over the past year. Human rights organizations reported on the deaths of five individuals while in police custody. Despite some Uzbek Government reports listing the cause of death as ``heart attack'' or ``brain tumor,'' the open wounds, broken bones and multiple bruises on the corpses tell a very different story. Clearly, there is much cause to worry about the safety of all individuals in prison. Besides physical arrests, the legal regime governing religious groups is designed to repress religious activity. Through these laws and regulations, the government places religious groups in an untenable situation. The government seems to allow approved mosques to operate and permits Christian communities to exist in relative peace (if they do not attempt to proselytize indigenous groups not traditionally Christian). Otherwise, for other religious groups, obtaining official recognition is nearly impossible, and the real threat of government repression looms large. The 1998 Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations law instituted registration requirements designed to make achieving official recognition next to impossible. The 1999 amendments to the criminal code increased the importance of registration, as individuals attending an unregistered group are potentially subject to three to five years imprisonment for belonging to an ``illegal'' group. Individuals caught attending meetings of ``banned'' religious communities risk up to 20 years imprisonment. Uzbek courts frequently hand down lengthy prison sentences for alleged participation in illegal or banned groups. In addition, the religion law bans religious free speech and private religious instruction, and only permits government approved clerics to wear religious dress. In recent weeks, Uzbek authorities appear more willing to use these provisions to repress unwanted groups and silence dissent. Most recently, on May 25th, Uzbek officials raided the Mir Protestant Church in the Karakalpakstan region in western Uzbekistan. The raid, justified because the church is unregistered, interrupted a service and recorded the names of individuals representing local nationalities, such as Kazakhs and Uzbeks. Authorities ordered individuals of those ethnic groups to appear in court to explain their participation. While the court did not impose a fine, in a similar case in the same region, a court did fine four members of the New Life Church for violating the law on religious organizations. Similarly, due to an inability to register, the small Christian community in Muinak has been denied permission to meet. According to Keston News Service, church members are now forced to meet in secret. Furthermore, the leaders of the Jehovah's Witnesses in the town of Bukhara could be sentenced to five years in jail for leading an ``illegal'' religious service, as their community is unregistered. In addition, in May a Tashkent court found a Jehovah's Witness guilty and fined him for illegal religious teaching when he was caught praying at a friend's funeral. Even more alarming was the request by the Uzbek Committee for Religious Affairs that Protestant groups stop preaching the Uzbek language, the country's official language. Mr. Speaker, the overall situation for religious freedom, and human rights generally, in Uzbekistan is bleak. Despite US involvement in the region, the recent increase of government efforts to suppress unrecognized religious groups is deeply troubling. Consequently, I urge the Uzbek Government to honor its commitments as a participating State in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution condemning the use of torture and other forms of cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment or punishment wherever they occur--in the United States and other countries. As the United States has become a safe haven for hundreds of thousands of torture victims, the resolution also expresses support for the victims of these heinous acts. I am pleased that I am joined by my colleagues, Representatives Steny Hoyer, Ben Cardin, and Alcee Hastings, as original cosponsors of the measure. The Chairman of the Helsinki Commission, Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, is introducing an identical resolution in the Senate. Torture remains the weapon of choice of oppressive regimes. In the worst cases, it is systematically used to silence political opposition, punish religious minorities, and target those who are ethnically or racially different from those in power. It is estimated that some 500,000 torture survivors live in this country alone, most of whom came here as refugees. The debilitating effects of torture often last a lifetime and require substantial medical, psychological and other treatment. Although they are aided by 34 centers in 19 states, the needs of the victims are extensive. I will continue to support funding for torture treatment centers in the United States, as well as foreign treatment centers funded through the U.S. Agency for International Development, and multilateral efforts supported by the UN Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture. Mr. Speaker, I also want to commend the non-governmental organizations which seek to document this abuse and hold perpetrators accountable. At the same time, I will be working to ensure that the United States continues to play a leadership role in the battle against torture by signaling our unwavering condemnation of this egregious practice. It is particularly important that we send that message now, when irresponsible voices are suggesting that torture may be a necessary tool against terror. Torture creates terror. That is its purpose, and it makes no sense to wage war to defend our great democratic republic and respect for the rule of law and use methods that denigrate the very values we seek to protect. Torture is unconstitutional, barred by the laws of the United States and the laws of all civilized nations. The resolution that Sen. Campbell and I are introducing underscores that message. It recognizes the United Nations International Day in Support of the Victims of Torture--June 26 each year--and encourages the training of law enforcement personnel who are involved in the custody, interrogation, or treatment of any individual who is arrested, detained, or imprisoned, with the hope of preventing the use of this practice. The resolution also calls on the Secretary of State to seek, at relevant international fora, the adoption of an agreement to treat confessions and other evidence obtained through torture or other forms of cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment or punishment, as inadmissible in any legal proceeding; and to prohibit, in law and in practice, incommunicado detention of prisoners. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution and giving it timely consideration.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4477, the ``Sex Tourism Prohibition Improvement Act.'' Chairman Sensenbrenner, I thank you for moving this important piece of legislation through your Committee to the House floor and commend you for your leadership on this most serious issue. As the prime author of the ``Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000,'' legislation that strengthens penalties against those running trafficking rings and provides services as well as protection for victims, I have followed this issue closely. Sex tourism is a heinous, deplorable activity that is on the rise around the world. In many cases, men prey upon underage girls in prostitution rings who are forced sex slaves. We know that Americans are traveling abroad as part of the sex tourism industry in large numbers. Sadly, it is estimated that there are more than 25 organized sex tour companies based in Miami, New York, and San Diego alone. Current law states that a person can only be held liable for traveling internationally to engage in sex with a minor if prosecutors can prove he intended to do so before leaving this country. As you might imagine, proving intent in such cases is extremely difficult, basically creating a loophole in the law for men who go abroad to have sex with minors, which in the United States is considered statutory rape. Thankfully, Chairman Sensenbrenner's bill will close this intent loophole in the sex tourism industry. While the ``Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000,'' seeks to punish those running sex trafficking rings and nations that fail to combat human trafficking, the enaction of H.R. 4477 into law will give law enforcement officials the additional powers they need in prosecuting the accomplices of the sex traffickers, those who feed into the industry abroad by paying for sex with minors or other illicit sexual conduct with another person. Last week, I chaired the International Relations Committee's hearing on the recently released State Department's annual Trafficking in Person's Report. This report ranks countries based on their efforts to combat trafficking, placing them in three different tiers. Countries that fail to take even minimal steps to combat trafficking and are placed on the lowest tier, Tier 3, and will be ineligible to receive non-humanitarian foreign assistance, beginning with the foreign aid budget for FY 2004. Although some progress has been made, much, much work still needs to be done as the exploitation and bondage of young girls in the sex industry continues to run rampant both in this country and throughout the world. At our hearing, videos were played by human rights groups showing girls as young as 8 and 9 years old being rescued from sex trafficking rings in India and Cambodia. While this is practically unimaginable for decent people to fathom, those involved with the sex industry reason that the younger the girl, the less chance of her infecting the sex tourist with HIV/AIDS. Sadly we know that many Americans go abroad to prey on young girls in other countries because laws protecting women are very weak, non- existent, or not enforced. I was recently presented a videotape containing undercover footage taken by FOX News near an American military installation in South Korea that shows American military personnel on assignment patrolling establishments where their fellow soldiers were soliciting sex from forced prostitutes. As Chairman of the House Veteran's Affairs Committee, I have the greatest respect for the men and women who serve in the United States military and it greatly saddens me to report on this case in South Korea before this chamber. A number of my colleagues have joined me in signing a letter to Secretary Rumsfeld asking him to conduct a full investigation into this case. We must expect the absolute best from the men and women who serve our country while living in foreign countries, both when they are on and off duty. We must also expect any American traveling or living abroad to abide by the standards of decency and respect for women we maintain and set by our laws here in the U.S.