Chris Smith

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. I just want to thank my dear colleague, Mr. Cohen, and the other members of the taskforce. This is truly a bipartisan resolution. We all contributed to it. We all care deeply about it. I want him and my other colleagues to know how deeply I respect their efforts, which have been Herculean, to try to end this cruelty that is on the rise in Europe, in the United States, and in other parts. We know in the Middle East it is perhaps as bad as it has ever been; and the diaspora that makes its way into Europe is carrying that hatred with them--not all of them, of course, but a sizable number--presenting more and more challenges. This is truly a bipartisan effort, and I want to thank Mr. Cohen for his comments.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Again, I want to thank Mr. Engel for his leadership and his kind words. Again, this is truly a collaborative effort, and I want to thank him for it. Mr. Speaker, at a congressional hearing I chaired in 2002--and I chaired about 18 such hearings on combating anti-Semitism--Dr. Shimon Samuels of the Wiesenthal Center said: ``The Holocaust for 30 years after the war acted as a protective Teflon against blatant anti-Semitic expression, especially in Europe. That Teflon has eroded, and what was considered distasteful and politically incorrect is becoming simply an opinion.'' He warned ominously, saying, ``cocktail chatter at fine English dinners can end as Molotov cocktails against synagogues.'' Mr. Speaker, Abraham Lincoln once said that ``to sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.'' Silence is not an option. And, I would equally say, nor is inaction. If our fight is to succeed, we need government officials at all levels to not just denounce but to act without hesitation or delay whenever and wherever anti-Semitic acts occur. There are no exceptions. The purveyors of hate never take a holiday or grow weary, nor should we. H. Res. 354 is a best practices resolution designed to seriously inspire and challenge the governments of Europe, especially law enforcement and their homeland security agencies, to partner with their respective Jewish communities to mitigate and hopefully end and eradicate anti-Semitism in all of its ugly manifestations. United States law enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department, the FBI, as well as State Homeland Security agencies, including in my own State of New Jersey, have been robust and aggressive in combating anti-Semitism here. We need to replicate this and encourage others to follow our lead and that of the UK, and I do hope we will do that. This resolution is broadly bipartisan. I want to thank Nathaniel Hurd, on our staff, for his tremendous work on this resolution, working with all of his respective staffers and Members, of course, to bring this about. And I want to thank the leadership for bringing it to the floor this evening. I urge a ``yea'' vote. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, the world is experiencing a crisis of international religious freedom that poses a direct challenge to U.S. interests in the Middle East, Central and East Asia, Russia, China, and sub-Saharan Africa. In large parts of the world, this fundamental freedom is constantly and brutally under siege. The worldwide erosion of respect for this fundamental freedom is the cause of widespread human suffering, grave injustices, refugee flows, and significant threats to peace and stability. This Congress has heard the cries of Iraqi and Syrian Christians who face the threat of extinction, slavery, and death. We have heard about the plight of Rohingya Muslims, who face attacks and such unimaginable discrimination from hard-line Buddhist groups that many chose slavery elsewhere than life in Burma. We have heard about the persecution faced by Chinese Christians, Tibetan Buddhists, Uyghur Muslims, and Falun Gong at the hands of a Communist Party suspicious of organized religion. And, many of us on this subcommittee have seen firsthand the religious dividing lines in sub-Saharan Africa that are the cause of so much death and destruction. In a world where some people are willing to kill those whose beliefs differ from theirs, where anti-Semitism persists even in the most tolerant of places, and where authoritarian governments view strong religious faith as a potential threat to their legitimacy, it is more important than ever that the U.S. engage in robust religious freedom diplomacy. One that uses all the tools available is the landmark International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. The stakes are too high and the suffering too great to downplay religious freedom as a priority of U.S. foreign policy. But unfortunately, we often hear from religious groups globally and from NGOs working on the issue that this Administration has sidelined the promotion of religious freedom. This criticism does not discount the work done by our men and women at the State Department and the efforts of Ambassador Saperstein himself. They do important and substantive work, but it seems too often that the issue is marginalized and isolated from issues of national security or economic development--even though we know from academic research that countries with the highest levels of religious freedom experience more prosperity and less terrorism. Religious persecution has catastrophic consequences for religious communities and for individual victims. But it also undermines the national security of the United States. Without religious freedom, aspiring democracies will continue to face instability. Sustained economic growth will be more difficult to achieve. Obstructions will remain to the advancement of the rights of women and girls. And, perhaps most urgent of all, religious terrorism will continue to be nourished and exported. The global religious freedom crisis will not disappear anytime soon. According to the non-partisan Pew Research Center, 75% of the world's populations live in countries where severe religious persecution occurs regularly. It has been almost 17 years since the passage of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. Religious freedom diplomacy has developed under three administrations of both parties. Unfortunately, the grim global realities demonstrate that our nation has had little effect on the rise of persecution and the decline of religious freedom. It is worth asking why. It is worth asking not only what the State Department is doing, but what can be done better? Are new tools or new ideas needed to help U.S. religious freedom diplomacy address one of the great crises of the 21st century? Does the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 need to be upgraded to reflect 21st century realities? That is why I introduced the Frank Wolf International Religious Freedom Act of 2015 (H.R. 1150). This legislation, named after the author of the original IRFA Act, my good friend former Congressman Frank Wolf, would, among other things, strengthen the role of the Ambassador-at-Large for Religious Freedom and the IRF office at State and give more tools to the Administration to address the crisis we face. The bill is roundly endorsed and supported by a broad, diverse array of religious freedom, civil society and diaspora organizations. They acknowledge what too many policymakers and administrations, Republican and Democrat alike, have been unable to appreciate-- America's first freedom ought to be infused, at every possible level, into our foreign policy. Upgrading and strengthening U.S. international religious freedom policy--and further integrating it into U.S. foreign policy and national security strategy--will send the clear message that the U.S. will fight for the inherent dignity of every human being and against the global problem of persecution, religious extremism, and terrorism. In so doing, we can advance the best of our values while protecting vital national interests.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, the world was shocked as 276 schoolgirls from the northeastern Nigerian town of Chibok were kidnapped by the Islamic militant group Boko Haram. In the days following this event, we learned that the military had four hours' warning of the attack, but failed to mobilize sufficient forces to fight off the attackers, who arrived at this predominantly Christian town in a convoy of vehicles. A military redeployment to find the girls two weeks later resulted in the massacre of at least 300 residents of the town of Gamboru Ngala. Since that time, the previous Nigerian Government made many announcements about freeing the kidnapped girls, none of which proved to be accurate. Hope had been raised last October by a government announcement of a cease-fire and release of the girls only to be dashed by increasing Boko Haram attacks and the continued captivity of the Chibok girls. In fact, Boko Haram kidnapped more girls in northeastern Nigeria, especially Christian girls. President Muhamadu Buhari has said he won't make promises about freeing these captives that he can't guarantee, but I expect he will make every effort to free the Chibok girls, as well as the many others taken by Boko Haram. I have met previously with young women who have escaped from Boko Haram, in Jos and Abuja, Nigeria, and here in the United States. They confirm the abuse of their sisters and mourn their loss as we do. I want to thank Emmanuel Ogebe for all his help in arranging these meetings and the programs allowing some of these young women to come to the United States for an education. An estimated 10,000 other Nigerian youth are prevented from being educated because of disruptions caused by Boko Haram. My subcommittee has held several hearings on Boko Haram and convinced the administration to declare Boko Haram a Foreign Terrorist Organization, which they announced at our November 13, 2013, hearing. I have since pressed the administration to use authorities under the FTO designation to investigate and identify for the Nigerian Government those who support Boko Haram. I also have worked to end the current roadblocks preventing U.S. counterterrorism training for Nigerian troops. During the past year, social media worldwide has exploded with the ``Bring Back Our Girls'' campaign. I must compliment my colleague, Congresswoman Frederica Wilson, who has maintained her efforts to free the Chibok girls and all the others kidnapped by Boko Haram, while others have moved on to different issues. I have worked with Congresswoman Wilson to update her House Resolution 147, which focuses on bringing to an end the violence unleashed by Boko Haram and bringing material aid to those harmed by their attacks. We also have joined in this legislation to press initiatives I mentioned earlier. I hope my subcommittee and our committee can move this legislation to the floor soon to give a boost to U.S. efforts to help Nigeria end the reign of terror by Boko Haram.