Chris Smith

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution today which honors the OSCE's Mediterranean Partners of Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria. And I do want to express deepest respect and gratitude to Alcee Hastings for his groundbreaking work with each of those six partners. Mr. Hastings is the former President of the Parliamentary Assembly, and now serves as Special Representative on Mediterranean Affairs, and is trying to bring the Helsinki process, the three baskets of the Helsinki Final Act, which emphasize economic issues, human rights issues and security issues and, really, to bring that good, positive process that has worked wonders over the years in election reform. Mr. Hastings has observed--how many is it now, Alcee?

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Eleven different elections overseas, usually as the head of the delegation. And we're trying to inculcate those kind of values and to say to our partners, learn from the Helsinki process. It works. It has yielded tremendous results and progress in the area of human rights. And so I want to, again, thank him for his work and again for this resolution. I'd also like to welcome the President of the Parliamentary Assembly, Joao Soares, as well as Goran Lenmarker, who is the immediate past President of the Parliamentary Assembly; Jerry Grafstein, our good friend from Canada, who's also here, who has done yeoman's work again. Everybody knows about NATO, Mr. Speaker. They don't necessarily, at least in the United States, know about the good work that the OSCE has done all these years. The Parliamentary Assembly was formed in the early 1990s to be, really, the voice of Members of Parliament and Congresses around the 56 countries that make up the OSCE. And we have really become friends. I was Chairman of the Helsinki Commission for 12 years. I've been on it since my second term in 1983, and now serve as ranking member. And Mr. Hastings and Ben Cardin are serving as co- chairs. This is a remarkable organization that, again, far too few people know the contributions that it makes, particularly in the area of human rights. So again, I want to thank Mr. Hastings and wish him great success with the conference that's underway, but especially for the hard work and very under-appreciated work in reaching out to those partners in the Mediterranean to say, learn from the OSCE and maybe even provides some insights also as to how we can improve our work as well.

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

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H. Res. 538, supporting Olympic Day and encouraging the International Olympic Committee to select Chicago, Illinois, as the host city for the 2016 Olympic and Paralympic games, and I congratulate my good friend and colleague Ms. Schakowsky for sponsoring this, bringing it to the floor today. I think it sends a very clear message of the solidarity that we have that this be the venue for the 2016 Olympic games. Last month, the world observed the 61st annual Olympic Day, a celebration commemorating the creation of the International Olympic Committee. Olympic Day was first observed in 1948, 54 years after the founding of the International Olympic Committee. As the only annual, worldwide event of the Olympic movement, Olympic Day is a fitting tribute to the ideals of the Olympic charter. These are: ``to create a way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles,'' and ``to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of man,'' and I would add woman, ``with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.'' The theme of this year's Olympic Day is ``Move, Learn and Discover,'' and it was celebrated last month with the 22nd annual Olympic Day run sponsored in various locations around the world by over 150 national Olympic committees. This resolution also encourages the selection of Chicago, Illinois, as the host city for the 2016 Olympic and Paralympic games. Selected in April of 2007 as the United States bid city for the summer Olympics in 2016, Chicago is a thriving example of our Nation's heartland, its urban vitality, and its remarkable diversity. The contributions of international sport to personal fitness and international understanding deserve our recognition, and I thank again my distinguished colleague from Illinois for introducing this resolution which deserves our unanimous support. I reserve the balance of our time.

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

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, we have no further speakers, so I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

