Chris Smith

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Dr. Roe, thank you very much. Thank you for your great leadership here. I would like to now yield to my good friend and colleague, Dr. Fleming, a medical doctor as well, from the great State of Louisiana.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Will the gentleman yield just briefly to my good friend, Ms. Foxx, because she does have to leave, and then we'll go right back.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Thirty-three.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. No, I did not.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for raising that important issue. The People's Republic of China doesn't have a pro-life movement per se. The government is a dictatorship. Regrettably, going back to 1979, they enacted with great push and encouragement from the United States and from the West, Europe especially, a one-child-per-couple policy where brothers and sisters are illegal, where women are systematically, forcibly aborted, and forced sterilization is commonplace to achieve quotas. Not only does a woman have to get a birth authorization from the Government of China to have a baby; if she has an out-of-plan birth, she is aborted forcibly. Over the years, as chairman of the China Commission and as chairman of the Human Rights Committee of the Foreign Affairs Committee, I've chaired 43 congressional hearings on human rights in China; and many of those were focused on, as you pointed out, women who had to be behind screens to tell their story about the gross indignity, the exploitation, the crimes against humanity that had been committed against them. In China today, there are approximately 100 million, maybe more, missing daughters, the direct consequence of sex-selection abortion and what is often referred to as gendercide, the deliberate killing of a little girl simply because she is a girl. In her book ``Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls and the Consequences of a World Full of Men,'' Mara Hvistendahl traces the sordid history of sex-selection abortion as a means of population control. And almost no one knows about this. You'll never read about this in the local papers. You don't hear about it on the major news broadcasts. She writes: By August 1969, when the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the Population Council convened another workshop on population control, sex selection had become a pet scheme. Hvistendahl writes: If a reliable sex-determination technology could be made available to a mass market, there was a rough consensus that sex-selection abortion would be an effective, uncontroversial, and ethical way of reducing the global population. What that means is that you kill the girl child in the womb, you end one life, and that girl who will never grow up to be a woman because she has been exterminated because she happened to be a girl, will never be a mother. So it is a means of population control. It is absolutely an egregious violation of human rights, and yet our own President refuses to support a ban on sex-selection abortion. He talked about we the people and inclusion yesterday. Where's the inclusion of all unborn babies, but those who are particularly targeted for elimination, the girl child? And I would also add, finally, Live Action, an undercover sting operation that they had done--and it's on the Web, you can watch it, you can watch the raw footage, liveaction.org--in their series, ``Gendercide in America,'' they showed Planned Parenthood personnel in this country advising undercover female investigators how to procure sex-selection abortions. I watched that and was sickened by the admonishment, the so-called counseling that was all caught on tape. One staffer tells the investigator to wait until her baby is 5 months along, get the ultrasound. That's when you can determine the gender of the child, boy or girl, and if it's a girl, that's when you can kill it. And it was all made very clear. The investigators were laying out a scenario where, if it's a girl, I want the girl child to be destroyed. And there was Planned Parenthood accommodating that to the nth degree.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my friend for yielding and for raising again another very important point. You know, at several of these hearings, which were covered very scarcely by the news media, unfortunately, we had some powerful witnesses from women who are actually the victims of coercive abortion. Over the many years we've had such hearings, and when they tell their story, and they talk about the helplessness and almost hopelessness of the situation, trying to evade family planning cadres in China as they hunt them down. You know, most people are unaware of the fact that it begins with economic coercion. If you have a baby out of plan, you are fined if you do not voluntarily walk into the abortion mill for the child to be destroyed. And many women want those children. One of the women we had testify, her name was Wuijan. She was a Chinese student attending a U.S. university, and part of her testimony--these are her words--she said, when she was rounded up, literally grabbed by the family planning cadres and thrown into a van, totally against her will, she said: The room was full of moms who had just gone through a forced abortion. Some moms were crying. Some moms were mourning. Some moms were screaming. And one mom was rolling on the floor with unbearable pain. Then Wuijan said that it was her turn, and through her tears she described her journey into hell. Here is a woman, just like so many others that we heard from, who were literally trussed, picked up, arrested. I had a woman back in the 1990s, who was pretty much smuggled out of