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, 59 years ago today, the Hungarian people rose up against the Soviet-installed communist dictatorship--a revolution that remains a model of patriotism, heroism, and resistance against tyranny today. I submit the following remarks delivered last evening at an event commemorating this momentous anniversary by Louis S. Segesvary, Ph.D., of the American Hungarian Federation. [From American Hungarian Federation] Hungary and the Hard Way (By Louis S. Segesvary, Ph.D.) It was in the month of October, on the twenty-third day in 1956, that the small Eastern European nation of Hungary rose up in a revolution against the Soviet Union that represented the first major challenge to its military dominion since World War II. Nearly six decades have passed since then, yet it would be a mistake to discount the significance of this revolution merely because of the passage of time. This was David facing down Goliath in the modern era, and as such it remains and will remain an inspiration to freedom loving people everywhere. Historians have explained to us the cause of the Hungarian uprising against the mighty Soviet empire as one of chafing under the weight of totalitarian occupation. But this explanation is hardly enough. Many peoples have suffered similar fates without risking the human costs associated with revolution. Those that have been willing to pay the price have been far fewer, and the more formidable the force of the occupier, the even fewer number. Bravery has always been the difference. In this respect, Hungary and the United States share a similar past. Both risked revolutions against the greatest powers of their times. Only the American patriots were successful while Hungarians were seemingly not. But it is just at this point that we must be the most careful in assessing the significance of Hungary's revolt against the Soviet Union, which pitted a nation of only ten million against the armed forces of a world superpower. For the sheer courage displayed in this uprising against the most hopeless of odds not only stunned the world but inspired it. As the French writer and Nobel Laureate Albert Camus put it at the time, ``Hungary conquered and in chains has done more for freedom and justice than any people for twenty years. . . Those Hungarian workers and intellectuals, beside whom we stand today with such impotent sorrow, understood this and have made us the better to understand it. That is why their hope is also ours. In spite of their misery, their chains, their exile, they have left us a glorious heritage which we must preserve: freedom, which they not only chose, but which in a single day they gave back to us.'' Practical consequences as well were to follow the Hungarian revolution even as it was crushed by columns of Soviet tanks, for the sacrifices of the freedom fighters helped lead eventually to a crescendo of falling dominos and the dissolution of the entire Soviet Union itself. The seven days of freedom Hungarians had achieved in 1956 meant that Goliath had been mortally wounded, his aura of invincibility shattered. It was just a matter of time before he collapsed into the dust once again just as in biblical times. Today Hungary is a fledgling democracy experiencing the kind of attacks that don't come from the muzzles of AK-47s or the cannons of Soviet era tanks. Caught in the whirlwind of the migrant crisis enveloping Europe, with nearly 400,000 political and economic migrants transiting the country so far this year on their way to Austria and Germany, it has been subject to harsh public criticism for not being accommodating enough to this flood of humanity. Regrettably, the fact that Hungary has faithfully adhered to the very protocol established by the European Union to deal with asylum seekers in requiring their registration on entry is generally ignored. But even more fundamentally, the civilizational issues associated with nation states are just as often disregarded. Whatever one thinks of Hungary's insistence on protecting its borders, one also has to consider the broader implications of what chaos will do to Europe's cultural distinctiveness. Albert Camus' stirring words on the Hungarian revolution are well known. Not as well-known are his prophetic words, just as profound, about the dangers associated with the breakdown of civilizational rules. While the pitfalls of anarchy meant the unpleasant task of having to make order, he wrote, there had to be order, because without order, he would die, ``scattered to the winds.'' He could have been speaking here once again about Hungary as well. Only this time it was about a people seeking to preserve the national identity they had secured for themselves with their own blood six decades earlier. It is a stand that not everyone will agree with, it is a stand that can be debated, but it is a stand that is once again resonating throughout the world. The stakes in this debate are not to be taken lightly because we should never forget that how this migrant crisis is resolved will affect not only this generation of Europeans but generation after generation to come. In a very real sense, these future generations are fated to live with the consequences of the choices made today with no other recourse to them. That means the decisions by all of us affected by this crisis need to be as wise as we can make them and our consciences as clear as we can keep them. The choices Hungary has taken so far in upholding the asylum precepts of the European Union and safeguarding its borders represent the hard way, a path of thorns on which Hungary has so often found itself in its brilliant but tragic history. It has risked its reputation on these choices, and only time can tell us how sagacious they have been. In the meanwhile, let us hold our rush to judgement. Especially on a day in which we honor Hungary for its great sacrifices for freedom.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today marks the 59th anniversary of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution against Soviet tyranny. Though the Soviet tanks put down the uprising that time, it lit a torch of resistance that the communists could never put out and ultimately democracy prevailed. I submit the following remarks by Marion Smith, Executive Director of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, at an event last evening commemorating the 1956 Hungarian Revolution. Commemorating the 1956 Hungarian Revolution (By Marion Smith) [From Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation] For a few days in 1956, Budapest became the capital of freedom. The city, which was gutted and nearly destroyed by the ruthless military showdown between Soviet and Nazi troops in World War II, became the city of hope and heartbreak in 1956. The Hungarian nation's patriotic glory and enviable spirit broke the yoke of the Soviet Empire, if only for a few days. Ruszkik haza!--Russians, go home!--a crowd eventually growing to 300,000 demanded as young people, who had everything to lose, gathered in the heart of the city. Hungarians began to tear off red stars from buildings, they toppled the statue of Stalin in front of the Hungarian Radio and tore out the Soviet symbol from the middle of the Hungarian flag, framed pictures of Lenin, Marx and Stalin were gathered on the street and burnt in bonfires. The flames of freedom lit up the nights. The Soviet military stationed in Hungary was considerably large. It should have been relatively easy to put down what the regime called a fascist ``counter-revolution''. But it wasn't. Moscow underestimated the resilience of the people and the determination of Hungarians to fight. For their freedom, for their family, for their life. From the West, Hungarians received sympathy and prayers. But not much more. And yet, these mostly young patriots succeeded in driving out the Soviet tanks all the way to the outskirts of Budapest. A free and democratic Hungary seemed within grasp. But the Communist Politburo in Moscow was not yet ready for a breakup of the Iron Curtain and on November 4, Soviet tanks rolled through the city. 30,000 troops and more than a thousand tanks eventually put down the lightly armed civilians of Budapest. The Soviets gave Hungary a new leader, Janos Kadar. He announced over the radio that the ``Hungarian Revolutionary Worker-Peasant Government'' was formed to protect Hungary's ``socialist achievements''. And people who disagreed, people who took a part in the fights had to pay the price. For many, the ultimate price. Some were simply shot on the streets like dogs, some disappeared in the middle of the night, some spent years in the prisons at Andrassy ut 60, where the House of Terror today commemorates the brutality of the communist secret police. Although the system was dubbed ``goulash communism'' for its more relaxed policies that allowed for some dissent, the one-party system, political censorship, food shortages of a centrally planned economy, and the arbitrary coercion of citizens by state officials remained until the very last days of the regime. Almost sixty years after the Hungarian revolution, and more than 25 years after the regime change, it is more important than ever for Hungarians and Americans alike to remember that communism was not a beautiful utopia. It was and is an ideology that enables tyranny. Communist regimes everywhere systematically killed a portion of their own people as a matter of policy in peacetime, denied citizens their basic rights, robbed them of their food and of their labor, and tore families apart in maintaining a police state. The mass exodus, one of the largest the U.S. has seen at the time, of political dissenters from Hungary on the heels of the 1956 revolution revealed the true intolerance of the ``socialist dream''. The Victims of Communism Foundation, through our Witness project tells true stories about life communist regimes. To understand the depth and scope of the evil of communism we have to listen to those who knew it all too well, those like: Bela Krasznay who spent nearly eight years in the notorious Recsk labor camp during the 1950's as a political prisoner due to his family background (landed-owners and military officers). Janos Horvath who served as the youngest member of the Hungarian parliament in 1948, was imprisoned for four years by the communist regime because of his political beliefs only to return to the Hungarian parliament, becoming its oldest living member until his retirement in 2014. Livia Gyarmathy who was ordered by the state to become a chemist, despite wanting to go to medical school and eventually became a filmmaker, and produced the first ever film about the Recsk labor camp--the Hungarian Gulag. Daniel Magay, whose idyllic childhood was wrecked when communist authorities targeted his father, a popular landowner. Though his efforts to escape communism brought Daniel to the 1956 Olympic Games and, eventually, San Francisco, Daniel remains deeply shaped by having grown up under that brutal system. We must not think that the fall of the Soviet Union meant the ``end of history'' or even the end of communism. As Charles de Gaulle, the former French president said: ``Stalin didn't walk away into the past, he dissolved into the future.'' Today, one fifth of the world's population lives in a one- party communist state. This very summer, new statues of Stalin have been erected in several Russian towns by Russia's Communist Party whose leader promised new statues in Irkutsk in Siberia and to Eastern Ukraine. In Donetsk, where the Soviets are responsible for the death of millions of Ukrainians in the period of forced starvation known as Holodomor, a new cult of Stalin is on the rise with new street posters of the bloody murderer on display. Russia is eager to display the red flag with hammer and sickle as a sign of past glory at sporting events from the Sochi Olympics to the FINA World Championships in Kazan. All this while Russian authorities have shut down the Soviet era archives, revised children's text books and harassed or jailed historians or journalists who dare to tell the truth about life in the Soviet Union. And in our own country, a country that spent more resources on fighting communism than any other country in the world, we see a shocking lack of understanding from teenagers and young adults who do not know the basics of 20th century history. They don't understand how bankrupt the Marxist ideology actually is and why the struggle we as Americans took against communist imperialism was and is worth it. The simple lesson of the Cold War is that there is absolutely nothing romantic, cute, or enviable about the socialist system and the communist utopia. Few nations know this better than the Hungarians, whose torn red white and green flag became, in 1956 a symbol for a universal desire for freedom. And so it remains today.