--standards we attempt to promote throughout the world through our foreign policy and diplomacy. As members of Congress, we must continue to fight against the exploitation of women and children through sex trafficking until every person imprisoned in the sex industry is set free. Again, I commend Chairman Sensenbrenner for his leadership on this issue.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, last week I participated in a ceremony commemorating the anniversary of the original GI Bill, and its principal author Mr. Harry Colmery of The American Legion. First enacted in 1944, the GI Bill has helped over 20 million Americans reach their educational goals, and in the process helped transform our Nation. Michael J. Bennett, the author of the book, ``When Dreams Came True: The GI Bill and the Making of Modern America,'' spoke at that ceremony and I want to commend his remarks to all of my colleagues: Mr. Dooley, my favorite political philosopher, had this to say about Americans: ``We're a great people we are, and the greatest thing about us is that we know we are.'' I wonder about that. We are a great people--and we know it, but I'm not sure we know why we are. We are a democratic people, citizens of the world's first truly democratic republic. And we are a practical, sensible people; indeed, our national philosophy is often called pragmatism. Yet, all too often, we seem to believe we are great because our Presidents are great, elected leaders whose wisdom is exceeded only by their power, and we are practical and sensible because we study their words and follow their example. If you believe that, you're in the wrong place today. Franklin Delano Roosevelt preferred an Economic Bill of Rights for everyone in return for everyone, women as well as men, being subject to a universal draft. America got the GI Bill of Rights instead because of the man we're belatedly honoring today. And that is the best proof we have that democracy itself, the wisdom of ordinary people, is what has made us great--and will make us even greater still if we follow the example, in deeds as well as words, of Harry Colmery. For it was Harry Colmery, who crafted the GI Bill of Rights in Room 570 of the Mayflower Hotel over the Christmas- New Year's holidays of 1943-1944. In just a few short weeks--and in the little more than six months it took the Legion, Hearst newspaper reporters and editors and Congressional allies in Congress to get the Bill through the House and Senate--these men, and one woman, made modern America possible. And they did so, despite FDR, and the vociferous opposition of the nation's elite, the best and brightest of the time. The GI Bill will turn the nation's colleges and universities into ``educational hobo jungles,'' Robert Maynard Hutchins, president of the University of Chicago, warned. The Bill will benefit ``the least qualified of the wartime generation,'' moaned James Conant, the president of Harvard, who rallied academic opposition to the Bill in Congress. And he might have prevailed. But Rep. Edith Nourse Rogers of Massachusetts was shrewd enough to use a Southern segregationist to potentially expose the proper Bostonian as a hypocrite to the improper Bostonian readers of The Boston Record-American. That's just one improbable--but true--anecdote in a story full of improbabilities, but then, everything about the GI Bill is improbable unless you believe that democracy can sometimes, rarely but sometimes, be the best of all possible governments. And that's what makes the GI Bill truly wonderful, a story full of real wonder and authentic inspiration. For this was a bill conceived in democracy and dedicated to the proposition that those called upon to die for their country, if need be, are the best qualified to make it work, if given the opportunity. And make the Bill work, the men and women who proudly identified themselves as GI's did. They did so despite the fact that the politically correct Pentagon advised newspaper and magazine editors that the word GI, an acronym for general or government issue is, and I quote, ``dehumanizing, demeaning and disrespectful.'' The GI Bill became the catalyst of America as an essentially middle-class society, and the seedbed of the civil rights movement as GI's built the suburbs, transformed arsenals of mass destruction into industries of mass consumption, and democratized higher education, even getting Conant to admit the GI's were ``the best students Harvard has ever had.'' There's a profound lesson here for all of us, one that transcends the pieties of the left and the banalities of the right; liberal ends are best achieved by conservative means. Capitalism can be democratic. Merit should be determined as much by actual deeds as by test scores. We live in an era of growing rather than lessening class distinctions. Those who go to the college of hard knocks can only expect hard times. And those who are the smartest graduates of the best schools experience little more than virtual reality. In these times, as in World War II, the military is the best preparatory school for life, higher education and citizenship. Everyone profits. The $14.5 billion cost of the WWII Bill was paid by additional taxes on the increased income of the GI recipients by 1960. Without the prosperity--and social peace--engendered by the GI Bill, America couldn't have afforded the Marshall Plan's $12.5 billion. Indeed, the GI Bill, rooted in eternal verities of individual aspiration and political reality, is a far better model for international development than the Marshall Plan. The authors of the GI Bill were World War I veterans who kept faith with their children, the veterans of WWII. That made possible the peaceful end in 1989 of the 20th century World War that began in 1914. Now, nine months after the massacres of September 2001, we are engaged in a war on terror that will, undoubtedly, last at least as long as WWI and WWII, if not much of the 21st century. Unfortunately, we didn't keep faith--as much as we should have--with the veterans of Korea and Vietnam, especially the Vietnam veterans. We didn't adequately respect their service, and sufficiently encourage their potential. But perhaps, starting with this dedication, we're beginning to learn the practical, sensible, and, yes, pragmatic lesson of the WWII bill. We owe the young men and women who are--and will be-- our protectors in this long, shadowy conflict no less than a moral--and a financial--equivalent of the WWII GI Bill. We don't just owe it to them; we owe it to ourselves.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce a resolution that expresses deep concern about ongoing violations of human rights in Kazakhstan. President Nursultan Nazarbaev, the authoritarian leader of this energy-rich country, has been flagrantly flouting his OSCE commitments on democratization, human rights, and the rule of law, and thumbing his nose at Washington as well. In the 106th Congress, there was a near unanimous vote in the House for a resolution I introduced voicing dismay about general trends in Central Asia. We sent a strong signal to leaders and opposition groups alike in the region about where we stand. Since then, the overall situation has not gotten better--throughout the region, super presidents continue to dominate their political systems. But their drive to monopolize wealth and power while most people languish in poverty is finally producing a backlash. Today in Central Asia, things are stirring for the first time in a decade. Even in quasi-Stalinist Turkmenistan, an opposition movement-in-exile led by former high ranking government officials has emerged which openly proclaims its intention of getting rid of dictator Saparmurat Niyazov. In Kyrgyzstan, disturbances in March, when police killed six protesters calling for the release of a jailed parliamentarian, were followed by larger demonstrations that forced President Akaev in May to dismiss his government. The iron-fisted Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan, under considerable pressure from Washington, has made some limited concessions to domestic and international public opinion, sentencing policemen to prison terms for torturing detainees and formally lifting censorship. In Kazakhstan, however, President Nursultan Nazarbaev has reacted differently to domestic pressure and to Washington's calls for reforms to keep repression from breeding terrorism. Since last fall, Nazarbaev has cracked down hard, when his position became a little shakier. First we saw squabbles within the ruling--or should I say, ``royal''?--family burst out into the open when Nazarbaev demoted his powerful son-in-law. Then a new opposition movement emerged, headed by former officials who called for urgent reforms. Two of the leaders of that movement are now in prison. Subsequently, Kazakhstan's prime minister had to acknowledge the existence of $1 billion stashed in a Swiss bank account under Nazarbaev's name. Some of the few opposition legislators allowed into parliament have demanded more information about the money and about any other possible hoards in foreign banks. This would be a scandal in any country. But with a consistency worthy of a nobler goal, Nazarbaev's regime has for years stifled the opposition and independent media. And as detailed in a recent Washington Post story, which I ask to be inserted for the Record, Kazakh authorities have recently intensified their assault on those few remaining outlets, employing methods that can only be described as grotesque and revolting. In one case, the editor of an opposition newspaper found a decapitated dog hanging outside her office. Attached to a screwdriver stuck into its body was a message that read ``there won't be a next time.'' On May 23, the State Department issued a statement expressing ``deep concern'' that these assaults ``suggest an effort to intimidate political opposition leaders in Kazakhstan and the independent media and raise serious questions about the safety of the independent media in Kazakhstan.'' That statement did not have the desired effect--last week, someone left a human skull on a staircase in the building where the editorial office of another newspaper is located. Mr. Speaker, after September 11, the U.S. Government moved to consolidate relationships with Central Asian states, seeking cooperation in the battle with terrorism. But Washington also made plain that we expected to see some reform in these entrenched dictatorships, or we would all have to deal with consequences in the future. Nursultan Nazarbaev has ignored this call. Increasingly nervous about revelations of high-level corruption, he is obviously determined to do anything necessary to remain in power and to squelch efforts to inform Kazakhstan's public of his misdeeds. But even worse, he seems convinced that he can continue with impunity as his goons brutally threaten and assault the brave men and women who risk being journalists in a country so hostile to free speech. Mr. Speaker, against this backdrop, I am introducing this resolution, which expresses concern about these trends, calls on Kazakhstan's leadership to observe its OSCE commitments and urges the U.S. Government to press Kazakhstan more seriously. I hope my colleagues will support this resolution and I look forward to their response. [Washington Post Foreign Service, Mon., June 10, 2002] New Repression in Kazakhstan Journalists Targeted After President Implicated in Scandal (By Peter Baker) Almaty, Kazakhstan.