China, who ran one of the family planning centers in Fujian Province, and she self-described herself: ``By day I was a monster, by night a wife and mother of one.'' And she talked about it, and she got asylum here eventually. But she talked about how she would use every part of the police state to ensure that women, even if they evaded family planning cadres up to the ninth month--to drag her in and to kill the baby, and if it's very late in the pregnancy, with a poison shot of formaldehyde or some other substance right to the soft part of the brain to kill the baby. These are crimes against humanity. They are ever-present throughout China. And again, they're missing 100 million girls, maybe more, because of gendercide and the loss of life. There's no precedent. There's no example that even comes close of a government using abortion as a tool of population control and the like. And it came right out of the population control movement and what happened in the early or late sixties and especially into the seventies, right here in the United States. In 1984, I say to my friend, Mr. Fortenberry, 29 years ago I offered the first amendment on this floor, from this podium, to a foreign aid bill to deny funding to any organization, such as the U.N. Population Fund, that is complicit in China's forced abortion policy and involuntary sterilization. It passed, and it morphed into what became known as the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, offered on the appropriations bill by Congressman Jack Kemp. After all of these years, it is astonishing to me that we still have so many Members of Congress, we have an administration, in the Obama administration, that is, at best, indifferent, and I would say, at worst supportive of these crimes by giving money to the groups that are on the ground enabling these crimes against women. The Obama administration has enabled this cruel policy by its silence and its financial support to the tune of some $50 million a year to the U.N. Population Fund. We passed, in this House, a prohibition. They, unfortunately, ignore it, do findings that do not comport with the reality on the ground, and then end up sending this money. And I met with a woman whose name is Peng Peiyun, who ran the family planning program in China, I say to my friend, Mr. Fortenberry, for several hours in a conversation in Beijing. She kept coming back to the fact that the U.N. Population Fund was there on the ground and found nothing but voluntary abortions. Of course, there are a loss of lives, too, but no coercion. So the whitewashing that the U.N. Population Fund has been able to provide to this egregious violation of women's rights in China, and now we today, under the Obama administration, are funding it, Mr. Fortenberry. So it's something that has to end. We should be on the side of life and respect, not enabling such terrible things.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. One of the things that is so noble about the pro-life movement is that it loves and cares for women during the time of their crisis. And if they do procure an abortion, they are there, again, with Project Rachel and all of these outreaches to help women find reconciliation and peace.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. And men, too, have lost track of the number of women we have met that found that peace. We had four women today at the 40 Years of Victims who told their story of the terrible crisis of the abortion but also the reconciliation and peace that they found later. You make a very good point, Mr. Fortenberry, about the young generation. I have never seen more pro-lifers at the March for Life than we are seeing now. And I went to the first one back in 1974 with my wife, Marie, and then made every one thereafter. When I speak in schools, I used to get a great deal of pushback in answer to a question on the right to life. There are still people who push back, but many students say, It's life. Ultrasound has helped enormously. It's a window to the womb. We all remember Dr. Bernard Nathanson, the founder of NARAL, who became a pro-lifer. He said, ``If wombs had windows, abortion would end.'' The ultrasound is a window to the womb. And you can see that magnificent unborn child moving, shaking around, sucking his or her thumb, doing somersaults inside the womb. Blobs of tissue and protoplasm don't do this. I think this young generation also has another perspective as well. One of my favorite musicals is ``Les Miserables.'' My wife and I have seen it twice--once in New York, once here in Washington. And now the movie. There's a very haunting song in ``Les Miserables,'' a song by Marius, one of the chief people in that musical, Victor Hugo's ``Les Miserables,'' and it's called, ``Empty Chairs and Empty Tables.'' And he says, ``There's a grief that can't be spoken, there's a pain,'' and it goes on and on, ``Empty chairs and empty tables where my friends will live no more.'' We have empty chairs and empty tables. A third of this generation has been killed by abortion. You look to your left, you look to your right in a classroom or at a diner, there are missing children and now young adults even up to the age of 40, since 40 years ago Roe v. Wade was handed down. Empty chairs, empty tables. And I would add to that, empty cribs.