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, to say that the Great Lakes region of Africa is troubled would be an understatement. Burundi is experiencing continued turmoil due to a recent contentious election. The Democratic Republic of the Congo, or DRC, has had some level of conflict since the late 1990s. The Lord's Resistance Army, also known as the LRA, has plagued several of these countries. Alleged plundering of DRC resources by Rwanda and Uganda have never been fully resolved. Nations in the region have been preoccupied in the last two years with resolving the South Sudan civil war. Definitions vary, but the Great Lakes region, as defined by the U.S. Department of State, comprises Burundi, the DRC, Rwanda, and Uganda. The region is among the most densely populated in Africa, especially around Lake Victoria and Lake Tanganyika, and enjoys rich agricultural potential, water resources, minerals, and wildlife. However, political instability, conflict, humanitarian crises, and a lack of development remain key challenges. These four countries are the purview of the U.S. Special Envoy to the Great Lakes, Tom Perriello, whom we had before my subcommittee yesterday. We also had Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Linda Thomas-Greenfield, who has spent a great deal of her time in office dealing with Great Lakes issues. Yesterday's hearing offered an opportunity to hear from these administration officials not only about continuing U.S. efforts to extinguish the LRA threat, but also the administration's work with governments in the region on issues such as peace building, governance and adherence to international human rights and democracy standards. In our subcommittee hearings over the last three years, we have uncovered numerous troubling situations: Even with the supposed end of operations by the M23 militia in eastern DRC in late 2013, there are several other militias still causing instability in the region. The Kabila government in the DRC is reportedly using a ban on completing foreign adoptions as leverage to ward off actions to prevent him from prolonging his rule despite a constitutional bar to any reelection bid. Burundi President Pierre Nkurunziza's decision to run for a third term, which some Burundians and outside observers viewed as a violation of a landmark peace agreement--and, arguably, the Constitution of Burundi--has led to a political crisis and heightened concerns about regional stability. Human rights abuses in Rwanda were found to be targeted toward real or perceived political opponents prior to 2012, but after 2012, such abuses were seen as more random, expanding the targets of the regime. Maj. Robert Higero, a retired Rwandan military officer, told our subcommittee on May 20th about his solicitation by the Rwandan intelligence chief to kill to high-level defectors. He turned against the government and informed the targets who asked him to record the offer. He did, and the recording was validated by the Globe and Mail in Canada and the British Broadcasting Corporation. The State Department has not only found the allegations to be credible but warned Maj. Higero to leave Belgium where his life was in danger. Although LRA killings have diminished in the past few years, kidnappings by the group have risen as it operates in smaller, scattered cells, using more adults as temporary labor. One witness at our hearing last month said an end to the U.S. support for the counter- LRA effort would be ``devastating.'' We have heard of the difficulties of addressing issues in this troubled region of Africa by both government and private witnesses over the past few years. However, the fates of these countries are interconnected, and our policies need to take this into account. There are numerous issues in the Great Lakes countries that require examination, and we discussed yesterday what should be a coordinated U.S. policy in this region and we heard from our witnesses what the prospects are for this policy to be implemented.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I chaired a hearing of the Helsinki Commission that examined the Russian government's repeated violations of its international security, economic, and human rights commitments. In accord with the three dimensions of security promoted by the OSCE and the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, the Commission looked at Russia's respect for the rule of law through the lens of three ``case studies'' current to U.S.-Russian relations--arms control agreements; the Yukos litigation; and instances of abduction, unjust imprisonment, and abuse of prisoners. Forty years after the signing of the Helsinki Final Act, we face a set of challenges with Russia, a founding member of the organization, that mirror the concerns that gave rise to the Helsinki Final Act. At stake is the hard-won trust between members--now eroded to the point that armed conflict rages in the OSCE region. The question is open whether the principles continue to bind the Russian government with other states in a common understanding of what the rule of law entails. In respect of military security, under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum Russia reaffirmed its commitment to respect Ukraine's independence, sovereignty, and existing borders. Russia also committed to refrain from the threat or use of force or economic coercion against Ukraine. There was a quid pro quo here: Russia did this in return for transferring Soviet-made nuclear weapons on Ukrainian soil to Russia. Russia's annexation of Crimea and subsequent intervention in the Donbas region not only clearly violate this commitment, but also every guiding principle of the 1975 Helsinki Final Act. It appears these are not isolated instances. In recent years, Russia appears to have violated, undermined, disregarded, or even disavowed fundamental and binding arms control commitments such as the Vienna Document and binding international agreements, including the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE), Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF), and Open Skies treaties. In respect of commercial issues, the ongoing claims regarding the Russian government's expropriation of the Yukos Oil Company are major tests facing the Russian government. In July 2014, GML Limited and other shareholders were part of a $52 billion arbitration claim awarded by the Hague Permanent Court of Arbitration and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). In response, the Russian government is threatening to withdraw from the ECHR and seize U.S. assets should American courts freeze Russian holdings on behalf of European claimants, while filing technical challenges that will occupy the courts for years to come. All of this fundamentally calls into question Russia's OSCE commitment to develop free, competitive markets that respect international dispute arbitration mechanisms such as that of the Hague. I note that U.S. Yukos shareholders are not covered by the Hague ruling for their estimated $6 billion in losses. This is due to the fact that the United States has not ratified the Energy Charter Treaty, under which European claimants won their case, as well as the continued absence of a bilateral investment treaty with Russia. This has handicapped U.S. investors in Russia's energy sector, leaving them solely dependent of a State Department espousal process with the Russian government. We were all relieved to learn that Mr. Kara-Murza is recovering from the attempt on his life--by poisoning--in Russia earlier this year. His tireless work on behalf of democracy in Russia, and his personal integrity and his love of his native country is an inspiration--it is true patriotism, a virtue sadly lacking among nationalistic demagogues. Sadly, the attempt on Mr. Kara-Murza's life is not an isolated instance. Others have been murdered--most recently Boris Nemtsov--and both his and Mr. Kara-Murza's cases remain unsolved. In other cases, such as the abductions, unjust imprisonments, and abuses of Nadiya Savchenko, Oleg Sentsov, and Eston Kohver, we are dealing the plain and public actions of the Russian government. Nadiya Savchenko, a Ukrainian pilot and elected parliamentarian, was abducted by Russian government agents, imprisoned, subjected to a humiliating show trial, and now faces 25 years in prison for allegedly murdering Russian reporters--who in fact were killed after she was in Russian custody. Meanwhile, a Russian court has sentenced Ukrainian film director Oleg Sentsov on charges of terrorism. Tortured during detention, Sentsov's only transgressions appear to be his refusal to recognize Russia's annexation of the peninsula and his effort to help deliver food to Ukrainian soldiers trapped on their Crimean bases by invading Russian soldiers. And the kidnaping and subsequent espionage trial against Estonian law enforcement officer Eston Kohver demonstrates the Russia's readiness to abuse its laws and judicial system to limit individual freedoms both within and beyond its borders. The Magnitsky Act that I had the honor to co-sponsor was in part meant to address human rights abuses such as these. It sanctions those involved in the abuse, and works to discourage further human rights violations while protecting those brave enough to call attention to their occurrence. It troubles me greatly to hear that the Administration's listings of sanctioned individuals has thus far only targeted `minor players,' rather than those who pull the strings.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday I convened a Helsinki Commission hearing to scrutinize the European refugee crisis and help determine the most effective ways in which the U.S., the European Union, and the OSCE can and should respond. The Syrian displacement crisis that has consumed seven countries in the Middle East has become the biggest refugee crisis in Europe since World War II. At least 250,000 people have been killed in Syria's civil war, many of them civilians. The security forces of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad's security forces have been responsible for many of these killings, targeting neighborhoods with barrel bombs and shooting civilians point-blank. ISIS has committed genocide, mass atrocities, and war crimes, against Christians and other minorities, and likewise targeted, brutalized and killed Shia and Sunni Muslims who reject its ideology and brutality. Fleeing for safety, more than four million Syrians are refugees, the largest refugee population in the world, and another 7.6 million Syrians are displaced inside their home country. Syria's neighbors--Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq, and Egypt--are hosting most of these refugees. Before the Syria crisis, these countries struggled with high rates of unemployment, strained public services, and a range of other domestic challenges. Since the conflict began, Syrian refugees have become a quarter of Lebanon's population, and Iraq, which has been beset by ISIS and sectarian conflict, is hosting almost 250,000 refugees from Syria. Until this past summer, few Syrian refugees went beyond countries that border their homeland. Syrian refugees and migrants from a range of countries have since come to Europe in such large numbers, and so quickly, that many European countries, especially front-line entry points like Greece, transit countries like Serbia, and destination countries like Germany, have been challenged to respond. The UN High Commission for Refugees, UNHCR, reports that more than 635,000 refugees and migrants have arrived in Europe by sea in 2015. Fifty three percent of these people are from Syria, sixteen percent from Afghanistan, six percent from Eritrea, and five percent from Iraq. Notably, only fourteen percent of them are women, twenty percent are children, and the remaining sixty five percent are men. The