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

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of my friend and colleague's resolution celebrating the rich history of Lithuania. I was recently back in Lithuania just a couple of weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, for the July meeting of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and saw, once again, the beautiful city of Vilnius, a city with an historic history. But more importantly than the city and its physical attractiveness is the people themselves, the kindness, the generosity, and a goodness, innate goodness, which is truly remarkable. The Lithuanians, as we know, were occupied. They were often called a captive nation, one of the Baltic captive nations. In 1940, they were brought into the Soviet Union by force, a grave injustice that this Congress has never recognized and thankfully now, since 1990, they were the first of the so-called Soviet Republics to declare its independence. Since securing their independence from the Soviet Union, Lithuanians have won the world's admiration by making Lithuania a free country that truly respects fundamental human rights. The Lithuanian Government conducts democratic and fair elections, respects the rule of law, and the Lithuanian economy is free. Mr. Speaker, the United States owes Lithuania a debt of gratitude, but the United States has not freed Lithuania from Soviet domination-- they did that themselves. Lithuania has recognized the common values it shares with the United States and has deployed its soldiers to do duty alongside ours in Afghanistan, Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, as well as in Georgia. Let me also point out that back in the early 1990s, I was part of a delegation led by Steny Hoyer. When the Soviets looked like they were about to take over the Parliament and rush it with the black berets, several of us traveled to Vilnius to be there to be in solidarity with President Landsbergis, who was under siege. And the belief was that if sufficient numbers of parliamentarians were there as witnesses, it might have a chilling effect on Soviet ambitions and they might not storm that Parliament. What we found in Vilnius was people who were literally praying night and day, people outside the parliament saying rosaries, offering up prayers and, hopefully, acting as shields themselves to the Soviet aggression. I will never forget visiting a TV tower that had been attacked by the Soviets. There were candles burning where people dropped as they were fired upon by Soviet troops; but they were still there in defiance, standing up to this world power that was seeking to crush them. One of the incidents I will never forget. Don Ritter, one of our Members of the House who was then the ranking member of the CSCE, stepped across the line, and there was a Soviet tank there at the TV tower which all of a sudden began turning its turret towards him. Several of us who were there said, Don, you'd better step across. This is truly a volatile situation. And nothing came of it. But again, the Lithuanians were there protesting against tyranny and the domination that was coming out of Moscow but did so with such class and such courage that it was truly inspiring. Our delegation was matched by delegations from Poland and other countries, recently emerging democracies; and they too were saying, We're not going to stand idly by and watch this great people conquered once again--conquered but never really conquered in their hearts and minds. So I, again, want to thank Mr. Shimkus for bringing this to the floor. I also thank my friends on the other side of the aisle for posting it for debate and consideration. Again, this says to the people of Lithuania, You are a tremendous people. We recognize and admire your goodness and your courage, because you certainly demonstrated it under fire.

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

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. I thank my friend and colleague for his kind remarks and for his strong support for this humanitarian legislation. It's deeply appreciated. Mr. Speaker, many Americans and perhaps a few Members of Congress may be shocked to learned that nationwide, there are an estimated 500,000 torture survivors in the United States, men and women who came, in most cases, to the U.S. as refugees. Worldwide, it's impossible to count the numbers, but the numbers are in the several millions. As chairmen of the Human Rights Subcommittee in prior Congresses, we put together a large number of hearings on the issue of torture. Numerous torture survivors testified at those hearings about the paralyzing scars from the physical as well as psychological wounds of torture that remain for years and usually for a lifetime. I'm happy to say that Chairman McGovern of the Tom Lantos Congressional Human Rights Commission under the able leadership of Hans Hognefe--thank you, Hans for having that hearing just recently, where we heard again about the need for this kind of approach but also the horror that these people had faced and the ongoing scars that they endure. Their painful memories make it all too clear that torture impacts not only the individual victims but, as we know now, the