--The message could not have been clearer even without the note. In the courtyard of Irina Petrushova's opposition newspaper office, a decapitated dog was hung by its paws, a green-handled screwdriver plunged into its torso with a computer-printed warning attached to it. ``There won't be a next time.'' The dog's missing head was left along with a similar note at Petrushova's house. Three nights later, someone threw three molotov cocktails into her office and burned it to the ground. The political climate in this oil-rich former Soviet republic has taken a decidedly ominous turn in recent weeks, ever since the revelation that the country's president, Nursultan Nazarbayev, secretly stashed $1 billion of state money in a Swiss bank account 6 years ago. As the scandal blossomed, opposition leaders were suddenly arrested, newspapers and television stations shut down, and critical journalists beaten in what foes of the government consider a new wave of repression. What inspectors and regulators have not accomplished, mysterious vandals have. One of the country's leading television stations was knocked off the air when its cable was sliced in the middle of the night. Shortly after it was repaired, the cable was rendered useless again when someone shot through it. ``Everything that's been achieved over the last 10 years, it's been wiped out,'' Petrushova lamented. ``This political system we have is still Soviet,'' said Yevgeny Zhovits, director of the Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and the Rule of Law. ``By its spirit, by its nature, by its attitude toward personal freedom, it's still Soviet.'' The tale of intrigue emerging in Kazakhstan, while familiar across the former Soviet Union, takes on special significance in Central Asia, a region that has become far more important to the United States as it fights a war in nearby Afghanistan. The case also sheds some light on the tangled world of oil, money and politics in a country with massive energy reserves. The U.S. Embassy and the State Department have issued statements condemning the pattern of events and fretting about the state of democracy in a country still run by its last Communist boss. But many reformers in Kazakhstan worry that the West has effectively turned its eyes away from human rights abuses to maintain the international coalition against terrorism. ``All this is happening with the silent consent of the West,'' said Assylbeck Kozhakhmetov, a leading figure in Democratic Choice for Kazakhstan, an opposition party founded last year. Until Sept. 11, Nazarbayev's government worried about offending the West, he noted, but not anymore. ``The ostrich party of Western democracies actually unties the hands of dictators.'' Nazarbayev, a burly, 61-year-old former steel mill blast- furnace operator, has run this giant, dusty country of 17 million people with an authoritarian style. Nazarbayev was a former member of the Soviet Politburo who took over as head of the republic in 1990, became president after independence in 1991, and continued to dominate Kazakhstan through uncompetitive elections and a referendum extending his term. His relationship with oil companies has prompted investigations in Switzerland and the United States as prosecutors in both countries probe whether an American lobbyist helped steer millions of dollars in oil commissions to him and other Kazakh leaders. The long-brewing questions about such transfers and rumors of foreign bank accounts erupted into a full-blown scandal in April when Nazarbayev's prime minister admitted to parliament that the president diverted $1 billion to a secret Swiss bank account in 1996. The money came from the sale that year of a 20 percent stake in the valuable Tengiz offshore oil fields to Chevron. The prime minister, Imangali Tasmagambetov, said that Nazarbayev had sent the money abroad because he worried that such a large infusion of cash into Kazakhstan would throw the currency into a tailspin. Although he never disclosed the secret fund to parliament, Nazarbayev used it twice to help stabilize the country during subsequent financial crises, Tasmagambetov said. In an inter-view last week, a top government official dismissed the significance of the revelation and the resulting furor. ``The so-called Kazakh-gate, the government officially explained this,'' said Ardak Doszham, the deputy minister of information. ``There was a special reserve account set up by the government. It's a normal account that can be managed by officials appointed by the government. It's not managed by individuals. The money that goes into it is state money, and it's supposed to be used to meet the needs of the state.'' Asked who knew about it, Doszham could identify only three men, Nazarbayev, the prime minister and the chairman of the national bank. Asked why lawmakers were never informed, he said, ``It was impossible to raise this issue before parliament because it would have elicited many questions.'' But opposition leaders and journalists said Nazarbayev finally revealed the account this spring only after they pushed Swiss prosecutors for information. The opposition and journalists said they believe the president announced the $1 billion fund only as a smoke screen to obscure other matters still under investigation by the Swiss and U.S. prosecutors. ``All around there is bribe-taking and stealing and mafia,'' said Serikbolsyn Abdildin, the head of the Communist Party and one of two parliament deputies whose information request to prosecutors preceded the announcement. ``There's corruption in the top echelon of power.'' The disclosure of the $1 billion Swiss fund was designed to ``fool public opinion,'' he said. The disclosures have coincided with an escalating series of troublesome incidents for those who do not defer to the government. Just days before Tasmagambetov's speech to parliament, Kazakh authorities arrested opposition politician Mukhtar Abilyazov, while his colleague, Ghalymzhan Zhaqiyanov, avoided a similar fate only by fleeing into the French Embassy here in Almaty, the former capital, two days later. After assurances from Kazakh authorities, he left the embassy, and promptly was also taken into custody. The government insisted it was pursuing embezzlement charges against the two, both founding members of Democratic Choice. The opposition called it blatant harassment. Other opposition figures began to feel the heat as well. While independent media in Kazakhstan have often experienced difficulty in the decade since independence, a string of frightening episodes convinced many journalists that they were being targeted. The government began enforcing a five-year-old law requiring television stations to ensure that 50 percent of their broadcasts were aired in the native Kazakh tongue, a language that in practice remains secondary to Russian here. Most television stations cannot afford to develop such programming and prefer to buy off-the-shelf material from Russia, including dubbed Western television shows and movies. As government agents swarmed in and began monitoring channels this spring, they began seizing licenses of those stations that did not comply. Similarly, inspectors showed up at newspaper offices demanding to see registration papers and suspending those publications that did not have everything in order. Some that did not list their addresses properly were abruptly shut down. Printing houses began refusing to publish other papers, and one printing house was burned down in unclear circumstances. Tamara Kaleyeva, president of the International Foundation for Protection of Speech here, said about 20 newspapers have been forced to stop publishing and about 20 television stations have been shut down or face closure. ``It appears the Swiss accounts are the reason for a terrible persecution against free speech,'' she said. Added Rozlana Taukina, president of the Central Asia Independent Mass Media Association, ``The country is turning into an authoritarian regime.'' Doszham, the deputy minister, denied any political motivations behind the recent actions. Television stations had been flouting the language law, he said, and the government has suspended about seven or eight, and gone to court to recall the licenses of another six or seven. Similarly, he said, newspapers had been violating requirements. ``The law is harsh,'' he said, ``but the law is the law.'' Even more harsh, however, has been an unofficial but often violent crackdown. It is not known who is orchestrating it. Bakbytzhan Ketebayev, president of Tan Broadcasting Co., whose Tan TV station was among the best known in Kazakhstan, has been off the air for two months following repeated attacks on his cable. Even after it was repaired following the gunshots, it was damaged yet again when someone drove three nails in it. ``Once it's an accident, twice it may be an accident,'' he said. ``But three times is a trend.'' At the newspaper Soldat, which means soldier in Russian but is also a play on words in Kazakh meaning ``that one demands to speak,'' the assault was more personal. One day in late May, four young men burst into the newspaper office and beat two workers there, bashing one woman's head so hard she remains in the hospital. They also took the computer equipment. Ermuram Bali, the editor, said the attack came the day before the weekly was to run the second of two installments reprinting a Seymour Hersh piece from the New Yorker about oil and corruption in Kazakhstan. ``This is the last warning against you,'' he said the assailants told his staff. Other journalists have been physically attacked as well. And then there was Petrushova and the headless dog. Like Soldat, her newspaper, the Republic Business Review, had written about the scandal. Then the mutilated animal was found May 19, and finally the newspaper office was set aflame on May 22. Petrushova suspects state security agencies were behind the incidents but cannot prove it. ``The throne started to waver, and in order to hold it in place, all sorts of measures are being used,'' she said. Now she works out of borrowed offices at Tan TV headquarters, putting out the newspaper on her own typographical machine and stapling each issue. ``It's just like it was in the time of the Soviet Union.''