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding, and I strongly support Mr. Frelinghuysen's amendment. Madam Chair, gaps in homeowners insurance coverage and a growing realization that there will be major tax receipt losses from towns that have had their tax bases eviscerated by Sandy is further compounded in a State that's reeling from a body blow with no precedent. All of this has led to crippling shortfalls. Towns have serious gaps in needed resources. They need our help. The $33 billion Frelinghuysen amendment fills those gaps for people in need of housing assistance, public infrastructure destroyed or damaged by Sandy will get a huge boost, and economic revitalization will accelerate. I've lost count, Madam Chair, of the number of my constituents who either didn't have flood insurance for their homes or who had an inadequate amount of coverage. To compound their misery, many have upside-down mortgages, and they desperately need our help. The Frelinghuysen amendment raises to $16 billion from $3.9 billion in the Rogers amendment, funds to aid in the relief of homeowners, buyouts, and home elevation. It will also provide very critical moneys for the Army Corps of Engineers. Where the Army Corps had projects in place, there was a mitigation of the amount of damage to infrastructure and to homes. We need this additional funding to protect homes, businesses so millions of people can get on with their lives.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by my good friend and colleague, Mr. Runyan, to ensure that the funding in this bill is targeted to those fishery disasters resulting from Superstorm Sandy. Recreational angling contributes more than $125 billion annually to the American economy, Madam Speaker, in addition to creating and sustaining over 1 million jobs. New Jersey has a long tradition of fishing along our 130-mile shoreline. Recreational and commercial fishing generates over $1.3 billion in New Jersey in economic activity and supports 8,500 Jersey jobs. This vital industry not only creates and sustains good jobs but boosts fishery conservation efforts, tourism, and contributes significantly to the economy in coastal communities. The disaster declaration on November 16 and the modest funding provided in the pending legislation will help rebuild the damaged and destroyed infrastructure so that this industry can recover and return to pre- storm levels. I urge all members to support the Runyan amendment.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule. When emergencies strike, large or small, Americans can always be counted on to assist and to support the victims. At our core, we are a Nation of Good Samaritans. After Superstorm Sandy came ashore in New Jersey and devastated the region, first responders courageously rescued people trapped in homes and cars. They often had minimal regard for their own personal welfare, safety and well-being. Everyone rallied around the clock. Governor Chris Christie, Emergency Management personnel, the National Guard, police and fire, elected officials, the Monmouth County OEM director Sheriff Shaun Golden were absolutely tenacious and effective, and our local mayors were like NFL quarterbacks--running the plays, making calls day by day, hour by hour. Faith-based organizations helped feed and clothe and shelter. Private voluntary organizations were on the scene in droves. Our neighbors to the north, west, and south poured in to the State to help restore power and remove fallen trees. Words are inadequate to convey my--our--appreciation. Within weeks, however, the emergency phase seamlessly matriculated into the recovery phase--the flip side of the same coin. Now the big question is this: will the feds have our backs as we strive to recover? It is an absolutely arduous process. I believe that we will. Any delay in appropriating sufficient funds will likely stall a comprehensive and robust recovery. Sandy was the most destructive storm ever in our region and, arguably, the second or third most costly in America's history. The Governor's office has estimated the damage in my State alone to be $36.9 billion. Homes like this one--22,000 homes like this one-- completely and totally destroyed. Another 324,000 homes damaged; 41,000 people can't return to those homes--they're still not fixed. Businesses also took it on the chin: 19,000 New Jersey businesses suffered damage of a quarter of a million dollars or more.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Three-quarters of New Jersey businesses were hurt by Sandy. When asked, they put the small business loss at $8.3 billion. No wonder 100,000 storm-related unemployment claims have been filed. The Governor's office points out that public facilities and infrastructure sustained the same losses of some $7 billion. Boardwalks were snapped like toothpicks, beaches have eroded, and some have been radically reconfigured. Significantly more funds are needed if New Jersey and our good friends in New York and other Sandy impacted areas are to recover. The Frelinghuysen amendment is absolutely crucial. We are not crying wolf here, I say to my colleagues. There are huge gaps. People who have filed for insurance claims find insurance has covered only this much. How do they ever recover? The same goes for the infrastructure in New Jersey. 860,000 people every single day use New Jersey transit. That infrastructure has been demolished--locomotives, cars, tracks as well as stations. Critical Army Corps projects need to be reconstructed and repaired, while new initiatives need to be funded. We need this money. And we need it now.