European crisis requires a response that is European, national, and international, and the United States is essential to it. There must be effective coordination and communication directly between countries as well as through and with entities like the OSCE and European Union. Individual countries also must have the flexibility to respond best to the particular circumstances in their own countries. The response must address ``push'' factors, like economic challenges and aid short-falls in countries like Syria's neighbors that have been hosting refugees. It must also address ``pull'' factors, like decisions individual European countries have made that have attracted refugees. There is real human need and desperation. Refugees are entrusting themselves to smugglers and where there is human smuggling there is a higher risk of human trafficking. I am especially concerned about the risk of abuse, exploitation, and enslavement, of women and children. Already we are hearing reports that some European countries are failing to protect women and girls from sexual assault and forced prostitution. The lack of separate bathroom facilities for males and females, rooms that can be locked, and other basic measures, enable such attacks. There is no excuse for such failures and everything must be done to ensure that women and children are safe. There is also the real threat that terrorist groups like ISIS will infiltrate these massive movements of people to kill civilians in Europe and beyond. I am deeply concerned that the screening at many European borders is inadequate and putting lives at risk. All of us must be responsive to the humanitarian needs without compromising one iota on security. European response plans should include specifics about strengthening security screening throughout the European region. During the conflict in Kosovo, I travelled to Stenkovec refugee camp in Macedonia and was at the McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey to welcome some of the 4,400 people brought from there to the United States. A refugee--Agron Abdullahu--was apprehended and sent to jail in 2008 for supplying guns and ammunition to the ``Fort Dix 5''--a group of terrorists who were also sent to prison for plotting to kill American soldiers at the Fort Dix military installation. Given Secretary Kerry's announcement in September that the United States intends to resettle at least 85,000 refugees in fiscal year 2016, including at least 10,000 Syrians, and at least 100,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017, the United States and Europe must be on high alert to weed out terrorists from real refugees. Because religious and ethnic minorities often have additional risks and vulnerabilities even as refugees, they should be prioritized for resettlement. Tuesday's hearing examined the ``who'' is arriving, the ``why'' they are coming to Europe, and the ``what'' has been done and should be done in response. European governments, entities like the OSCE and the EU, and civil society all have critical roles to play. The United States has been the leading donor to the humanitarian crisis inside Syria and refugee crisis in the region. We also have the largest refugee admissions program in the world. However, according to Tuesday's testimony from Shelly Pitterman, Regional Representative for the UN High Commission for Refugees, ``The current inter-agency Syrian Regional Refugee and Resilience (3RP) plan for 2015 is only 41 percent funded, which has meant cuts in food aid for thousands of refugees.'' Globally, he warned, ``The humanitarian system is financially broke. We are no longer able to meet even the absolute minimum requirements of core protection and lifesaving assistance to preserve the human dignity of the people we care for. The current funding level for the 33 UN appeals to provide humanitarian assistance to 82 million people around the world is only 42 percent. UNHCR expects to receive just 47 percent of the funding we need this year.'' At the hearing, Sean Callahan, Chief Operating Officer of Catholic Relief Services, said, ``As global leaders in the international humanitarian and refugee response, the U.S. and Europe must heed Pope Francis' call and find new ways to alleviate the suffering and protect the vulnerable.'' I could not agree more. In the 20th and 21th centuries, the United States and Europe have come together to address the great challenges of our time and this is an opportunity to do so again.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me thank Kevin Brady, the chairman, for his extraordinary leadership on this and so many other issues, and Mr. Blumenauer, with whom we have worked together to build a strong bipartisan push for this piece of legislation. I do rise in strong support for passage of S. 1362, the PACE Innovation Act. Identical to the companion bill that I introduced along with Mr. Blumenauer, this bill will provide PACE programs with flexibility to bring a proven model of care to new populations. The program for all-inclusive care for the elderly, or PACE, is a widely popular program serving over 30,000 seniors around the country. For those unfamiliar with PACE, the program delivers the entire range of medical and long-term services, including medical care and prescription drug services, physical or occupational therapy, day or respite care, and medical specialties such as dentistry, optometry, and podiatry. Currently, eligibility for PACE is limited to those aged 55 and over who meet State-specified criteria for needing nursing home-level care. This program will provide wellness and keeps people in their homes. It is already doing it. Now more people will benefit from it. It improves outcomes. And this is all for people who otherwise would be paying catastrophic costs for nursing home care. Mr. Speaker, PACE has seen a significant growth in recent years, including a 30 percent increase in the number of people receiving services over the last 3 years alone. PACE has a proven track record in my own State of New Jersey where programs currently serve roughly 900 seniors throughout the State. Just last week, Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to attend the grand opening and ribbon cutting of a new PACE program in Monmouth County, and it is New Jersey's fifth program. When I first heard about PACE, I worked hard to bring this valuable program to my State back in 2009. Even though it was around before that, it was one of the best kept secrets around. They then formed the first PACE program called LIFE, Living Independently for Elderly, at St. Francis Medical Center in the Trenton and Hamilton area. I have visited St. Francis LIFE often since and on its fifth anniversary was overwhelmed by the appreciation of seniors and their families for the program's ability to raise or maintain their quality of life. The limits, however, and operational restrictions placed on PACE do not allow these programs to serve many others in need. Chronological age should not be the determinant. If somebody is disabled and could use and should use a nursing home and is eligible, this gives another option to the family to keep them at home. The legislation will allow CMS to establish pilot programs and waive restrictions and test how to best deliver results for new populations. As Tim Clontz, the chairman of the National PACE Association's Public Policy Committee, testified before the Health Subcommittee on the Energy and Commerce Committee, he told stories about a man named Jim G., a 54-year-old man with early-onset Alzheimer's disease. He was hospitalized for a lung infection and, as a result, stayed home alone during the day, where he was isolated and struggled with activities of daily living, such as personal grooming, household chores, and child care. His wife quit her job to care for him full time, but his needs were more than she could handle. He was permanently placed in a memory care unit, and since PACE was not an option for Jim--remember, he is 54 years old--his wife is crowd-sourcing to try to pay his medical care. This heartbreaking story could have been eliminated. I also chair the Alzheimer's Caucus, Mr. Speaker, here in the House, and I can tell you there are many patients with early onset who could benefit and benefit in a very, very significant way with this change in law. I look forward to the President's signature. Again, I want to thank you, Kevin, for your leadership and your very distinguished staff.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, since 1987, the Lord's Resistance Army, or LRA, has killed, raped, kidnapped, enslaved or robbed thousands of people in the Great Lakes region of Africa and beyond. In October 2011, the Obama administration deployed about 100 military advisers to help Ugandan and other military forces in the region to seek out and capture or kill the members of a terrorist force that has now dwindled from thousands of fighters in the late 1990s and early 2000s to fewer than 200 today, but remains a very real danger to people in the east and central regions of Africa. A hearing I held last week looked at why the effort to end the LRA is so critical for the international community and how the U.S. counter-LRA program has worked thus far. Last week's hearing was held even in the absence of the Department of Defense or the State Department (whose relevant officials are unavailable for a few weeks) because it will serve as acknowledgement of the importance of countering the LRA prior to the administration's decision on whether to continue the program. The decision on renewing the American deployment will come in the next few weeks. We trust the administration will decide to continue this worthy effort. We hope to cover U.S. counter-LRA policy with administration witnesses in a future hearing on Africa's Great Lakes region. One can use a number of metaphors to describe the LRA today. It is like a wounded animal, less capable but still very dangerous. It is like a vulture, feeding off the existing misery it finds in countries otherwise troubled by conflict. The LRA is like a fire that is tamped down but not extinguished and can re-ignite at any time. However, the danger posed by the LRA is not metaphorical; it is very real to those who still live in fear in eastern and central Africa. The LRA is a vivid example of how ethnic strife can provide a cover for wanton viciousness. In the name of protecting the rights of northern Uganda's Acholi tribe, LRA founder Joseph Kony has brought only wretchedness to his people and their neighbors, as well as to people living in surrounding countries. Efforts to come to a negotiated settlement have all come to naught because Kony apparently has no coherent demands. His terrorist group seems to want nothing more than chaos and destruction. The international community has been much too quick to abandon humanitarian activities, largely because the number of victims has been reduced significantly. In confirmation hearing testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee last year, General David Rodriguez referred to the counter-LRA effort as ``a good success story,'' citing the group's decline and American determination to support African efforts to finish off the LRA. Unfortunately, this is where the metaphors about the group must be kept in mind. Whenever the LRA has had a setback due to international efforts to eliminate it, the group's retaliation has been ruthless. Ongoing conflict in Central African Republic, South Sudan and eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo has provided a welcoming environment in which the LRA can hide and resume its deadly activities with less fear of regional government action against it. When we take our eyes off the LRA, they have enhanced maneuverability and opportunity to regroup. Thanks to the #Kony2012 campaign by the advocacy group Invisible Children, the LRA became notorious worldwide and garnered international support, especially among the young, on behalf of a robust counter-LRA effort. Yet the staying power of social media is fleeting. There are always new causes, also legitimate, to draw attention away. Remember #BringBackOurGirls on behalf of the Chibok schoolgirls kidnapped by Boko Haram? Our caring has to extend to the victims of LRA and other such groups, which not only include those whom they attack, but also those whom they cruelly use in their destructive campaigns. We had one such victim with us, who described the ongoing desolation the LRA brings to so many young lives. We also had witnesses familiar with the LRA and its terrorist activities who described the ongoing threat this group poses, however diminished their ranks may be. Countering terrorist groups cannot depend on Twitter campaigns. The United States and other members of the international community must retain our resolve to capture or remove the leaders of the LRA and any terrorist group that threaten the lives and well-being of innocent people worldwide. Whether such groups pose a direct, confirmable threat to the homeland or not, by terrorizing those whom we help, they oppose U.S. interests and must be dealt with.