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence), for yielding me this time, for taking out this time on this very important Special Order to look at the issue of cloning. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) certainly has been the leader of this historic legislation. He is the prime sponsor of the bill that passed in the House. It ought to be acted on in the other body as soon as possible for the sake of humanity, and for the sake of so many who would be injured irreparably by delay. Delay is denial, and I hope that Mr. Daschle and the leadership on the Senate side will rethink the dilatory tactics they have engaged in to preclude consideration of this important human rights legislation. In the 21st century, bioethical issues, Mr. Speaker, really are the human rights issues, especially in Western democracies like the United States. I have spent 22 years working on human rights issues, including religious freedom and trafficking in persons. I was the prime sponsor of the antitrafficking legislation. Yesterday we had a day-long hearing on this scourge of human trafficking, which injures, hurts and ends in the rape of women; but in countries like the United States, where we have a sophisticated medical capability and a scientific capability, bioethical issues are really a human rights issue. What we do for those prior to birth, those who are fragile, whether it be the issue of abortion or euthanasia or infanticide or, in this case cloning, we need to step up to the plate and not become enablers by inaction. We have become enablers of atrocities and human rights abuses. We cannot stand on the sidelines. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon), our leadership especially, including Speaker Hastert and the rest of our leadership team, and a bipartisan, real healthy majority stepped up to the plate to pass this legislation, and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence) has been a real leader in this Congress on these human rights issues, especially as it relates to the sanctity of human life. Mr. Speaker, just let me say that promoting human cloning for research is indeed shockingly shortsighted, and it lacks a moral basis. I understand the drive to cure debilitating diseases and to improve health care for those who are suffering, because I have been fighting for funding for disease cures for 22 years as a Member of Congress. I would just note parenthetically, I am the co-chairman of the Autism Caucus, I am co-chairman of the Alzheimer's Caucus. As my good friend indicated earlier, I am chairman of the full Committee on Veterans' Affairs. Half of our budget, approximately, is dedicated to health care. We have a significant research budget that we try to use as wisely as possible to help our spinal cord-injured veterans and a whole host of other problems from post-traumatic stress disorder right on through. Let me just say, having fought like the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) and so many others trying to find cures for Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, cancer, lung disease, asthma, spina bifida, autism and a host of other debilitating diseases, it is cruel, I would respectfully submit, it is utterly cruel to tell those who suffer from these diseases that somehow they will be cured through the making of a clone of themselves to cannibalize for parts. It is also cruel to divert limited resources from promising, ethical adult and umbilical stem cell research to unethical, impractical human cloning research. There is only so much money available; and as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) pointed out a moment ago, in the area of regenerative medicine, adult stem cells, embryonic, cord blood, these hold enormous promise that goes underutilized when we go on this fantasy of creating clones. Again, embryonic stem cell research derived from clones is unethical. On the other hand, we have the promise of real breakthroughs and then real application, as we are already doing with adult stem cells and umbilical cord stem cells. This research has no ethical baggage. These provide cures, they provide hope, and they provide rehabilitation and regenerative capabilities. Mr. Speaker, human cloning is not just a slippery slope. It is indeed stepping off a moral cliff. If our government approved human cloning for research, it would be the first time we would sanction the special creation of human life for the sole purpose of destroying it. Not only would we be sanctioning human cloning, we would also have a law that would require the death of those human clones, whether it be at 5 days or 14 days or whatever new arbitrary line would be drawn. Human cloning represents the commodification and eventual commercialization of human life, and it would create a class of human beings who exist not as ends in themselves, like all of us, but as a means to achieve the ends of others. A law that promotes human cloning for research is worse, far worse than no bill at all. Once stockpiles of cloned human embryos are created for research, how realistic will it be really to have an implementation ban? Not only is allowing research cloning immoral, it would also not work. We do not fight the war on drugs by telling the public to manufacture as much cocaine as possible, pile it up in warehouses, but make sure to destroy it before anyone can smoke it or inhale it. If anyone suggested that strategy on the floor of the House, they would be criticized from here to breakfast; but that is exactly what the proponents of human cloning for research are advocating, and with a straight face. In addition, they are not talking about how these human embryo forms would be created. Human embryos, if my colleagues read ``Brave New World'' and can look at the Orwellian visions we have had in the past, they can happen and will happen if the gentleman from Florida's (Mr. Weldon) historic legislation is not enacted and enacted soon. The clock is running out on this, and I just want to say and reiterate what the good doc said a moment ago about the negative impact that this will have on women. If, as the proponents of research cloning claim happens, they will someday be able to cure human beings, which we do not think will happen, but say it does happen, we will see more drugs being used, super-ovulating drugs, to promote this egg harvesting. I want to reiterate what the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) has on his plaque up there which was from, ``Our Bodies, Ourselves for the New Century,'' and it was written by a woman who does not agree with me or many of us on the pro-life issue of the right to life of the unborn, but she points out, Judy Norsigian, ``Because embryo cleaning will compromise women's health, turn their eggs and wombs into commodities, compromise their reproductive autonomy and, with virtual certainty, lead to the production of `experimental' human beings, we are convinced that the line must be drawn here.'' She has joined us, as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) pointed out, a number of other people who have never supported a pro-life piece of legislation to cross the line and say, wait a minute, time out, we are not going to go across that Orwellian line and manufacture human beings for the sole purpose of destroying them and then cannibalizing their remains. This is important human rights legislation that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) has introduced, has gotten passed in the House with a bipartisan majority of both sides. We have got to pass it soon; and again, I call on the Senate, do not be enablers of human rights abuses. We have got to find a way of getting this legislation down to President Bush. He has already signaled clearly and unmistakably, most recently in a White House ceremony, that he will sign this in a heartbeat. We have got to do this for the next generation and for the generations to come.

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 recognize Richard L. Glotfelty, the Associate Executive Director for Veterans Benefits of the Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) on his retirement this month after 23 years of distinguished service for this national veterans service organization. Mr. Glotfelty was born and raised in Eighty-Four, Pennsylvania. He began service with PVA in 1978 as a National Service Officer in the Pittsburgh PVA Service Office. He also served in chapter level positions at the Pittsburgh-based Tri-State PVA Chapter. Following his move to PVA's National Office in Washington, D.C. he served in a variety of senior management positions. In 1990, he was selected to direct PVA's entire veterans benefits operation, the organization's largest department. In this capacity, Mr. Glotfelty oversaw PVA's National Service Officer Program designed to provide local and regional support and assistance to PVA members and all veterans through 141 full-time staff located in 54 field offices nationwide. He was also responsible for the development of extensive training programs for PVA's professional corps of service representatives in both veterans benefits and medical services. These programs allow PVA representatives to provide VA benefits/claims assistance and to monitor the quality and quantity of health care services in VA's Spinal Cord Injury Centers across the country. Mr. Speaker, Richard Glotfelty served in the United States Air Force from 1966 to 1969. A crew chief on an Air Force C-130 aircraft, he sustained a spinal cord injury in the line of duty while conducting air support operations in Thailand during the Vietnam War. During the last 23 years, through Mr. Glotfelty's service and leadership, PVA's veterans service representatives have assisted hundreds of thousand of veterans, their dependents and survivors in applying for and receiving the benefits and medical services they have earned and deserve. He and Paralyzed Veterans of America can be rightly proud of this record of achievement in service to those who have served in defense of the United States of America.