families themselves, the families who have to deal mostly with post- traumatic stress disorder, which manifests itself with such agony in the lives of these people. Mr. Speaker, in 1998 Congress took an historic step towards attempting to repair the broken lives of torture victims with the passage of the Torture Victims Relief Act of 1998. I was a prime sponsor of that legislation and subsequent reauthorizations. Despite all of those efforts, however, there continues to be an enormous need and, I would submit, an escalating need for us to reach out to the victims of torture who oftentimes have no other recourse for their suffering. Over the years, as I said, and now to current day with the Tom Lantos Commission, we've had hearings with the torture victims from the Soviet Bloc, Africa, Asia as well as Central and South America. One of the witnesses at the last hearing that I chaired on this issue was Mr. Sheikh Sackor, the founder of Humanist Watch Liberia and a survivor of torture in Liberia. Mr. Sackor testified to the brutal physical treatment, including the use of electrical shocks and the psychological abuse that he suffered at the hands of the regime of Charles Taylor. Mr. Sackor was finally released from prison with the help of the United States embassy in Liberia. He fled to the U.S. and was admitted to the Bellevue Hospital Program for Survivors of Torture where he received medical and psychiatric care, evidentiary support for his asylum application and eventually, assistance finding employment with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Mr. Sackor concluded his testimony at the hearing by stating, ``Mine is a story like so many other individuals around the country cared for by the torture treatment centers funded by the Torture Victims Relief Act. But I know from my fellow torture victims,'' he went on, ``now living in the United States that the need for more services is enormous. I urge you to do whatever you can to increase funding for the centers doing this important work. For survivors of torture, this is truly a matter of life and death.'' It is to help people like Mr. Sackor that I and so many others, 26 cosponsors who bring this bill today, including Jim Oberstar, who has been a leader for so many years on these issues. The organizations in Minnesota, New Jersey, Florida, all over the country doing heroic work in assisting refugees and asylees within our own country, such as the International Institute of New Jersey, need the funding that would be authorized under this legislation to help individuals overcome the scars of torture so that they can finally, at long last, integrate successfully into our society. The Institute of New Jersey, for example, provides refugee resettlement services in New Jersey that include medical care, English language training, housing, employment, vocational referrals, mental health counseling, and social adjustment services. The benefits of such programs far outweigh any cost. It's an investment in people who have been harmed in most cases by despotic regimes. H.R. 1511 has three components. The domestic aspect is designed to ensure that particular attention is given to torture victims in regions within the U.S. that have significant immigrant and refugee populations. The measure authorizes $25 million for each fiscal year 2010 and 2011 to the Department of Health and Human Services to assist domestic treatment centers. There are over 20 programs in 15 States assisted by the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Refugee Resettlement. In addition to direct assistance to survivors of torture and their families, many of these centers are also engaged in training mainstream organizations and personnel in the specialized treatment that is required for torture victims. The Department of Health has said over 3,200 individuals were assisted during the 6-month period in '06 to '07; and the primary countries of origin to grant beneficiaries included Cameroon, Ethiopia, Iran, DR Congo, Iraq, Sudan and Togo. It is important, Mr. Speaker, that the United States also express concrete concern for victims overseas. H.R. 1511, therefore, authorizes $12 million for fiscal years 2010 and 2011 for foreign treatment centers and programs administered through USAID's Victims of Torture Fund. The funding is intended to give particular emphasis to supporting centers and programs abroad in emerging democracies and in post- conflict environments. I would note parenthetically that as I travel on human rights missions abroad, Mr. Speaker, I often visit those centers to see the good work that's being done to help people, like in Bucharest, where-- the legacy of Nicolae Ceausescu, the brutal tyrant of Romania--people are being assisted tangibly who spent time suffering torture under the Securitate, his secret police. Lastly, Mr. Speaker, the measure encourages international cooperation and awareness of this issue by authorizing $12 million to the U.N. Voluntary Fund For Torture Victims. The type of humanitarian assistance provided by organizations that receive grants from the fund, including organizations in the U.S., consists mainly of, again, psychological, medical, social and legal assistance. I hope my colleagues can support this legislation.