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, earlier this week I convened a hearing on the topic of food security and nutrition programs in Africa. I am the sponsor of the Global Food Security Act of 2015, a bill which in its prior iteration passed the House of Representatives. The Global Food Security Act, H.R. 1567, will help provide a long-term strategy to combat global hunger by authorizing the existing national food security initiative coordinated by USAID commonly known as Feed the Future. It is a bill with broad bipartisan support, including the original co- sponsorship of my friend and colleague Karen Bass as well as Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce and Ranking Member Eliot Engel. Investing in global food security is a policy that is both penny wise and pound wise. This program strengthens nutrition, especially for children during that critical first 1000-day window, from conception to the child's second birthday. Indeed, there is perhaps no wiser investment that we could make in the human person than to concentrate on ensuring that sufficient nutrition and health assistance is given during the first one thousand days of life: A thousand days that begins with conception, continues throughout pregnancy, includes the milestone of birth and then finishes at roughly the second birthday of the child. Children who do not receive adequate nutrition in utero are more likely to experience lifelong cognitive and physical deficiencies, such as stunting. UNICEF estimates that one in four children worldwide is stunted due to lack of adequate nutrition. By addressing nutrition during the first 1000 days of life, we help lay the groundwork that the next 25,000 days--or whatever the number is that our Creator has allotted--are filled with good health. As the three witnesses at the hearing attested, enhancing food security is also transformational in the lives of millions of small- holder farmers throughout the world, particularly women. Feed the Future teaches small-scale farmers techniques to increase agricultural yield, thereby helping nations achieve food security, something that is in the national security interest of the United States as well. It is also economical in the long run, and should lead to a reduction in the need for emergency food aid. The approach we have taken in the Global Food Security Act is fiscally disciplined, authorizing an amount for 2016 which is less than what we appropriated for food security programs in 2014. USAID is nevertheless able to do more with less by leveraging our aid with that of other countries, the private sector, NGOs and, especially faith-based organizations, whose great work on the ground in so many different countries impacts so many lives, and who were ably represented at the hearing by Carolyn Woo of Catholic Relief Services. By statutorily authorizing this existing program, which had its roots in the Bush administration and was formalized by President Obama, we are also increasing our oversight by requiring the administration to report to Congress. Political will is absolutely essential to enacting a global food security policy that will continue. Such interventions in the lives of so many people in Africa, particularly in the first 1000 days of life, are not only cost-effective but morally imperative.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding. Mr. Speaker, last month, Pope Francis admonished a joint session of Congress to follow the Golden Rule, to ``do unto others as you would have them do unto you,'' and said that the Golden Rule compels us to ``protect and defend human life at every stage of development'' and that ``it is wrong to remain silent and look the other way.'' Establishing this select committee is the right thing to do. We simply can't remain silent or look the other way. Instead, Congress needs to thoroughly investigate profoundly disturbing conduct by top-level Planned Parenthood officials. Caught on tape--and I have watched all the tapes, Planned Parenthood's top leadership, not interns or lower level employees, showed callous disregard for children's lives while gleefully calculating the financial gain derived from the sale of baby body parts. We already know that every day Planned Parenthood dismembers or chemically poisons to death approximately 900 unborn babies. Since 1973, more than 7 million children have been violently killed in Planned Parenthood clinics. Now, because of the CMP videos, Planned Parenthood's involvement in trafficking in baby body parts has been revealed. In one clip, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, senior director of Planned Parenthood Federation of America's Medical Services says on camera: ``We have been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, and because we know that, I am not going to crush that part. I am going to basically crush below, I am going to crush above, and I am going to see if I can get it all intact . . . I would say a lot of people want liver; and for that reason, most providers will do this case under ultrasound guidance, so they will know where they are putting their forceps.'' Ladies and gentlemen of the House, this is a dismemberment abortion-- arms, legs, torsos, decapitation--but the prized body part is preserved, pulled out intact, and then sold to brokers. This needs to be done. We haven't lost our sense of being shocked.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Burma is a problem; Rohingya Muslims face problems. In Pakistan, as we all know, there are problems; in Iran, not just with the Baha'i who are persecuted again and have been facing that with unrelenting pressure, but also other Christians who live there and other Muslims. Mr. Speaker, the need for USCIRF is clear, and I hope all Members will support this important human rights legislation. I thank the Chair, and I thank my friend for yielding.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank the chairman for his leadership and for his commitment to human rights, particularly religious freedom, and I want to thank Senator Corker for helping to shepherd this legislation through the Senate when there were some contentious issues. Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom was created as part of the landmark International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, originally authored by my good friend and former colleague Frank Wolf, who provided exemplary service and leadership in this House. The creation of USCIRF made the promotion and protection of religious freedom a priority of U.S. foreign policy; and believe me, before the passage of this law, it was not. Since its inception, USCIRF has been a valuable, independent, and bipartisan source of information and policy recommendations for the Congress, U.S. Government, and the American people. Mr. Speaker, USCIRF gives voice to persecuted religious groups and raises prisoner cases, individual cases, at the highest levels of the U.S. Government. USCIRF's annual report--and I encourage Members to read it--often provides a fuller view of violations of religious freedom than the State Department's International Religious Freedom Report. As an independent body, USCIRF has the political freedom to report the facts and provide critical insight and recommendations on countries like Vietnam, Pakistan, India, Cuba, or China, countries where the U.S. Government may be hesitant to draw attention to religious rights violations because it is concerned about upsetting foreign governments. It needs to be noted that in the beginning, the Clinton administration actively opposed passage of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. I know because I chaired the hearings. We heard from people like Assistant Secretary John Shattuck, who said it would create a hierarchy of human rights, which it did not. It put religious freedom in its rightful place. Of course, years later, people from the administration pointed out that none of that happened and it was a very important addition to our work. I also want to note that a very broad coalition supported and continued to support IRFA in general and USCIRF in particular. In the end, President Clinton did sign the legislation into law. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops endorses USCIRF's reauthorization, as do over 80 different nongovernmental organizations and religious groups, part of the International Religious Freedom Roundtable. These groups sent a letter to every Member of Congress and said, in pertinent part, ``while there is very little we agree on theologically, or politically, we all agree on the importance of religious freedom.'' Mr. Speaker, bipartisan cooperation is critically important at a time when religious freedom is under siege through the world. Anti-Semitism, pervasive in most of the Middle East, has spread like a cancer to parts of Europe. The increase in violence perpetrated against Christians, Muslims, and other religious minorities has reached staggering proportions, including disturbing reports of torture, rape, imprisonment, forced exile, and murder. Mr. Speaker, the world faces a deepening crisis of religious freedom restrictions and abuses by governments. The Pew Foundation estimates that over 75 percent of the world's population lives in countries where severe religious freedom abuses are commonplace. Ancient Christian communities in Iraq and Syria are on the verge of extinction, and other religious minorities in the Middle East face a constant assault from ISIS. ISIS, as we all know, has committed and is committing genocide, mass atrocities, and war crimes. China continues to suppress religious practice broadly and with impunity. It has been another punishing year for the Tibetan Buddhists, Uighur Muslims, Christians, as well as Falun Gong practitioners who face restrictions, imprisonment, and torture.