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 41. I want to thank leadership for posting it today, and especially thank Chairman Scott Garrett for authoring this critically important legislation, boosting the NFIP's borrowing authority by $9.7 billion, and I'm very proud to be a cosponsor. Madam Speaker, the devastation unleashed by Sandy is without precedent, and the impacted communities are in dire need of comprehensive assistance. Nowhere is this more evident than in the sheer magnitude of the housing damage and the subsequent housing need. According to Governor Christie's office, Sandy damaged or destroyed 346,000 housing units. Of that number, some 72,397 were covered by the National Flood Insurance Program, whose owners have submitted claims and are awaiting the insurance payout for comprehensive repairs. Thus far, only 18 percent have received funds pursuant to their claims. Over 80 percent of my constituents are waiting in limbo--an intolerable situation that is making a bad situation worse. Moreover, Madam Speaker, throughout the region there are a total of 115,000 insurance claims related to Sandy; many of them are waiting as well. This is must-pass legislation. We have an obligation--we have a duty to meet this compelling need and contractual obligation. This legislation takes us in that direction. Again, I want to thank Chairman Garrett for his leadership.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, last month the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights held a hearing which examined U.S. policy regarding the conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). This conflict was exacerbated by Rwanda's interventions in neighboring eastern Congo, as documented by the release of three United Nations reports last year. These reports confirmed Rwanda's support of militia who have ravaged and continue to plague this region. The State Department was unavailable to testify at our September 19th hearing on this issue, and the subcommittee promised at that time to follow-up when State was available to testify. In the aftermath of the 1994 genocide, successive U.S. administrations have turned a blind eye to reports of Rwandan plundering of resources from the DRC and support for rebels who have devastated eastern Congo and its people. It seems that guilt over the Clinton Administration's failure responding effectively to the genocide in Rwanda has led subsequent U.S. administrations to be reluctant to criticize the Government of Rwanda. With these UN reports on that government's behavior in the DRC, we must overcome our regret over what happened 18 years ago. As an NGO letter to President Obama points out, the United States is now out of step with our European allies, who have cut aid to Rwanda because of their interference in the DRC, as recommended by the UN Group of Experts in their recent reports. The Group of Experts also recommends imposing sanctions on responsible Rwandan officials, such as Defense Minister General James Kabarebe. Additionally, the Government of the DRC has failed to ensure that its military adequately provides security for its citizens. In fact, the National Forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (FARDC) also is alleged to be a perpetrator of human rights violations in the East. Security sector reform is critical in the DRC, and the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) has not been able to completely train military containing elements that too often terrorize their own people instead of protecting them. At this point, it is vital to understand what the administration intends to do about the UN reports on Rwanda's violation of the arms embargo on non-state groups in eastern DRC and how this impacts U.S. relations with Rwanda. Furthermore, we must know how the administration intends to deal with the DRC government in light of its deficiencies in security sector reform. The hearing also took a comprehensive look at who is responsible for the insecurity in eastern Congo beyond the two government and the militias. Most attention is being paid to the M23 rebel movement in eastern Congo, and justifiably so in light of their recent seizure of territory and overall destructive impact on the people of eastern Congo. However, there are reportedly as many as two dozen armed groups terrorizing Congolese in this region. According to a November 2012 report from Oxfam, Commodities of War, nine of these militias are believed to be most prominent. They range from those with a focus on Rwanda or Uganda, those that were formed in response to the flight of perpetrators of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda to the DRC or those singularly focused on the DRC itself. Whatever the reason for their founding, these militias have terrorized the people of eastern Congo and the DRC as a whole. We must identify their support base and end the flow of arms and other aid that enables their ongoing reign of terror. According to the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), insecurity in eastern Congo has displaced approximately 2.4 million people nationwide, especially in the East. Despite longstanding conflict in eastern Congo, OCHA estimates that the majority of displaced persons typically returns to their areas of origin within six to 18 months of their initial displacement and require minimal return assistance. While that may be true, it does not account for the kind of life Congolese will have once they can return to their homes. Women continue to be targeted for abuse in DRC. A study that recently appeared in the American Journal of Public Health in May 2011 concluded that an average of 48 women and girls are raped every hour in this country. So, as with our February 2nd and September 19th hearings on the DRC this year, more than 100 females in DRC were raped before our hearing last month ended. Their rejection by their families and communities casts a cloud over future efforts to recreate communities destroyed by militias in the DRC. This is an issue that must be addressed by Congolese themselves--sooner rather than later. Since our hearing in September, M23 made significant gains in territorial control, occupying Goma for 10 days while moving southward, potentially toward the South Kivu town of Bukavu. However, international pressure played a major role in the group ending