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, President Bush has returned from a successful summit in Moscow. As the Cold War recedes more and more into memory, our relations with Russia continue to improve, as they should. Russia has made a significant contribution to the struggle against terrorism since the attacks on the United States last September. While there remain serious differences in the area of human rights, foreign policy, and economics, we should welcome President Putin's ``turn to the West'' and encourage Russia to further integrate into an international community of mutual security, free trade, and democratic structures. Nevertheless, over this summit banquet of warm words about the ``new strategic relationship'' looms a ``Banquo's Ghost'' of tragic and monumental proportions. I refer to the war in Chechnya--the subject of a recent hearing of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, which I co- chair--which continues to wreak havoc and death on combatants and non- combatants alike. The brutality of the so-called ``anti-terrorist operation'' of the Russian military has been amply documented by reputable Russian and international organizations. Bloody military ``sweeps'' of civilian areas, bestial ``filtration camps'' and ``holding pits'' have become hallmarks of what passes for Moscow's military strategy. One month ago, the Helsinki Commission heard chilling testimony from Ms. Aset Chadaeva, a nurse from Chechnya who resided in a community near Grozny, Chechnya's capital. Ms. Chadaeva described an event in February 2000, when the Russian military carried out one of its most notorious ``anti-terrorists'' operations: Young Chechen men living in Chechnya today have two choices: to wage war or to wait for Russian soldiers to arrest or kill them. All three of my brothers were illegally detained by Russian servicemen. One of my brothers-- officially classified as disabled because of his poor eyesight--was severely beaten by Russian soldiers in my presence. When I asked the soldiers why they were arresting him, they told me: ``He's a Chechen! That's reason enough!'' I treated women who had been raped by Russian soldiers, and I've also seen the bodies of women who had been killed after being raped. During both wars, I buried many dead. Bodies were left lying in the streets. I, my brothers, and my neighbors collected them so they wouldn't be eaten by dogs. In February 2001, the remains of over fifty persons were found in a mass grave in a village located less than a mile from the Russian military headquarters in Chechnya. Russian authorities attribute their deaths to Chechen partisans. In 2000 and 2001, the UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva condemned the widespread violence against civilians and alleged violations of human rights and humanitarian law'' by Russian forces. I would note that even Chechen officials who have sided with Moscow in the conflict with the secessionist movement have criticized the reign of terror created by the Russian military in Chechnya. Unfortunately, efforts to have a resolution passed this year at the Human Rights Commission failed with allies and friends casting the swing votes either in opposition to the resolution offered by the European Union or abstaining. The United States does not currently have a seat on the Commission and thus was not voting. A Human Rights Watch report of February 2002 entitled ``Swept Under: Torture, Forced Disappearances, and Extrajudicial Killings During Sweep Operations in Chechnya'' describes the ``sweeps'' conducted by the Russian military in the summer of 2001: Troops rounded up several thousand Chechens, mostly without any form of due process, and took them to temporary military bases in or near the villages. According to eyewitnesses, soldiers extrajudicially executed at least eleven detainees, and at least two detainees ``disappeared'' in detention. . . . Twelve former detainees [gave] detailed testimony of torture and ill-treatment, including electric shocks, severe beatings, and being forced to remain in ``stress position.'' Eyewitnesses also gave testimony about widespread extortion, looting, and destruction of civilian property. Eventually, Russia's top military officer admitted that the troops had committed ``widespread crimes.'' International revulsion against the conduct of these ``sweeps'' was so great that in March of this year, the Russian military introduced ``Order No. 80,'' according to which ``sweeps'' are to be conducted ``only in the presence of procurators but also of the local authorities and the organs of internal affairs,'' and local authorities are to be provided with a list of detainees. However, reports by human rights groups indicate that even these minimal requirements are not being observed on the ground. In a rare admission, the military commander in Chechnya has acknowledged that innocent people have disappeared during the ``sweeps.'' In October 2000, Human Rights Watch issued ``Welcome to Hell,'' a vivid and horrifying description of arbitrary detention, torture and extortion in Chechnya. As described in the report, groups of Chechen non-combatants, usually men of military age, are detained on suspicion of participation or collaboration with Chechen guerrillas, and subjected to brutal and humiliating interrogations. This is the description of the procedure followed at the infamous Chernokozovo prison: Detainees at Chernokozovo were beaten both during interrogation and during nighttime sessions when guards utterly ran amok. During interrogation, detainees were forced to crawl on the ground and were beaten so severely that some sustained broken ribs and injuries to their kidneys, liver, testicles, and feet. Some were also tortured with electric shocks. In many cases, a detainee was released only after relatives or a loved one paid a bribe to his captors. In other cases, the detainee simply disappeared. Chechnya is filled today with desperate souls seeking word of their missing loved ones who are presumed dead. Even if the Russian Government manages to create a graveyard in Chechnya and call it peace, it will be a Pyrrhic victory, sowing the seeds of social disintegration in Russia. The prominent Russian joumalist and military analyst Pavel Felgenhauer has written, ``The complete impunity of the military leaders is leading to the moral decay of their subordinates.'' He concludes that ``the war in Chechnya is serving to destroy both the armed forces and the [Russian] state.'' Mr. Speaker, these comments should not be seen as an endorsement of Chechen separatism, and we must frankly admit that some Chechen partisans have been linked with international terrorist organizations who see Chechnya as a staging ground for ``jihad'' against Moscow. I am fully aware of the depredations visited upon the people of the North Caucasus by marauding kidnappers, highjackers and terrorists. According to press reports, some Chechen guerrillas have executed ``traitors'' who work for the pro-Moscow administration in Chechnya. But this does not absolve the Government of Russia from having to live up to basic standards of conduct such as the Geneva Conventions and the Code of Conduct of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. ``Anti-terrorist operations'' and ``territorial integrity'' are not synonymous with waging total and barbaric war against one's own citizens. How many more bodies will show up in mass graves? How many young Russian soldiers' bodies will be sent homes to grieving parents in Russia? How many more displaced persons will spend another winter in tents? The Administration has called upon Chechnya's leadership to ``immediately and unconditionally cut all contacts with international terrorist groups, while calling for ``accountability for [human rights] violations on all sides,'' and a political solution to the conflict. I urge the Administration to continue to use every appropriate opportunity to condemn human rights violations in Chechnya, and impress upon Moscow the need for a just political solution. I trust that the return of the United States to the UN Human Rights Committee in Geneva will afford one more such opportunity. The last leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, once called Afghanistan a ``bleeding wound.'' Chechnya is now the ``bleeding wound'' for the Russian Federation. I say this as someone who wishes Russia and the people of Russia to prosper. The time for a cease-fire and serious negoitiations is at hand.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support of H. Con. Res. 213 regarding the plight of North Korean refugees inside of China. I want to thank the chief sponsor, the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), for introducing this important resolution nearly a year ago, long before this issue had hit the U.S. press. I also want to thank him for accepting language that I suggested that goes into more detail about the human rights situation inside of North Korea, and, most importantly, language that urges the State Department to begin work now and draft and pass a North Korea human rights resolution at next year's session of the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva. It is amazing to me that such a deplorable situation has received so little attention from the international community. That shameful silence must end. Mr. Speaker, as has been described by my colleagues, hundreds of thousands of North Koreans are inside China today having fled from starvation and brutal repression inside of North Korea. Although many of them have left in search of food, many of them are genuine refugees. Many more of them, however, have become refugees because of the persecution that they would face if forcibly returned. North Koreans who attempt to escape to third countries or who have contact with South Korean or missionary groups while in China face execution or imprisonment in labor camps in North Korea. As the front page of yesterday's New York Times pointed out, pregnant women returned to North Korea are forced to undergo abortions or their babies are killed once they are born. I will include that article for the Record. At the ground breaking hearing, Mr. Speaker, convened by the gentleman from Iowa (Chairman Leach) of the Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific last month, we heard from three credible North Korean defectors who described the unbelievable brutality of the Pyongyang regime and the hardships those witnesses endured as refugees inside of China. Two of the witnesses were rare survivors of North Korea's concentration camps, where nearly 200,000 of their countrymen and women are being held today. These camps are places where prisoners are worked or starved to death, where Christians are killed by torture, where people attempting to escape are publicly shot or dragged to death behind trucks, where newborn babies are killed in front of their mothers, and where prisoners are used as guinea pigs for chemical weapons experiments. The Korean people in the north are suffering unspeakable evil at the hands of Kim Jong Il. Mr. Speaker, as a party to the U.N. refugee convention, China has bound itself not to return North Koreans who face a well-founded fear of persecution. However, for much of the past year, Chinese authorities have conducted a crackdown against North Korean refugees. They have routinely rounded up many North Koreans and forcibly sent them back to uncertain and sometimes deadly fates. North Korean undercover agents are active inside China helping to capture and return escapees. Mr. Speaker, I urge strong supports for this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I include the New York Times article, ``Defectors From North Korea Tell of Prison Baby Killings'' for the Record. [From the New York Times, June 10, 2002] Defectors From North Korea Tell of Prison Baby Killings (By James Brooke) Seoul, South Korea.