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 1300, the Adoptive Family Relief Act. This bill seeks to remove obstacles for immigrant visas to be issued to adopted children from other countries. It eliminates fees for such visas. Clearly, the challenge of caring for orphans due to crises worldwide is increasing. Rather than frustrate, however, or undermine the compassion and the love of American families who seek to adopt, this legislation modestly seeks to remove some of those barriers and some of those obstacles. I would point out to my colleagues that I have held of number of hearings on adoption in my subcommittee, the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations. At one of those hearings several months ago, one of our witnesses made a very keen observation that there are more than 50 million children orphaned on the continent of Africa; and if you put that number in perspective, that would make that number of children, if they were in a single country, the fourth largest country in all of Africa after Nigeria, Ethiopia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. One remedy, of course, for this crisis is intercountry adoption, which sometimes brings children from Africa to our shores to provide them with loving homes. Of course, this is only a partial remedy. Many do find a place to live, a home with family members, but many others are left to fend for themselves. This legislation recognizes that countries' policies do matter. Look at the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Currently, there are more than 400 American families who have successfully adopted children from the DRC. However, due to the DRC Government's suspension of exit permits, which was implemented beginning in September of 2013, many of these families have been unable to bring their adopted children home to the United States. About a dozen of those children have paid with their lives, dying in the country before they could receive medical attention. Others are in dire need of medical aid which, again, this legislation would help, at least, in terms of the families to give them a bridge for the financial burdens they face. I would point out that at one of my hearings, one of the witnesses really, in a very powerful way, said--and her name was Jovana Jones, an adoptive parent--``As adoptive parents, we spend years preparing, and it is imperative that our children come home immediately. We have done our part. Our families have done all we can, and we are at our limit.'' And then she said: ``Our arms are open now, and our homes are ready to receive them today. We pray that our government mirrors our dedication and acts now so that our children come home soon.'' This is a very important piece of legislation that hopefully will facilitate the adoption and, at least, help those parents who are putting their money on the line; and it allows them to facilitate that adoption, to just hang in there until they can get their children.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, in 1983, 241 American servicemen in Beirut were killed and another 60 injured by a car bomb. One of the Marines murdered was my constituent, Paul Innocenzi III, who lived with his young family in my hometown of Hamilton. In my second term as Congressman, I joined mourners at his funeral. I will never forget the agony and the sorrow of his family. Iranian terrorism killed Paul Innocenzi and, over the decades, has killed or maimed thousands of other Americans. A Federal court, Mr. Speaker, found that the 1983 bombing was ``beyond question'' perpetrated by ``Hezbollah and its agent who received massive material and technical support from the Iranian Government.'' Later a three-judge Federal appeals court panel approved $1.75 billion in judgment against Iran for the 1983 bombing and some other Iranian acts of terror. Today Iran is poised to get billions of dollars through so-called sanctions relief for an egregiously flawed comprehensive plan of action, money that will procure for Iran a significantly larger arsenal of sophisticated weapons and an enhanced capability to terrorize, murder, and destabilize. The chairman talked about Iran's $21 billion weapons purchase from Russia. Billions more to Iran will exponentially increase weapons buys. The Justice for Victims of Iranian Terrorism Act authored by Pat Meehan says not so fast. The President has said he will veto this bill. That is wrong, Mr. Speaker. That is uncaring, it is unacceptable, it is unconscionable. And does a grave disservice to American victims of Iranian terrorism. Support court-ordered victim payments by the terrorist State of Iran. Fundamental justice demands that this bill become law. Mr. Speaker, what was previously unacceptable--an Iranian nuclear state--is now inevitable under the terms and conditions of what is officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Tragically, the deal is riddled with serious flaws, gaps, and huge concessions to Iran. Taken as a whole, this egregiously flawed deal poses an existential threat to Israel, our allies in the region--and poses significant risks to the United States. Today Iran is poised to get billions of dollars through so-called sanctions relief--money that will procure for Iran a significantly larger arsenal of sophisticated weapons and an enhanced capability to terrorize, murder and destabilize. The Justice for Victims of Iranian Terrorism Act (H.R. 3457) authored by Pat Meehan says not so fast. The bill prohibits the President from waiving sanctions until Iran pays its more than $44.5 billion in court ordered damages to thousands of victims and survivors of Iranian terror attacks. To date, the U.S. Department of State has refused to release funds ordered by the courts to victims and surviving families in more than 80 cases despite clear authority to do so under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). In 1983, 241 American servicemen in Beirut were killed and another 60 injured by a car bomb. One of the Marines murdered was my constituent WO1 Paul Innocenzi III who lived with his young family in my hometown of Hamilton. In my second term as congressman, I joined mourners at his funeral. I will never forget the agony and sorrow of his family. Iranian terrorism killed Paul Innocenzi and over the decades, has killed or maimed thousands of other Americans. A federal district court found that the 1983 bombing was ``beyond question'' perpetrated by ``Hezbollah and its agents (who) received massive material and technical support from the Iranian government''. Later a three judge federal appeals court panel approved a $1.75 billion judgement against Iran for the 1983 bombing and other Iranian acts of terror. The President has said he will veto this bill. That's wrong. That's uncaring, unacceptable, and unconscionable. Support court-ordered victim payments by the terror state of Iran. Fundamental justice demands that this bill becomes law.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, Janice and Len Nachbar of Freehold, New Jersey, who lead the Central New Jersey Dystonia Support and Action Group, eloquently addressed a congressional briefing yesterday on dystonia--a neurological movement disorder characterized by muscle contractions causing abnormal and often painful body movements and postures. Dystonia can cause a range of impairments, in some cases leaving a person legally blind or unable to walk or communicate. Janice and Len are the loving parents of Joanna, a remarkably brave and smart woman who is afflicted with dystonia. Janice and Len explained their daughter's multi-year battle with this condition, saying in part: ``Eventually, her dystonia became so advanced and painful; she was approved for Deep Brain stimulation surgery, or commonly known as, DBS. She underwent seven hours of brain surgery while wide awake to implant electrodes in her brain with a second surgery to follow.'' Ultimately, says Janice, ``[Dystonia's] largest tolls are emotional. How hard it is to see a bright child with the world open to her disintegrate daily.'' Today, though Joanna faces significant mobility and communication challenges, she serves as an online mentor for dystonia patients around the globe. Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the Nachbars' compelling testimony from the briefing, along with testimony from Janet Hieshetter, executive director of the Dystonia Medical Research Foundation. I urge my colleagues to read their statements and seek to join us in expanding improved research and treatments for this little- understood condition. testimony of janet hieshetter, executive director of the dystonia medical research foundation Thank you all for being here today and joining us for Dystonia Awareness Month. If you don't know a great deal about dystonia, you are in the right place. We have a great line up of speakers that can talk extensively about these conditions. My name is Janet Hieshetter, and I am Executive Director of the non-profit Dystonia Medical Research Foundation. The DMRF works to advance medical research and support individuals and families impacted by dystonia. We also work collaboratively with four other patient-driven dystonia organizations, the Benign Essential Blepharospasm Research Foundation, DySTonia, Inc., the National Spasmodic Dysphonia Association and the National Spasmodic Torticollis Association to improve patient care through a nationwide grassroots effort known as the Dystonia Advocacy Network. Briefly, dystonia is a neurological movement disorder that is characterized by persistent or intermittent muscle contractions causing abnormal, often repetitive, movements, postures, or both. The movements are usually patterned and twisting, and may resemble a tremor. There are multiple forms of dystonia, and dozens of diseases and conditions may include dystonia as a symptom. Dystonia can affect a single body area like the eyelids leaving the person legally blind or be generalized throughout multiple muscle groups in the body--often placing people in wheelchairs. Dystonia affects men, women, and children of all ages and backgrounds. Estimates suggest that no fewer than 300,000 people are affected in North America. Dystonia causes varying degrees of disability and pain, from mild to severe. Thanks in large part to our federal investment in medical research, significant advancements have been made in our understanding of these conditions. While there remains no cure, clinical research has led to meaningful treatment options including botulinum toxin injections and deep brain stimulation. testimony of janice nachbar Joanna was a very bright, articulate child. She walked at ten months. She had a high and big voice. Her hands always had tremors, but so did those of my mother and grandmother, so we shrugged it off. She also never vomited. A good thing, right. She was in the gifted class in first grade. She attended dancing school and gymnastics and was good at both. Strange symptoms started appearing between the ages of six and ten. Her handwriting became cramped and her reading was not advancing properly. In the third grade, she was moved out of the gifted class. By the sixth grade, she was on the verge of repeating the grade. Although she moved up to the seventh grade, her work was still below grade level. We took her to a multitude of specialists, including an eye therapist, reading labs and psychologists, thinking she had a learning disability. Nothing was helping. She became frustrated and felt she was a failure. While in High School, Joanna had braces on her teeth. Coincidentally, her speech started to become cluttered and hard to understand. We attributed it to the braces. She was classified as a learning disabled student and was placed in a special academic program in school. She was given individual help with her work. We also hired tutors, but her work was still unsatisfactory. We knew something was radically wrong when her braces came off and we still could not understand her. Physically, she was still functional. She drove her car. After graduation, she became licensed as a home and nursing home aide and briefly was able to work. By age 21, her speech was almost gone and she was having pain and spasms. Her back was pulled to the side and her hips were uneven. Her balance was off and she fell repeatedly. The first neurologist she saw told us she had Fazio-Land disease. This was a form of muscular dystrophy and we were told she would slowly strangle to death. We next took her to a well-known neurologist in a large teaching hospital in NYC. He admitted her to their testing center and spent three days having various medical staff poke, prod and test. He came up with nothing, other than to watch her. As parents, we were