its advance southward and withdrawing from Goma town by early December. DRC President Joseph Kabila's government and the M23 rebels reportedly have agreed to peace talks in Kampala sponsored by the Government of Uganda. There have been peace talks and peace accords in the DRC before, and they didn't hold. Will this effort achieve lasting peace? The DRC is home to abundant mineral wealth, including 70 percent of the world's coltan (used to make vital components of cell phones and other electronic equipment), 30 percent of the world's diamond reserves and vast deposits of cobalt, copper and bauxite. Unfortunately, these natural resources have attracted international looters and fuelled civil war. Now oil has been discovered in eastern DRC. Can a way be found to prevent the DRC's blessings from being turned into curses? The tragic genocide in Rwanda in 1994 has had lasting repercussions in the DRC, but since the 1880s, resentment over the perceived influx of people considered foreigners in eastern DRC has contributed to conflict in this region, including two regional wars. Various leaders in the region have used this antipathy for political purposes, pitting their supporters against their perceived opponents. Can the inter- ethnic problems in the DRC and its neighbors be finally resolved so that a lasting peace among all the people in the DRC can be achieved? Our witnesses last month were well-positioned to address questions regarding a path toward sustainable peace in the DRC and the obstacles that lie in that path. It is time now to find a way to bring to an end the suffering of the people of the DRC.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, the two-tiered amendment disaster relief bill that we had hoped to bring to the floor to get us to the $60 billion that is desperately needed to assist families, businesses, and municipalities devastated by Superstorm Sandy. Our appeal--and it's a bipartisan appeal--is that there is still time to bring this vital legislation to the floor for a vote back to the Senate and then down to the President for signature. Numerous towns in my district, Mr. Speaker, as well as well as our friends in New York and further north, are still coping with and recovering from the most destructive storm ever in our region--and perhaps the second or third most costly in all of American history. Today, families lack housing. Businesses are in shambles, and municipalities have been decimated. In New Jersey, some 346,000 housing units were damaged or destroyed, with 22,000 units rendered absolutely uninhabitable. An estimated 11,000 housing choice vouchers will be needed to ensure that residents at least have a roof over their heads this winter. Approximately 100,000 new storm-related unemployment claims have been filed in New Jersey, 100,000, attributable to the storm. Over 235,000 people in New Jersey have already registered with FEMA for individual assistance. Seventy-five percent of New Jersey's small businesses were adversely affected, 10 percent of which, or nearly 19,000 businesses, sustained damage of $250,000 or more, far in excess of the loss to businesses from Katrina. Total business losses are estimated to be a whopping $8.3 billion. Furthermore, an estimated 10,000 structures statewide will need to be demolished, and 1,000 sites across New Jersey will require remediation after hazardous materials discharge. Fifty-one schools sustained serious damage, including six that will not reopen this school year. Transit, roads, and bridges have been damaged to the tune of $2.9 billion, which includes 294 damaged railcars and 75 damaged locomotives. One of the main roads that runs through my district, Route 35, will require an estimated $120 million to repair. Power and gas lines are expected to cost roughly $1 billion, understandably, given that, at the peak, power outages left 2.4 million people in the dark. Waste and water and sewer will require about $3 billion to repair and to protect. Hospitals, assisted living, and other health facilities will have seen over $150 million worth of storm damage. These facts--and there are many more--underscore the devastation unleashed by Sandy, and it is without precedent. I would say to my colleagues that no recovery is ever accomplished in a single year, but it's about predictability and the certainty of funds to rebuild and to restore that ensures that the work proceeds immediately, comprehensively, efficaciously, and without interruption. Mr. Speaker, for days and weeks, like many of my colleagues, after that horrible storm hit, I met with hundreds, even thousands of tenacious women and men who, despite crippling losses, were determined to rebuild. I'll never forget one resident in Belmar who came up to me the day after Superstorm Sandy, and said, I've lost everything, but at least I'm alive. We need to now backstop these individuals. We need to ensure that the monies are there, that they flow quickly but prudently to ensure that they can rebuild, and their homes and businesses and community. You know, Congress assisted those pummeled by Hurricane Katrina in 2005 with $62 billion in a mere 2 weeks. We are now past 2 months. And we need to be clear: The President didn't send to Sandy Relief package to Congress December 7. There was a loss of several weeks, but we do have a proposal. It's about 25 percent less than what the affected States have said they needed. New Jersey, New York and the other estimates about $80 billion. It's down at approximately $60 billion, so it is less. And I've seen and gone through the numbers that my State has sent to Congress as well as to the President. They are very well vetted. Governor Chris Christie used to be a U.S. attorney. Many of the people around him are former prosecutors. Their tough and disciplined. They hate waste, fraud, and abuse, and they're trying to ensure that the money is there in the amounts needed to make a difference in the lives of your constituents. Finally, let me just say, Mr. Speaker, we need to act now. As my colleague before me said a moment ago, New Jersey especially as well as New York, are contributing States not takers. We get back far less from the Federal Government than we pay in every year. That's a good thing. We have very, very good businesses that really provide employment for our people. But we've been devastated, and I would hope and urge the Speaker to bring the Sandy Relief bill to the floor as quickly as possible, hopefully today, tomorrow, but as quickly as possible, because the people who have suffered, the victims, deserve no less.