--On a cold March day, the bleak monotony of a North Korean prison work detail was broken when a squad of male guards arrived and herded new women prisoners together. One by one, they were asked if they were pregnant. ``They took them away in a car, and then forcibly gave them abortion shots,'' Song Myung Hak, 33, a former prisoner, recalled in a interview here about the day two years ago when six pregnant prisoners were taken from his work unit in the Shinuiju Provincial Detention Camp. ``After the miscarriage shots, the women were forced back to work.'' More and more escapees from North Korea are asserting that forced abortions and infanticide are the norm in North Korean prisons, charges the country's official Korean Central News Agency has denounced as ``a whopping lie.'' In 2000 and 2001, China deported thousands of North Korean refugees, with many ending up in North Korean prison camps. People who later managed to escape again, to China and South Korea, say that prisoners discovered to be pregnant were routinely forced to have abortions. If babies were born alive, they say, guards forced prisoners to kill them. Earlier defectors from North Korea say that the prohibition on pregnancy in prisons dates back at least to the 1980's, and that forced abortions or infanticide were the rule. Until recently, though, instances of pregnancy in the prisons were rare. China's deportations of thousands of illegal migrants from North Korea in recent years has resulted in a sharp increase in the number of pregnant women ending up in North Korean prisons. Defectors, male and female, are reviled as traitors and counterrevolutionaries when they are returned to North Korea. But women who have become pregnant, especially by Chinese men, face special abuse. ``Several hundred babies were killed last year in North Korean prisons,'' said Willy Fautre, director of Human Rights Without Frontiers, a private group based in Brussels. Mr. Fautre said that over the last 18 months, he and his volunteers had interviewed 35 recent escapees from North Korean camps. Of the 35, he said, 31 said they had witnessed babies killed by abandonment or being smothered with plastic sheets. Two defectors later described burying dead babies, and two said they were mothers who saw their newborns put to death. ``This is a systematic procedure carried out by guards, and the people in charge of the prisons--these are not isolated cases,'' Mr. Fautre said in a telephone interview. ``The pattern is to identify women who are pregnant, so the camp authorities can get rid of the babies through forced abortion, torture or very hard labor. If they give birth to a baby alive, the general policy is to let the baby die or to help the baby die with a plastic sheet.'' Lee Soon Ok, who worked as an accountant for six years at Kaechon political prison, recalled in an interview that she twice saw prison doctors kill newborn babies, sometimes by stepping on their necks. With virtually no medical care available for prisoners, surgical abortions were not an option. Ms. Lee, 54 and an economic researcher in Seoul, said: ``Giving birth in prison is 100 percent prohibited. That is why they kill those babies.'' Ms. Lee, who has written a book about her prison experiences, seeks to focus attention on North Korea's prison system. On May 2, she was one of three North Korean defectors who testified on human rights abuses at a hearing of the House International Relations Committee. On Jan. 19, North Korea's official news agency said the charges by Human Rights Without Borders that ``unborn and newly born babies are being killed in concentration camps'' were ``nothing but a plot deliberately hatched by it to hurl mud'' at North Korea. Since then, accusations of baby killing in North Korean prisons have increased. They were featured in February at a human rights conference on North Korea, in Tokyo, and in March the claims were included for the first time in the State Department's annual human rights report on North Korea. They were raised in April by European Union delegates to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and in May by a former North Korean prisoner who testified before a House committee. North Korea's mission to the United Nations did not return telephone messages about the charges. But on May 9, at the United Nations conference on children in New York, the North Korean delegate said his nation regarded each child as a ``king of the country.'' But recent interviews with seven defectors now living in the Seoul area provided a detailed and different picture of North Korean prison camps. All of the recent defectors except one, Mr. Song, allowed publication of only their family names, which are common Korean surnames. These four said they feared reprisals against relatives in the North. Two defectors, who had escaped almost a decade ago after working in the prison camp system, allowed their full names to be used. The defectors' names and phone numbers were supplied by Human Rights Without Borders. They were interviewed individually, in their homes, without human rights or government officials present. South Korea's government, seeking to avoid conflict with the North, discourages defectors from speaking out. In her Seoul apartment, Mrs. Lee, 64 and no relation to Lee Song Ok, said she was still haunted by memories of prison after being deported from China in 2000. Mrs. Lee who is the widow of a North Korean general, recalled thinking that she had won an easy job in the clinic after arriving on June 14, 2000, at the Pyongbuk Provincial Police Detention Camp. Then, she said, she saw a prison doctor give injections to eight pregnant women to induce labor. ``The first time, a baby was born, I didn't know there was a wooden box for throwing babies away,'' Mrs. Lee recalled. ``I got the baby and tried to wrap it in clothes. But the security people told me to get rid of it in the wooden box.'' That day, she said, she delivered six dead babies and two live ones. She said she watched a doctor open the box and kill the two live babies by piercing their skulls with surgical scissors. The next day, she said, she helped to deliver 11 dead babies from 20 pregnant women who had been injected to induce delivery. In 2000, from March to May, 8,000 North Korean defectors, overwhelmingly women, were deported from China to North Korea during a crackdown on prostitution and forced marriages, according to D. K. Park, a retired United Nations worker who works with Human Rights Without Frontiers along the border between North Korea and China. ``They blame North Korean women for having Chinese babies and just kill the babies,'' Mr. Song, now a college student in Seoul, said of his time in Shinuiju prison in 2000. Mrs. Park, 41, no relation to the rights worker, said she was among those caught in a Chinese sweep two years ago, ending up in a work camp in Onsong, North Korea. She was nine months pregnant at the time. ``One day, they gave me a big injection,'' she said. ``In about 30 minutes I went into labor. The baby I delivered at the detention camp was already dead.'' For babies born alive in prison cells, defectors say, male guards threaten to beat women prisoners if they do not smother newborns with pieces of wet plastic that are thrown between the bars. ``Guards told the prisoners to kill the babies,'' recalled Miss Lee, a 33-year-old vocational student who is unrelated to the accountant and the general's widow. She said that in 2000, as she was moved among four camps, she saw four babies smothered at the Onsong District Labor Camp in April, and three smothered at the Chongjin Provincial Police Detention Camp in late May. ``The oldest woman in the cell did it reluctantly,'' she said. ``The young women were scared. The mothers would just cry in silence.'' Miss Lee, a former factory worker who survived in China through marriage to an ethnic Korean Chinese, estimated that 70 percent of the people she saw deported from China in the spring of 2000 were women, and about one-third were pregnant. In the summer of 2001, a 28-year-old former North Korean border guard surnamed Kim was imprisoned at the same Chongjin detention camp. There, he buried three newborn babies wrapped in ``blue-tinted plastic bags.'' He recalled, ``The prisoners were ordered to get the babies coming from the mothers and to kill them.'' His wife, a 25-year-old day-care worker in Seoul, said in the same interview at their apartment here that during her 10 weeks at the same camp last summer, she counted seven babies born and smothered in nearby cells. The current wave of reported baby killings has nationalistic overtones. ``The guards would scream at us: `You are carrying Chinese sperm, from foreign countries. We Koreans are one people, how dare you bring this foreign sperm here,' '' Miss Lee, the vocational student, recalled. ``Most of the fathers were Chinese.'' But two decades before pregnant refugees were forced home from China, infanticide was standard practice in the North Korean prison system, a former guard said in an interview near here. ``Ever since Kim II Sung's time, it has been a North Korean regulation to prevent women from delivering babies in prisons,'' said Ahn Myung Chul, a 33-year-old bank employee, who worked as a guard from 1987 to 1994 in four North Korean camps. Mr. Ahn, who also trained guards, added in an interview: ``If babies have to be delivered, babies have to be killed. The trainers told military personnel that this is the procedure.'' Foreign journalists traveling inside North Korea are restricted to tightly guided tours, and requests by the International Committee of the Red Cross to visit prisons are routinely rejected. ``Those of us inside the country have no knowledge of the existence of prison camps or practices inside them,'' Richard Bridle, the Unicef representative in North Korea's capital, Pyongyang, said by telephone. Asked about infanticide policies, he said: ``The only stories we get are from outside. There is no information circulating inside'' North Korea. North Korea's prison camp system currently holds about 200,000 people in conditions so brutal that an estimated 400,000 people have died in prison since 1972, according to the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, a private group based in Washington. ``Nothing would surprise in accounts of this kind,'' Selig S. Harrison, the director of the national security program at the Center for International Policy, in Washington, and an expert on North Korea, Mr. Harrison, a seven-time visitors to Pyongyang, added: ``North Korea is a repressive, repugnant, totalitarian state, and it certainly uses repugnant methods in its prison system and in its concentration camps.''

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for his comments and his contribution to this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the distinguished gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella).