panicking as we watched her diminish and were fortunate enough to obtain an appointment with Dr. Mark Hallett, Senior Investigator of the Human Motor Control Section of the NINDS. Joanna and I traveled to Bethesda and spent an afternoon with Dr. Hallett. Thanks to him, and after 15 years of searching, we finally had a diagnosis. He referred us to a movement disorder specialist who, coincidentally, was in the same building and one floor below the neurologist she had been seeing for two years, but who had never mentioned the movement disorder clinic in his own department. This kind of disconnect by physicians is a huge issue for those seeking a diagnosis and treatment. If a physician does not recognize a movement disorder or avoids a referral to a movement disorder specialist, the patient is helpless. After seeing the new movement disorder neurologist, Joanna began taking medications for Dystonia. At this point, the mystery of her school failure was revealed. Her hairdresser commented that her head no longer had minute tremors. Tremors? I never saw them. When the tremors stopped, she could read. She didn't have a learning disability; she just couldn't see the page. Imagine how different her school experience would have been with an early diagnosis and treatment? Now she was able to go to a local college and obtain an associate's degree, something none of us could have imagined. Eventually, her dystonia became so advanced and painful; she was approved for Deep Brain stimulation surgery, or commonly known as DBS. She underwent seven hours of brain surgery while wide awake to implant electrodes in her brain with a second surgery to follow. Some people have miraculous results. Joanna had minimal results, but the DBS did lessen her pain. Remember she never vomited? It seems she has no gag reflex. She also cannot cough. As a result, Joanna has had numerous pneumonias, with the last one requiring 11 days in CCU, five days of which on a ventilator. It was a devastating experience for all of us. I spent the entire 11 days next to her, only leaving her side to eat or shower in the hospital or to take a short break when another family member sat with her. All patients need advocates, but a non-verbal one is even more vulnerable. Because her dystonia affects her mouth so intensely, she cannot take in enough nourishment to sustain health. At 5'3 inches in height, she weighed about 88 pounds. She now has a permanent feeding tube and takes all nutrition and hydration through it. She can eat very little, since just about everything is a choking risk and she can't cough to move the food out. Her g tube became infected and she spent 7 weeks in a rehab center. Of course, her dad and I spent 7 weeks there, as well. Despite all of these treatments, Joanna's dystonia worsened. She lost all speech, most of the use of her hands and the ability to walk safely. My husband and I are aging and were fearful for Joanna's future security. As a family, we made the most difficult decision of a lifetime. In March of 2014, Joanna moved to a long-term care facility in Philadelphia. It's a wonderful place and she has many friends, but it's still not the life any of us envisioned for our bright and lively child. Dystonia has affected Joanna and us in many ways. Economically, we made huge changes in our work so as to be able to care for her. Her medical bills, hospitalizations and trips to see doctors added up. Socially, our family became hermits, avoiding social activities either because Joanna couldn't keep up or we had nobody who could stay with her. We missed birthdays, weddings, family vacations and other important events due to Dystonia. The largest tolls are emotional. How hard it is to see a bright child with the world open to her disintegrate daily. How hard is it for Joanna? That's our family story and Joanna's journey. Thank you. testimony of len nachbar My wife, Janice, spoke to you about how dystonia has affected our daughter, Joanna, and our family. I'm going to tell you about how dystonia changed the lives of members of our New Jersey and Philadelphia support groups and of friends of ours around the country. Last week, a bright, beautiful and talented friend in her twenties wrote: ``Feeling so completely broken. Why was I even born? I live in such pain and agony. There is no end in sight.'' She's a graduate student who should have a promising career and life, but the constant pain caused by her dystonia hasn't allowed it. Sometimes the pain, the inability to work and the resulting poverty becomes too much to bear. A few years ago, a member of our New Jersey support group attempted to commit suicide. She is also a bright woman and was a graduate student at Rutgers University when dystonia struck. Another member of our support group was the Facilities Administrator at a major Philadelphia hospital before he developed dystonia. His neck is involuntarily pulled to the side. He's unable to straighten it. He tried to continue working, but the constant pain made him retire. A member of our New Jersey support group has been a teacher for many years. She loves the career and wants to continue teaching, but says that her school district is trying to force her to resign. A second grade teacher who's a member of our Philadelphia group is still working, but sometimes needs assistance. So far, her colleagues have been able to help her hide the problems. A New Jersey Special Ed teacher is an ``expert'' on the accommodations that people with disabilities need. She's angry because her school makes accommodations for her students, but has refused to do so for her. She asked for a chair and a program that would enable her to dictate because she has difficulty writing. Dystonia has impacted or ended the careers of many other friends and support group members. The bass member of a singing group can no longer sing. A travel agent can no longer drive and has difficulty speaking to clients. An attorney has similar problems. A guitarist friend, who was a Grammy winner, lost the ability to finger the strings. A French Horn player's lips stopped working properly. A half year ago, a story about a Midwest woman in her thirties received a lot of Internet and media attention. Her story was featured on national news programs and she was interviewed on the Today show. The woman had been diagnosed with CP, was treated unsuccessfully for that disease for over thirty years and led a very disabled life. After living as a CP patient for over three decades, she finally received the correct diagnosis: dystonia. Her story is even more frustrating. The woman is one of a minute percentage of dystonia patients who have dopa responsive dystonia. The symptoms that those people have can be controlled by medication. After thirty years, the woman is now leading an almost ``normal'' life. Misdiagnosis is common. Many patients are told that their symptoms are psychosomatic. A third of the hundreds of thousands of dystonia patients in this country are children. An eight and a half year old girl from New Jersey and a fifteen year old young woman from Connecticut were both diagnosed with CP. Both had unnecessary and very painful surgeries that cut their leg tendons in an attempt to straighten their feet. Both actually have dystonia. A foot turning in is often a first symptom. It wasn't recognized by their pediatricians or by their orthopedists. When we started our New Jersey support group, it took our daughter and many of the original members over ten years to be diagnosed correctly. Research conducted by the NIH has shortened that time for many patients. It has also improved the types and number of treatments that are available. However, as our presentations have illustrated, there's much more to learn and it's important to continue funding the research. Please help us. Thank you.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding, and I thank the gentlewoman from Florida, Corrine Brown, for her courtesy. Mr. Speaker, I served on the House Veterans' Affairs Committee for a quarter of a century, including stints as vice chairman and full committee chair. I believe that our Nation's veterans are fortunate to have a great champion with the gentleman from Florida, Chairman Miller, at the helm. Chairman Miller has led the committee with aggressive oversight and accountability of the often-troubled Department. He has shepherded numerous bills into law, including the VA Choice Program, which expands timely and local access to health care for veterans, and, working so closely in a bipartisan way with Ranking Member Brown, ensured that the VA has the resources and the authorities to meet evolving needs. The chairman always puts veterans and their dependents first. Chairman Miller has explained the bill. I will just take a brief moment to comment on title III. Title III reauthorizes a number of provisions from a law that I wrote back in 2001 known as the Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act, or Public Law 107-95. That law established the grant programs that included female veterans, homeless veterans with special needs, children, serious mental illnesses, and incarcerated veterans. The act authorized dental care. We learned through our hearing process that not only oral health--but overall health as well--is negatively affected with broken and diseased teeth and gums. And you don't get a job with busted teeth. Oral health was critical, so we put that into the bill. Job training and expanded domiciliary care programs were also expanded. It also authorized the Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans and launched the national goal, which has now been replicated since 2010, of attempting to end chronic homelessness among veterans. We also did the Department of Labor's Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program and the HUD-VASH program. In 2001, the estimation from VA was that almost 300,000 veterans were homeless at some time during that year. By fiscal year 2013, that number had decreased to approximately 140,000 veterans. Of course we now have a different, altered way of calculating, but, unfortunately, on any given night last year, just under 50,000 veterans were still on the street. This legislation will go far and do much so that no veteran is on the street and suffering homelessness. We need to bring them back into society. Again, I thank Chairman Miller for his strong leadership. Thank you, Chairman Miller, for your leadership on this bill and your staff's work to bring it to the floor in a timely manner to ensure that the VA continues to provide the services necessary for veterans to successfully transition back to civilian life and live independently. Mr. Speaker, I served on the House Veteran's Affairs Committee for a quarter of a century, including stints as vice and full committee chair and I believe that our nation's veterans are fortunate to have a great champion with Chairman Miller at the helm. Chairman Miller led the committee with aggressive oversight and accountability of the often troubled Department. You have shepherded numerous bills into law including the VA Choice program which expands timely and local access to healthcare for veterans and you've ensured that the VA has the resources and authorities to meet evolving needs. You have always put veterans and their dependents--first. Mr. Speaker, the bill we are voting on today will reauthorize over 30 critical programs that provide healthcare, education, and child care benefits to veterans and continue the VA's homeless veterans and caregiver assistance. Since Chairman Miller has explained the bill let me focus for a moment on Title III which extends many provisions first authorized by landmark legislation I authored in 2001 known as the Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act (Public Law 107-95). That law established the grant programs we are reauthorizing today that focused on homeless female