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I do join my colleagues in asking that the Speaker reconsider. I want to thank Majority Leader Eric Cantor who has worked tirelessly through these many days right up to the last couple of minutes. Today, families lack housing, businesses are in shambles, and municipalities have been decimated; 346,000 housing units were damaged or destroyed in New Jersey with 22,000 units today uninhabitable. Approximately 100,000 new storm-related unemployment claims have been filed in New Jersey--100,000--and over 235,000 people have already registered with FEMA for individual assistance. This is a dire crisis. People are hurting. I talk to people in my district who have been mal-affected, and they're looking to us for help, and they're looking for timely help. We need to pass this. Please, Mr. Speaker, reconsider.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation, and thank my good friend Mr. Kelly for authoring it. Mr. Speaker, this resolution urges the governments of Europe and the European Union to designate Hezballah a terrorist organization, so that it will not be able to raise funds and recruit operatives in Europe. Since Hezballah is one of the most active, dangerous, ruthless, and evil terrorist groups in the world, this should be the most obvious thing in the world for the European governments to do--the minimum action which they should be in a hurry to do on their own, without any urging from anybody. One reason many European countries have not done so is the ongoing presence of anti-Semitism in Europe. It's a very sad story, but it's undeniably true that in many European countries large minorities or even majorities of the population hold attitudes that can only be described as anti-Semitic. Regarding this I'd like to recommend to my colleagues a March 2012 study of the Anti-Defamation League on ``Attitudes Toward Jews in Ten European Countries.'' It is shocking but necessary reading--I will be happy to share it with any of my colleagues. Further, in Europe anti-Semitic opinion doesn't hide its head furtively. Rather people who are not anti-Semitic accept various forms of anti-Semitic statement and attitudes into seemingly ``mainstream'' discussion, where it's allowed to influence government policy--that is, anti-Semitic public opinion limits what some governments are willing to say and do in fighting anti-Semitism. So with this resolution we are also urging the European governments, and the European Union, to deal more pro-actively, much more pro- actively, with anti-Semitism in Europe. Denounce anti-Semitic actions and statements whenever they occur--this is a fundamental responsibility of every elected official. As elected officials, we always have a special responsibility to anyone in danger--and this resolution documents very well that Hezbollah is an extraordinarily dangerous terrorist group. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I do want to recognize the many European parliamentarians who have worked hard in fighting anti-Semitism in Europe. I've worked with many of them over the years, particularly in the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE and in the Interparliamentary Coalition for Combating Anti-Semitism. This resolution, with its careful documentation of the extraordinary danger posed by Hezballah, will provide Europeans engaged in fighting anti-Semitism with a tool they can take to their governments and demand that they be much more pro-active against anti-Semitism. For it is anti-Semitism that creates the poisonous atmosphere in which Hezballah operates. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this excellent resolution.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 193, calling on the new government of Egypt to honor the rule of law and immediately return American citizens Noor and Ramsey Bower to the United States. It is absolutely appalling and inexcusable that more than three years after a textbook abduction, the new government of Egypt has yet to right the terrible wrong that has been perpetrated upon Noor and Ramsey, as well as upon their father, Colin Bower. Noor and Ramsey were abducted and hidden with the assistance of the previous Egyptian government August 2009. The boys' mother had lost custody of the children in the United States because of her drug use and psychological problems. Their father, Mr. Bower, was their primary caregiver. For the last three years, Colin Bower has been doing everything in his power to find out if his sons are safe and to be reunited with them. In July of 2011, he testified before my subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights--and conveyed his frustration over the lack of priority abduction cases receive in U.S. foreign policy. This sentiment is shared by the thousands of American parents whose American children have been abducted to foreign jurisdictions, often in violation of valid U.S. court