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. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, before yielding back the balance of my time, there are a number of people to thank again. I mentioned the Members earlier on. I would like to thank Peter Smith of our distinguished staff; Joseph Rees; Andy Napoli and George Phillips, who worked on this legislation; Nisha Desai, who also worked very hard on the bill; Jed D'Ercole, from the staff of the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer), for his work as well; and also Mr. Dan Freeman, who is our parliamentarian extraordinaire, who was also very, very helpful in crafting this legislation.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4073) to amend the Microenterprise for Self- Reliance Act of 2000 and the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to increase assistance for the poorest people in developing countries under microenterprise assistance programs under those Acts, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise to present H.R. 4073, the Microenterprise Enhancement Act of 2002, to the House. This important anti-poverty legislation reforms, enhances, and expands microenterprise programs throughout the world and authorizes $375 million over 2 years for this incredible initiative. I would like to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) for his very strong and steadfast support of this legislation and commend him for the great leadership that he has shown on so many foreign policy and humanitarian issues, especially since September 11. I would also like to thank my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer), our leading Democratic cosponsor, whose tremendous efforts greatly influenced and helped shape this important piece of legislation. This has been a great team effort, and again I want to thank him for his extraordinary work and leadership. The support of both the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), our committee's ranking member, and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the chairman emeritus, have also been important. I would also like to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), and the nearly 80 other cosponsors for their support of this endeavor. Mr. Speaker, the impact of microenterprise on entrepreneurs and borrowers in the developing world cannot be estimated and overstated. Over 2 million clients are currently benefitting from AID-assisted programs, and since its inception, millions more have been empowered by microenterprise services. Like many of my colleagues, and like I think Members of the other body, I have been at times critical of some of our Nation's foreign aid programs, because some of the money never really ends up reaching the people that that money is intended to reach. One of the reasons I am so enthusiastic about microenterprise programs is because they are fundamentally different than traditional foreign aid programs. They are based on a bottom-up, grass roots approach rather than a top-down model. Microenterprise programs have demonstrated very impressive results. An estimated 97 percent of the loans are actually repaid. Contrast that to some of our own domestic lending programs, and the difference is rather stark. Studies on the effects of microenterprise programs find they promote higher household income and increased family well-being, including improved nutrition and education among children. In the past 2 fiscal years, we have spent $155 million, which has been authorized by Congress for microfinance. I am proud to say that this legislation we are considering today will expand that to $175 million for fiscal year 2003, and $200 million for fiscal year 2004. Our legislation will also ensure that more funds go to the poorest of the poor, or as we now define it, the very poor, including those living on less than $1 a day. Although previous legislation has stipulated that 50 percent of the funds will go to the poorest of the poor, efforts to target funding to the neediest persons has been insufficient because AID essentially uses only a single measurement tool to evaluate its poverty outreach efforts, and that is to say, average loan size. With currency values varying from country to country, and loan size dependent on the type of business a person is attempting to start, this has not been a sufficient measure, has not been an accurate barometer of poverty. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4073, as amended, would require AID to devise new, more meaningful poverty-assessment tools and give consideration to low- cost, easy-to-implement tools already in use by the microfinance institutions. Moreover, AID will have a deadline of October 1, 2004, to certify and utilize at least two additional poverty-assessment techniques that can better evaluate who the poorest actually are and ensure that they receive their fair share of the funds provided under this act. A main reason for the success of the microenterprise programs is that the assistance goes directly to those who need our help. It provides vital capital for small business owners to strive and achieve their dreams. It helps build sound financial institutions on the grassroots level that foster self-sufficiency. A loan of several hundred dollars or less, which by our standards might be considered quite small, is often a substantial portion of a person's yearly earnings in the developing world. Such a loan can help an entrepreneur businessman or businesswoman increase their profits many-fold, making a better life for themselves and their families for many years to come. Take the example of Baulia Parra Pruneda of Monterrey, Mexico, one of the many successful recipients of a microenterprise loan. When her husband lost his job in 1998, she was determined to support her six children. Even though she had never worked before and could not read or write, she taught herself to sew by following designs that she saw in magazines. A $150 loan from a lending institution supported by ACCION, one of the leading microfinance institutions in the Americas, provided capital for her to purchase the necessary supplies to launch her endeavor into self-sufficiency. After building her small business through a series of microloans, she now sells over 100 items per week. The money she earns and continues to make not only provides food for her children, but has also enabled her to install a toilet and a shower, as well as a second floor in her home. As inspiring as Braulia's story is, it is not unique. When given the opportunity and the seed capital to produce, people can turn their economic situation around in a dramatic way. The goal now is to build on past successes that have reached tens of thousands of people and apply lessons learned to devising a better program. Mr. Speaker, it is worth noting that approximately 70 percent of microenterprise beneficiaries are women, so this initiative is key to reversing the feminization of poverty. I would note that later today, probably by early tomorrow, the report on trafficking will be issued pursuant to the trafficking legislation that we passed last year. I was the prime sponsor of that bill. We worked very hard in a bipartisan way. The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) worked on it, and so many others, to ensure that we crack down on this terrible scourge called trafficking. But one of the core reasons why women can be preyed upon and trafficked into prostitution and other involuntary servitude has been poverty. They have been exploited because they are vulnerable. This legislation is part of the effort to give women the opportunity to take care of themselves, as well as their families. Mr. Speaker, let me say finally, the greatest antipoverty program will always be a job. This is all about job creation, one village at a time, one community at a time, one family at a time. It is a very important piece of legislation, it is bipartisan at the outset; and I hope all Members will support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 4073, the bill under consideration.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the call of the Private Calendar be dispensed with today.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform my colleagues about a very special event that will take place this Monday, May 27th, Memorial Day, in Cooperstown, New York. In a special ceremony, on the day in which we honor America's fallen heroes, the National Baseball Hall of Fame will take time out to honor the 64 members of Baseball's Hall of Fame who served honorably in our nation's armed forces. Mr. Speaker, as a nation, we remember and honor the dedicated service of all veterans who have worn the uniform of the United States, including those without the famous sobriquets or the notoriety of our baseball legends. As a fan and amateur player, I have long cherished baseball and those who played the game. As Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the United States House of Representatives, I have the privilege of working every day on behalf of America's veterans. That is why I am so pleased that the Hall of Fame has chosen to hold this remembrance. During a special ceremony on Monday at Cooperstown, a plaque will be erected in the Hall of Fame Gallery to permanently honor these veterans who earned baseball's highest recognition. In announcing this event, Dale Petroskey, president of the National Baseball Hall of Fame, explained its purpose: ``Since the first pitch was thrown, baseball history has been intertwined with American history . . . during World War II, some 95 percent of all major leaguers registered for active duty, including its biggest stars. Hall of Fame members who put themselves in harm's way and sacrificed some of their most productive baseball years join a special category we call true national heroes. This plaque represents their sacrifice and bravery and reminds us of all Americans who have fought--and are continuing to fight--for freedom.'' Mr. Speaker, among the 64 veterans being honored this coming Monday are five veterans of World War II who will be in attendance: Warren Spahn, Bobby Doerr, Bob Feller, Ralph Kiner, and Phil Rizzuto. Warren Spahn, of Buffalo, New York, was elected to the Hall of Fame in 1973. A left handed batter and pitcher for the Boston-Milwaukee Braves, Mr. Spahn had 363 career wins, led the National League in wins eight times, and was awarded the Cy Young award in 1957 as baseball's most outstanding pitcher. In his 21-year long career, he was voted an all-star 14 times, pitched two no-hitters, and holds the National League record for total number of innings pitched. Mr. Spahn missed the 1943, 1944, and 1945 major league seasons while serving courageously in the United States Army. During his service, he was awarded the Purple Heart and Bronze Star. Bobby Doerr, known as ``the silent captain of the Red Sox'', played second base for Boston. He held the American League record for handling 414 plays without errors and was also a prominent leader among second basemen in double plays, putouts, and assists. Following his service in the United States Army, Mr. Doerr returned to baseball in 1946, leading the Red Sox to the World Series where he batted a remarkable .406. Bob Feller of the Cleveland Indians was known as ``Rapid Robert'' during his 18 years of professional baseball. In 1940, Mr. Feller led the American League with 27 games won, a 2.61 earned run average, 261 strikeouts, and 31 complete games. Despite the loss of four years in his career due to his time spent serving his country in World War II, Mr. Feller had 2,581 strikeouts and pitched three no-hitters. During his service in the United States Navy, Mr. Feller was awarded five campaign ribbons studded with eight battle stars. Ralph Kiner played for the Pittsburgh Pirates, debuting in 1946 after his service with the United States Navy. In his 10-year career, Mr. Kiner had 369 homeruns and averaged 7.1 homeruns per 100 at-bats, which places him directly behind Babe Ruth, the all-time leader in this statistical category. In 1951, Mr. Kiner led the National League with a .452 on-base percentage and a .627 slugging percentage. Elected into the Hall of Fame in 1975, Mr. Kiner was known as a true powerhitter who envisioned a home run each time he stepped up to the plate. Following his playing career, he became an announcer for the New York Mets, where he has remained for 40 years, still hosting a popular post-game show called ``Kiner's Corner.'' And finally, Phil Rizzuto, of Brooklyn, New York, played for the Yankees for 13 seasons. Known as ``The Scooter'', Rizzuto was a slick fielding shortstop and incredible base runner who ended his baseball career with a .273 batting average. He was named an All-Star five times and was the American League's Most Valuable Player in 1950. As a member of the United States Navy, Phil Rizzuto fought in World War II for three years and missed the 1943, 1944 and 1945 seasons. As you can see, Mr. Speaker, these gentlemen were extraordinary ball players who earned the title of American heroes on the diamond. More importantly, they were soldiers, sailors and marine, audacious and brave-hearted, who answered their country's call. Like the other 59 members of the Hall of Fame, including one Civil War veteran, they interrupted successful careers to defend the freedom and liberties that each of us are privileged to enjoy today. On a day when we celebrate the heroism and honor the memory of millions of men and women who paid the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of our country, I am pleased to see that these Hall of Famers also honored for their service. It is both fitting and appropriate to pay homage to these special veterans who answered the call to duty when their nation needed them. Mr. Speaker, I call on all Americans who cherish liberty and freedom to join us this weekend in respectful recognition of all the brave men and women who have worn the uniform, fought and died for our country. God Bless them all.