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

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Resolution 519. I am happy to be one of the cosponsors, but it was introduced by my good friend and colleague, Bart Stupak, expressing appreciation to Canada for its long history of friendship with the United States and congratulating Canada on its celebration of Canada Day. Canada Day, otherwise known as ``Canada's birthday,'' celebrates the 1867 enactment of the British North America Act, which united Canada as a confederation of four provinces. One of our closest friends and allies, I would like to thank the people of Canada and the government for their friendship and steadfast support of this country over many, many years. The relationship between the U.S. and Canada is among the closest and most extensive in the world. Our two countries maintain the world's largest trading relationship, exchanging the equivalent of $1.5 billion in goods each day. Canada is the single largest foreign supplier of energy to the U.S., including oil, uranium, natural gas, and electricity. In 2008, the U.S. imported energy from Canada worth $111 billion, and every day about 300,000 people cross our shared border. In both the First and Second World Wars, we fought on the same side against tyranny and fought for freedom and peace and against threats to international security. When the U.S. was faced with the horrors of 9/ 11, Canada, who also lost lives in the attack, stood by our side. In Afghanistan, Canada is our key NATO ally and is the leading contributor of combat forces to the alliances' International Security Assistance Force. The friendship and partnership between the countries is warm and enduring, and this resolution tries to recognize that, so I thank Mr. Stupak for authoring it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of the FY 10 Energy and Water Development Appropriation Act. Requesting Member: Rep. Christopher H. Smith Bill Number: H.R. 3183 Project name: Wreck Pond Clean-Up Account: Army Corps of Engineers--Investigations Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Army Corps of Engineers Address of Requesting Entity: Jacob K. Javits Federal Building, 26 Federal Plaza, Room 2109, New York, NY 10278-0090. Description of Request: Enable the Army Corps to continue and further its partnerships with state and local officials in the effort to fully clear toxic contamination from Wreck Pond. Overflow contaminants from Wreck Pond pollute the Ocean and such pollution has been responsible for more than 80% of all beach closings on the New Jersey shore. Planned remedies such as dredging will reduce flooding, ensure improved water quality, protect ocean swimmers and prevent beach closings. Project name: Assunpink Creek Flood Mitigation in Hamilton Township Account: Army Corps of Engineers--Section 205 Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Army Corps of Engineers Address of Requesting Entity: The Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390. Description of Request: Investigate flooding problems along the Assunpink Creek in Hamilton Township, NJ--an area which has frequent water control problems and environmental degradation--to save structures and contents from flood damage, alleviate cleanup costs for residents in this highly urbanized setting of the area. Project name: Assunpink Creek Day Lighting Initiative in Trenton Account: Army Corps of Engineers--Section 1135 Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Army Corps of Engineers Address of Requesting Entity: The Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390. Description of Request: The project seeks to day light Assunpink Creek along the Broad Street culvert--which connects various greenway areas and transportation facilities. The corps reports that this will improve anadromous fish migration along Assunpink Creek in Trenton. The project also benefits businesses adjacent to the site and provides recreational, historical and educational opportunities for the community. Project name: Delaware River Bank Protection, Philadelphia to Trenton Account: Army Corps of Engineers--Operation and Maintenance Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Army Corps of Engineers Address of Requesting Entity: The Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390. Description of Request: Maintain and inspect bank protection works, provide bridge reconstruction and perform maintenance dredging of lower reach and turning basin. This project will restore safe and economical navigating depths in the Florence Township area. Funding will be used for maintenance dredging of lower reach and turning basin and to construct three upland disposal sites, and for disposal area maintenance & construction and placement of rip-rap material. Project name: New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway Account: Army Corps of Engineers--Operation and Maintenance Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Army Corps of Engineers Address of Requesting Entity: The Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390. Description of Request: Provides a safe, reliable, and efficient navigation channel for the East Coast's largest and the 5th most valuable commercial fishing fleet in the US, as well as nine US Coast Guard Stations. This funding will be used to perform maintenance dredging of the entrance channel. Project name: NJ Shore Protection for Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet Account: Army Corps of Engineers--Construction Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Army Corps of Engineers Address of Requesting Entity: Jacob K. Javits Federal Building, 26 Federal Plaza, Room 2109, New York, NY 10278-0090. Description of Request: Funding would be used to continue the renourishment phase of the Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet, NJ shore protection project. Beach replenishment remedies have been extremely effective in the section of the Jersey shore and ongoing funding is needed to sustain the progress made through the initial successful federal/state shared investment. New Jersey's beaches are a vital recreational and economic resource. Replenishment and sustained maintenance of healthy beaches help protect residents, local businesses, tourist attractions and natural habitats. Project name: Comprehensive Restoration of the Delaware River Account: Army Corps of Engineers--Investigations Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Army Corps of Engineers Address of Requesting Entity: The Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390. Description of Request: Continue the Delaware River plan formulation and evaluation of alternative solutions and mitigation remedies to the region's problems regarding flooding along the river and tributaries. This project will help alleviate significant flood damage for residents while providing ecosystem restoration, protection and enhancement and restoration of public lands. Project name: Manasquan River Maintenance Account: Army Corps of Engineers--Operation and Maintenance Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Army Corps of Engineers Address of Requesting Entity: The Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390. Description of Request: Manasquan River connects the New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway with the Atlantic Ocean. This navigation project provides for 2 jetties; a channel 14 feet deep and 250 feet wide from the ocean to the inner end of the north jetty; and a channel 12 feet deep and 100 to 300 feet wide extending to within 300 feet of the railroad bridge. This funding will be used to perform maintenance dredging of the channel.