orders. Every year, more than a thousand additional families are anguished by an abduction. We are losing our children and are not bringing them home. At that same hearing, we heard from Michael Elias, an Iraqi veteran from New Jersey, who told this committee of his anguish after his ex- wife used her Japanese consulate connections to abduct Jade and Michael Jr., after the New Jersey court had ordered surrender of passports and joint custody. His ex-wife flagrantly disregarded those valid court orders telling Michael Elias, ``My country [Japan] will protect me.'' She was right. Both the U.S. embassy personnel and Mr. Elias have been unable to even see the American citizen children since 2008--much less return them to their home. The U.S. talks about the problem with Japan, and talks, and talks-- but Japan has yet to issue and enforce a court order to return a single American child. In the case of Egypt, we have provided more than $4 billion in aid and debt relief since the abduction of Noor and Ramsey in 2009--despite the fact that Egypt has continued to flagrantly violate valid U.S. court orders, prevent Mr. Bower from seeing his sons, and otherwise aid and abet a kidnapping. The United States can and must do more to demand that our would-be allies respect the rule of law and return our abducted children. H. Res. 193 is a step in the right direction. Specifically, H. Res. 193 ``urges Egypt and all other nations--such as Japan--to join and fully participate in the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, and to establish procedures to promptly and equitably address the tragedy of child abductions, given the serious consequences to children of not expeditiously resolving these cases and of denying them access to a parent.'' H. Res. 193 also urges the House of Representatives to take other appropriate measures to ensure that Hague Convention partners return abducted children to the United States in compliance with the Hague Convention's provisions--and to work aggressively for the return of children abducted from the United States to countries that are not Hague Convention Partners and for visitation rights for left-behind parents while return is negotiated, establishing memorandums of understanding where necessary for the expeditious return of children. Mr. Speaker, it may soon be time for this body to consider additional steps if we do not see immediate cooperation from our would-be allies in the return of American children. H. Res. 193 is ample warning to Egypt, Japan, and other nations that American patience with abductions has run out. I strongly support the passage of H. Res. 193--and the passage of additional steps if the warning is not heeded.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Michael Ochs has announced his retirement from the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, also known as the Helsinki Commission, which I chair. So at this time I'd like to pay tribute to him for his 25 years of service to the Commission. Michael began his work as a member of the professional staff on October 1, 1987, a time when the changes to come in what was then the Soviet Union were unimaginable. Yet within a few years, the Soviet Union had disintegrated, succeeded by newly independent states facing difficult and sometimes complex transition periods. Dr. Ochs joined the staff of the Commission after completing his doctoral work in Russian history, and began his career by monitoring human rights abuses in the Soviet Union. He participated in the first international human rights conference to be convened in the Soviet Union, a meeting eventually interrupted by the KGB. Following the breakup of the Soviet Union, Michael was an early voice promoting democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in post-Soviet states, particularly in the Caucasus and Central Asia. In the early 1990s, he traveled regularly to the region, working with authorities, opposition representatives, journalists and human rights activists to promote democracy and human rights, as well as participating in early OSCE election observation missions. This early involvement in the newly independent states gave Michael a remarkable depth of understanding of the region. His extensive network of contacts has made him indispensable to the Commission as well as other U.S. government agencies. He is certainly one of our government's top experts on the Caucasus and Central Asia. Michael's extraordinary expertise has served the Commission well over the years, and has also been recognized and called on by other U.S. government agencies. He has earned a reputation for his thoughtful and thorough analytical skills, which are respected not only within the U.S. government, but also within the region by both opposition and authorities alike. He also is known for his outstanding language skills, including near-native proficiency in Russian, as well as a command of Polish, Azeri and several other languages. Michael's tenure at the Commission has seen color revolutions in Ukraine, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan, tragic massacres and violence in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, and steps forward towards democracy throughout the region, and, sadly, many steps backward in the region. He has worked hard to advocate for activists, journalists, and others arrested for opposing authoritarian regimes--and, sometimes against the odds--has been successful in getting individuals released from prison. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize and commend Dr. Michael Ochs for his faithful service to the Commission and in defense of human rights and freedom. As he will be retiring at the end of this month, this is also a sad good-bye for me--I have known Michael almost since he joined the Commission, have traveled abroad with him, benefited greatly from his expertise, enjoyed his company immensely, and will certainly miss him.