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, as Chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, I rise to commend the Appropriations Committee, Chairman Bill Young, and particularly Subcommittee Chairman Jim Walsh, for including $417 million in urgently needed funding for veterans medical care. As most of my colleagues know from listening to their constituents, the demand for VA health care services has risen significantly in the past several years. The Department of Veterans Affairs has had to make mid-year changes to their projections of VA health care usage because of the dramatic increase in veterans seeking to enroll. In fact, the VA's latest budget submission projects that almost 700,000 more veterans will receive VA care in 2003 than they had projected just one year ago. The dramatic upsurge in demand facing the VA is real and substantial. With hundreds of new VA community outpatient clinics opened in recent years, veterans are now finding that VA health care is available much closer to home. Prescription drug costs have risen dramatically in the past several years, while seniors' incomes levels have remained level. This has created a great demand for VA-provided prescription drugs. Mr. Chairman, the response to increased demand for VA health care services should not be to curtail services or limit access for veterans in any way, but rather to provide sufficient resources to pay for veterans' health care. America has a special obligation to care for former soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who risked their lives to protect our freedoms and this legislation is another step towards meeting that sacred obligation. The inclusion of $417 million for VA medical care is a responsible and absolutely necessary action that this Congress must take. Again, I want to commend Chairman Young, and Subcommittee Chairman Walsh, for once again demonstrating their commitment to America's veterans.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, we have received the news that United States Ambassador to Albania, Joseph Limprecht, died suddenly of a heart attack on Sunday, May 19, 2002, while hiking with his wife and colleagues in northern Albania. Although I did not have the opportunity to meet Ambassador Limprecht, I did correspond with him on an issue of mutual concern--the trafficking of Albanian women and children into sexual slavery in Europe. With porous borders and more than its share of criminals, Albania is used by traffickers as a key transit point to Italy. As a source country, young Albanian women are lured into the hands of traffickers and even kidnaped from their home towns or villages. The Ambassador was well aware of this tragedy and pressed for greater law enforcement to stop trafficking networks as well as greater assistance to the victims. Indeed, in keeping with the point of my correspondence with him, the Ambassador made sure U.S. assistance would go to a shelter for repatriated Albanian trafficking victims similar to one created for women found in Albania and waiting to be repatriated to their country of origin. Beyond that, the Ambassador worked hard in the three years he spent in Albania in helping the country recover from its many ills, in particular the civil strife which tore the country apart in 1997. Given Albania's vulnerability to militant Islamic infiltration, I am sure that the war on terrorism was in the forefront of his duties in recent months. Ambassador Limprecht was a member of the Senior Foreign Service, having served with the U.S. Foreign Service since 1975, with postings in Germany, Pakistan and Uzbekistan as well as in Washington. In the 1980s, he served in the office which handled what was then the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe and now the OSCE, and worked with the staff of the Helsinki Commission which I had just joined and now serve as Co-Chairman. My deepest condolences go to the Ambassador's wife, Nancy, their daughters Alma and Eleanor, friends and colleagues.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, first of all, let me say I rise in very strong support of the DeLay amendment. It is a very serious and necessary amendment that makes clear that the United States will not sit idly by as prosecutors and judges, whose country of origin will be rogue states, bring politically motivated charges against United States servicemen and women around the globe. I truly believe, Mr. Chairman, that the depiction used by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) of this very serious amendment trivializes not only the amendment but the compelling risk to U.S. peacekeepers abroad, U.S. peacekeepers who are likely to be accused by rogue nations, prosecutors who work for countries like the Sudan, Libya, or other countries where human rights are trashed and cruelty is the order of the day. Our people could be held accountable for doing their duty for either peacekeeping or peacemaking. And that, frankly, is absolutely unacceptable. Let me make it very clear, Mr. Chairman, that I was and I am a very strong supporter of the regional criminal actions that have been taken against those who commit crimes against humanity in Rwanda as well as in the former Yugoslavia. I believe we ought to do it on a regional basis, and not allow this ongoing freestanding court with judges and prosecutors, again, who are from rogue states who will sit in judgment of U.S. peacekeepers and peacemakers. Let me just also say on those regional courts, when the first tribunal was getting under way, I offered the amendments to significantly increase the amount of the U.S. contribution because of the terrible crimes that were being committed against the Croatians and then the Bosnians. So I take a back seat to no one about my concern in holding accountable the Milosevics of this world. But having said that, this tribunal is rife with mischief and is likely to kill peacekeeping as we know it. Why would we send our men and women out to be held accountable by a Libyan judge and by a Libyan prosecutor who would bring our people to trial? And I would just note parenthetically that the Clinton administration was against this until the last few weeks of the administration when they signed it, but argued against it in Rome as the Rome Statute, or the ICC, was being considered. At one of our hearings I asked the U.S. State Department to go back to all of our wars, World War II, World War I, the Korean conflict, Vietnam, and look at any battle that we were engaged in, and asked the question, Could a prosecutor take the Dresden bombing or the bombing of Japan or Hiroshima or Nagasaki and bring an action against President Truman, or General Marshall, or President Eisenhower, or any of our other generals, or those who flew the Enola Gay? Or take Vietnam or any other conflict, most recently the Persian Gulf, or any conflict we have engaged in. This is rife, rife with mischief that rogue nations would bring about against us. And let us not forget as well, although it was rejected, there was an attempt to bring action against General Wesley Clark, who led our efforts in the Serbian conflict. And had we had somebody from one of those rogue nations sitting as a prosecutor, he might have been brought to the Hague or there may have been an attempt to bring him to the Hague to stand in account. Finally, if you want a glimpse about what the ICC will look like when it comes into force, look just at the U.N. Human Rights Convention in Geneva. I have been there, year in and year out, as has the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), and many of us saw countries like the Sudan sitting in judgement to do two things: one, they tried to run interference when actions are brought against them; and, secondly, they sit in judgment and then try to give their friends who commit human rights abuses a pass. They constantly do that. That is why this is a dangerous game. And again I think the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) owes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) an apology. That little game he played with the Netherlands was way off base. This is a serious amendment, and when our peacekeepers are held accountable, I hope President Bush and any successor President does all that is humanly possible to protect every American service personnel abroad as well as in this country. Mr. Chairman, first of all, let me say I rise in very strong support of the DeLay amendment. It is a very serious and necessary amendment that makes clear that the United States will not sit idly by as prosecutors and judges, whose country of origin will at times be rogue states, bring politically motivated charges against United States servicemen and women around the globe. I truly believe, Mr. Chairman, that the depiction used by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) of this very serious amendment trivializes not only the amendment but the compelling risk to U.S. peacekeepers abroad, U.S. peacekeepers who are likely to be accused by rogue nations, prosecutors who work for countries like the Sudan, Libya, or other countries where human rights are trashed and cruelty is the order of the day. Our people could be subjected to kangaroo trials for doing their peacekeeping or peacemaking duty. And that, frankly, is absolutely unacceptable. Let me make it very clear, Mr. Chairman, that I was and I am a very strong supporter of the regional criminal tribunals that have been used to prosecute those who have committed crimes against humanity in Rwanda as well as in the former Yugoslavia. I believe we ought to establish war crimes tribunals on an ad hoc basis, and not allow this freestanding court with judges and prosecutors, who are accountable to none, to sit in judgment of U.S. military personnel. Let me just say with regards to ad hoc tribunals, that the first tribunal was getting under way, I offered amendments in committee to significantly increase the amount of the U.S. contribution to establish the tribunal. The terrible crimes that were committed against the Croatians and then the Bosnians and even the Serbes, demanded no less. So I take a back seat to no one about my concern in holding accountable the Milosevics of this world. But having said that, the tribunal established by the Rome Statute is rife with mischief and is likely to kill peacekeeping as we know it. Why would we send our men and women out to be harassed and prosecuted by a Libyan judge and by a Libyan prosecutor who would bring our soldiers to trial? And I would just note parenthetically that the Clinton administration was against the ICC until the last few weeks of the administration when they abruptly signed it, but previously had argued against it in Rome, as the ICC was being considered. At one of several hearings I chaired I asked the U.S. State Department representatives to go back to all of our wars: World War II. World War I, the Korean conflict, Vietnam, and look at any battle that we were engaged in, and I asked the question, Could a prosecutor construe the Dresden bombing or the fire bombing of Tokyo or Hiroshima or Nagasaki and bring an action against President Truman, or General MacArthur or Eisenhower or Marshall, or any of our other generals, or those who piloted or crewed the Enola Gay? Or take Vietnam or any other conflict, most recently the Persian Gulf or the bombing of Serbia or any conflict we have engaged in. Were these actions, in whole or in part, war crimes? I got a big ``maybe'' from State. The ICC is rife with mischief that rogue nations would bring actions against us. And let us not forget, as well, although it was rejected by the prosecution arm at The Hague, there was an attempt to bring action against General Wesley Clark and others who led our efforts in the Serbian conflict. And had we had somebody from one of those rogue nations serving as a prosecutor, he might have been brought to The Hague or there may have been an attempt to bring him to The Hague to stand trial. Finally, if you want a glimpse about what the ICC will look like when it comes into force look just at the U.N. Human Rights Convention in Geneva. I have been there, year in and year out, as has the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and Ms. Ros Lehtinen, and many of us saw countries like the Sudan sitting on the commission do two things: one, they tried to run interference when actions were brought against them; and, secondly, they sat in judgment and then tried to give their friends who commit human rights abuses, a pass. If given new powers to prosecute Americans--believe me--they will! That is why this is a dangerous game. I believe the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) owes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) an apology. That little game he played earlier with the Netherlands invasion scenario was way off base. This is a serious amendment, and when our peacekeepers are wrongfully charged, I trust President Bush and any successor President will do all that is humanly possible to protect every American soldier, sailor, or marine abroad.