veterans; homeless veterans with special needs, children, serious mental illnesses, and incarcerated veterans. The Act authorized dental care--for better oral health and overall health--job training and expanded domiciliary care programs. It is hard to get a job if your teeth are cracked and deteriorated. It authorized the Advisory Committee on Homeless Veterans and launched the national goal of attempting to end chronic homelessness among veterans within a decade of the enactment of the Act. And among its many other provisions, it increased funding for two programs that were effective but seriously underfunded. The first was the Department of Labor's Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program--which helps homeless veterans reenter and stay in the labor force. Allowing more veterans access to this program was critical, as a steady job is key to successfully maintaining a residence. The second is the HUD-VASH program, which combines rental assistance with case management and clinical services. After enactment, utilization of these services spiked and more veterans received the assistance that has led to self-sufficiency and independence. Today, these programs continue to be a highly effective means of reducing homelessness among our veterans population. In 2001, it was estimated that almost 300,000 veterans experienced homelessness that year. By fiscal year 2013, that number had decreased to approximately 140,000 veterans. The VA and HUD have since changed how they calculate homeless veterans to a point-in-time estimate. The latest numbers show that we still have much work to do: on any given night last year, just under 50,000 veterans were on the street. Of course one homeless veteran is one too many. Yet we are continuing to make progress and the numbers demonstrate how these programs, coupled with other recent and successful programs like the Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) Program which we are reauthorizing today, are tangibly assisting homeless or potentially homeless women and men who served in our nation's armed forces. It is estimated that approximately 135,000 veterans and their families got assistance through SSVF in (FY) 2015 including funds to Soldier On and other initiatives in my state.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding. Madam Speaker, last week Pope Francis admonished a joint session of Congress to follow the Golden Rule--to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. The Pope also said the Golden Rule compels us to protect and defend human life at every stage of development--and, of course, that includes the unborn. It is wrong to remain silent, he said, or to look the other way when individuals are put at risk. At the White House welcoming ceremony earlier in the day, President Obama spoke of protecting the least of these, taken from Matthew's Gospel, the 25th chapter. When President Obama says protect the least of these, he excludes millions of unborn children. Every day Planned Parenthood dismembers or chemically poisons to death approximately 900 unborn babies, the least of these, and hurts many women in the process. Subsidized by half a billion dollars annually, Planned Parenthood kills a baby every 2 minutes and has terminated the lives of over 7 million infants since 1973, a staggering loss of children's lives that equates to twice the number of every man, woman and child living in the State of Connecticut. So I rise in strong support of H.R. 3495, the Women's Health and Public Safety Act, authored by our distinguished colleague, Sean Duffy, to give States the authority to defund Planned Parenthood. States, indeed, Madam Speaker, should have the freedom to choose who they subsidize and why. But the President has denied that option to at least six States so far, including Texas, Arizona, Indiana, Louisiana, Alabama, and Arkansas. The latter three States had moved to defund in the wake of the recent undercover videos by the Center for Medical Progress. Now, because of the CMP videos, we know Planned Parenthood is also trafficking in baby body parts. I would note parenthetically, Madam Speaker, I wrote the Trafficking Victims Protection Act to try to end the cruelty of modern-day slavery, sex trafficking, and labor trafficking. Planned Parenthood's activities are a manifestation of human trafficking, exploiting defenseless unborn children and taking body parts that they have no right to take. It turns out Planned Parenthood has turned these babies into human guinea pigs, and it makes the abortion industry even richer. Although much of the media continues to ignore this scandal, Planned Parenthood's meticulously crafted facade of care and compassion has been shattered. Caught on tape, Planned Parenthood's top leadership, not interns or lower level employees, show callous disregard for precious children's lives while gleefully calculating the financial gain, which begs the question: Do Americans understand the violence to children done every day in Planned Parenthood clinics? Have my Congressional colleagues, has the President, actually watched the videos? To care for the least of these, have they watched them? In one clip, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, Senior Director of Planned Parenthood Federation of America's Medical Services, says: ``We have been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that I am not going to crush that part.'' So they crush all around that part that is desired, dismember that baby piece by piece, but they leave intact certain parts, including livers, that will then be sold. Planned Parenthood Medical Directors' Council President Dr. Mary Gatter appears on the video nonchalantly talking about utilizing a ``less crunchy''--her words--abortion method, again, to preserve body parts. Regarding the price tag for baby body parts, she says: ``Let me just figure out what others are getting. And if this in the ballpark, then it is fine.'' ``If it is still low, then we can bump it up,'' she says. Another Planned Parenthood Director, Deborah VanDerhei, says: ``We are just trying to figure out as an industry''--and it is the abortion industry--``we are just trying to figure out how we are going to manage remuneration because the headlines would be a disaster.'' Concern for making money, finding another revenue stream, but no concern whatsoever for that child victim who suffers when they are dismembered: arms, legs, torso, decapitated head. It is gruesome dismemberment abortions. That is what Planned Parenthood does. One woman, Holly O'Donnell, from StemExpress, says: ``She gave me the scissors and told me that I had to cut down the middle of the face.'' ``I can't even describe what that feels like,'' she says. I suspect that, if the President watches at least one of the videos and my colleagues on the other side, they would at least demand real answers concerning Planned Parenthood's inhumane behavior and violence that is directed at the least of these.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend. You know, mention has been made about Margaret Sanger. I have read three of Margaret Sanger's books. In one of them, called The Pivot of Civilization, she talks about the cruelty of charity of caring for indigent women who carry babies to term, that you should not give them help, that charity is cruel. She was a racist. Read her books. Read her birth control review. I went to the Library of Congress, got many copies of it and read through it. She had many programs that talked about focusing on Blacks and others for extermination. Just read her books. And, again, The Pivot of Civilization is one of the worst. Let me also say to my friends that they talk about how these videos have been doctored. Well, there is a new report that just came out called the Coalfire Forensics Analysis. It finds that the videos are authentic and show no evidence of manipulation or editing. The events depicted in the missing footage fall into five common categories: commuting, waiting, adjusting recording equipment, meals, and restroom breaks. At each interview, four devices recorded conversations, two video recorders with microphones and two audio-only devices. I ask my friends and colleagues on the other side to take a look at that analysis. Again, you just attack the whistleblower. You attack the organization. But you don't look at the evidence. I have watched those tapes several times and was sickened by just how inhumane these individuals are in cutting little babies into pieces in order to procure their body parts. Seven million babies since 1973 killed in Planned Parenthood clinics. They ought to be called Child Abuse, Incorporated. It is the most unsafe place in America, for a child to be in a Planned Parenthood clinic. I submit the Coalfire Forensics Analysis Report for the Record. [Prepared by Coalfire Systems, Inc., Sept. 28, 2015] Digital Forensics Analysis Report (Delivered to Alliance Defending Freedom) Executive Summary In September, 2015, CGS, the prime contractor on behalf of Alliance Defending Freedom, engaged Coalfire Systems, Inc., the sub-contractor (hereinafter ``Coalfire'') to conduct a computer forensics analysis of certain raw video and audio data files. Coalfire's objectives for this project are to: Forensically evaluate video and audio files provided by The Center for Medical Progress (``the Organization'') through CGS (``raw'' video and audio), and determine whether the raw video or audio content of the files have been edited or otherwise altered; Compare the raw video and audio to certain files posted to YouTube (``Full Footage'' videos and a ``Supplemental'' video) for the purpose of determining inconsistencies between the files. The scope of Coalfire's analysis did not cover or include: Validation of those individuals depicted in the video or audio, who recorded the video and audio files, the location where they were recorded, when they were recorded, or the purpose of the recordings; Providing an opinion on the chain of custody prior to receipt of source materials by Coalfire; Coalfire's analysis was limited to only the source materials received from the Organization and did not include interviews of participants in the videos or audio. A flash drive containing recorded media was received via FedEx by Coalfire on September 17th, 2015, where it was examined using industry-standard forensic tools and techniques. The flash drive contained (i) a total of ten (10) videos with audio recorded on two (2) separate devices, and (ii) a total of eight (8) audio recordings made with two (2) audio-only devices. Coalfire's analysis of the recorded media files contained on the flash drive indicates that the video recordings are authentic and show no evidence of manipulation or editing. This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme. The uniformity between the footage from the cameras from the two Investigators also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic. With regard to the ``Full Footage'' YouTube videos released by the Organization, edits made to these videos were applied to eliminate non-pertinent footage, including ``commuting,'' ``waiting,'' ``adjusting recording equipment,'' ``meals,'' or ``restroom breaks,'' lacking pertinent conversation. Any discrepancies in the chronology of the timecodes are consistent with the intentional removal of this non-pertinent footage as described in this report. Furthermore, four of the five raw video recordings, which also contained audio captured from the video recording device, are accompanied by a raw audio recording captured from a separate audio-only recording device. The raw audio- only recordings last for the duration of their associated raw videos. These raw audio recordings support the completeness and authenticity of the raw video recordings since they depict the same events within the same duration as captured from the two separate video recorders.