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, this week and even today Israel's terrorist enemies massively escalated their rocket attacks on our country's closest ally, Israel--Hamas has fired its rockets at large cities whose population has not been under attack for decades, including Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, the latter of which had never been subject to rocket attack. Sadly, three people have been killed. Words cannot express the inhumanity and barbarity of these rocket attacks. The number of Israelis who live under daily threat of air attack has increased exponentially: more than a third of Israel's population lives in the Tel Aviv metropolitan area alone, which was last under rocket fire during the first Gulf War. This is the moment for America to send a clear message: Hamas's rocket attacks are completely and totally unacceptable and unjustified and intolerable, their escalation even more so. The Israeli government has not only the right but the duty to defend its people. I want to recognize and applaud Israel for vigorously doing so, and for taking every reasonable precaution to avoid civilian casualties. I want to remind my colleagues that Hamas's goal is not to avoid civilian casualties, but to initiate conflict that will cause it, so that all the people killed, whether Israeli or Palestinian, are in fact Hamas's victims. Our hearts and prayers go out to their families.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, almost 40 years ago, this body heard the cries of the Jewish refuseniks trapped behind the Iron Curtain, and it passed the Jackson-Vanik amendment, which brilliantly linked the free movement of goods with the free movement of people. It was a congressional initiative, opposed by the White House, which sought ``reset'' at all costs--at that time it was called ``detente''-- with Russia. It's a sad commentary on what the Russian people continue to suffer that now, more than 40 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, we meet in the same House Chamber to struggle with similar issues. Russia is now a market economy and permits emigration, but human rights and the rule of law are trampled with impunity and often violence. Since Jackson-Vanik--a marvelous tool for promoting human rights in the seventies and eighties--doesn't address Russia's current problems, we need a new tool. The need for one should be evident to anyone who follows the news. Madam Speaker, the Magnitsky provisions of the trade bill we are considering provide such a tool. These tools couldn't be timelier as some lament a perceived decline in American influence abroad. The Magnitsky sanctions shouldn't cost us a dime--and the howls from the Kremlin suggest we are on to something. While threats like cutting off aid or military cooperation mean nothing to the Russians, its kleptocratic elite deeply value access to the West. The privilege of a U.S. visa affords a measure of respectability as well as a quick exit for those who worry daily that somebody may be held to account for the crimes against their countrymen. Further, corrupt Russian officials know better than to keep their fortunes inside Russia, risking confiscation by other corrupt officials. The penalties imposed by Jackson-Vanik applied to the entire Russian economy, but those envisioned by the Magnitsky legislation look to personal responsibility and target the individual bad actor. What this bill is saying is that murderers and torturers are not welcome in this country. I would certainly hope that we are not so compromised in our security and commercial relations that to publicly name and shame these individuals would be seen to hurt our interests. It is a great bill, and it will have, hopefully, good, strong bipartisan support.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from New Jersey, the Honorable Donald M. Payne, Jr., be permitted to take the oath of office today. His certificate of election has not arrived, but there is no contest and no question has been raised with regard to his election.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say how happy I am, and the New Jersey delegation, and what a privilege it is to welcome Don Payne to the U.S. House of Representatives, a Member from the 10th Congressional District. Don is a former city councilman where he served in Newark as president of that council, a county freeholder. And of course he takes over after the very tragic passing of his dad, Don Payne, who all of us have worked with over the years. I personally, as chairman of the Africa Committee, Don before me, we worked side by side on issues related to Africa. Again, I will be very brief, but he takes over, of course, after the tragic passing of Don Payne, who all of us loved, admired and respected. I sat next to Don for years on the Foreign Affairs Committee. He was the chairman of Africa, I chaired it and do so today; and we worked side by side on malaria and a whole host of other very important issues relevant to the health and well-being of the people of Africa, global health, and human rights. So, Don, you have very big shoes to fill. I'm sure you'll do it, and it is a great pleasure. Members should know Don has been an activist on a number of issues, including Embracing Arms. He works very strongly on job creation in Newark, which has been very hard hit by the recession. So it's great to welcome you, Don. And, again, I look forward to serving with you in this Congress and the next. I yield to my friend and colleague, Frank Pallone.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.