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, it was Albert Einstein who said that ``the most powerful force in the universe is compound interest.'' That's great, Mr. Speaker, when compound interest is working for you--in building a nest egg for your children's college costs or for retirement. But when compound interest is working against you, it's catastrophic. It is absolutely devastating, especially for a Nation on the intermediate and long term, when that Nation recklessly spends taxpayers' money and causes huge, unsustainable deficits. As of June 30, the national debt was $11.5 trillion--over $37,000 per person. In June alone, the deficit rose by over $220 billion, a year's worth of deficits in 1 month! Now CBO says that the number, the total debt to the United States, will double in the next 10 years. It took 180 years for us to get to that $11.5 trillion. Under President Obama's massive spending it will double in just 10 years. Nothing puts our economy at greater risk of implosion and job loss than unsustainable debt.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, Ms. Norton earlier suggested that prohibiting funding for abortion, over which we have constitutional jurisdiction, is none of our affair. I would respectfully submit, Madam Speaker, defending innocent and inconvenient children, protecting them from violence, is always our affair. Human rights, and the defense of human rights, protecting the weak and the most vulnerable, is always our affair. So I would respectfully ask Members to reject this rule. Last week, President Obama told, of all people, the Pope, that he wanted to reduce abortion. Oh, really? This week, pursuant to Mr. Obama's 2010 budget policy request, the House is getting ready to reverse a longstanding pro-life policy that prohibits taxpayer funding for abortions except in the rare cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother. Today's vote isn't just about whether pro-life Americans will be forced to subsidize dismembering unborn children to death, or paying to poison unborn children to death, or delivering premature children to effectuate their destruction, children who are too immature to withstand life outside of the womb. Our vote today is also about government policies that are hurting women, abandoning women to the abortionists. We know that abortion hurts women. The evidence grows every day. Retaining current law, and that's what the Lincoln Davis, Todd Tiahrt amendment would have done and should do if this rule goes down, actually reduces abortion. Some of my colleagues have already pointed this out. It couldn't be more clear. The evidence is in. When you deny funding for abortion, the numbers go down. So when President Obama says he wants to reduce abortions, the answer is to take away the public subsidy. My friend on the other side said the bill restricts no Federal funds. We have jurisdiction over all the funds with regard to this issue. If we want to save a life, please don't use that kind of very thin and, I think, very shallow argument. Saving a life in the District of Columbia is no different than saving a life anywhere in the United States of America. These are our children. We need to protect and safeguard those children from the violence of abortion. If you want to reduce abortion, Madam Speaker, and colleagues, don't subsidize it. The Gutmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood's research arm, has said that between 20 and 35 percent do not get abortions under the Medicaid program because of the Hyde amendment. There are millions of children walking in America. There are thousands of children in the District of Columbia who today are enjoying their summer vacation, playing ball, having fun, getting ready to go back to school in late August and early September, because the subsidy was not there to effectuate their very painful demise through abortion. Abortion is child abuse. It is violence against children. Vote ``no'' on this rule.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding. Mr. Chairman, for almost two decades, Congress has banned the use of taxpayer funds for abortion in the District of Columbia except in the exceedingly rare and tragic cases of rape, incest, or the life of the mother. President Obama tells us he wants to reduce abortion. Well, one of the most effective and proven ways to reduce abortion is not to fund it. The evidence is compelling. And, frankly, it's logical. The research arm of Planned Parenthood, an organization that itself every year performs over 305,000 abortions in its own clinics--a staggering loss of children's lives--their research arm, the Guttmacher Institute, has made it absolutely clear that when taxpayer funding is not available, between 20 and 35 percent of Medicaid abortions that would have been procured simply don't occur and that these children go on to be born. Today, there are thousands of children in the District of Columbia and millions throughout the country who live, attend schools, have boyfriends and girlfriends, get married and have their own kids--dream and hope because taxpayer subsidies didn't effectuate their demise. Pursuant to the Constitution of the United States, Congress has the authority and, I would respectfully submit, the obligation and duty, especially from a human rights perspective, to set policy as it relates to how funds are used in either protecting or destroying children. We should not be subsidizing the killing of unborn children. By definition, abortion is infant mortality. Ultrasound technology, the rise of prenatal medicine has shattered the myth that unborn children are somehow not human, nor alive. Dr. Alveda King, Mr. Chairman, niece of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, had two abortions. She now leads an organization known as the Silent No More Campaign, made up exclusively of women who have had abortions.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. She has made it very clear that, after every abortion, one baby dies--two if they're twins--and the woman is wounded. The intermediate and long-term psychological damage and physical damage to women is underreported and underappreciated, but as she and so many others have pointed out, it is real and frightening. Dr. King has said, How can the dream survive? She was talking about her late uncle, the late Dr. Martin Luther King. How can the dream survive-- these are her words--if we murder children? Abortion methods, Mr. Chairman, are gruesome. The cheap sophistry of choice, the euphemisms that are cynically employed to cloak it, can't mask a dismemberment abortion that hacks a child to death and can't mask poison shots that chemically burn and kill an unborn child. Abortion is infant mortality. We should not be funding it. There will be children who will die if this legislation becomes law simply because the subsidies are there to effectuate their deaths. I hope Members will vote ``no'' on the bill.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Dr. Fleming, thank you very much for your leadership. It is so reassuring in so many ways having a distinguished medical doctor like yourself leading the fight, as you have done so ably, and to have some of our other docs who are speaking out so eloquently on behalf of the most fundamental human right of all, and that is the right to life. I find it appalling--and I know you do and our colleagues who are here tonight--that unborn children and the preciousness and the innate value of their lives is so easily cast aside by this Congress, regrettably by the abortion President, President Obama, who has systematically, since he has taken office, through policy reversal, through policy reinterpretation and through legislative proposals that he has made, including one that passed today that will force taxpayers to pay for abortion on demand in the District of Columbia. And we know when that happens, there will be more abortions, and the tragedy of that is beyond words. Young boys and girls who will never taste the sunshine, never see the light of day, never enjoy the everyday happiness, joy and challenges that all of us face. Their lives will have been snuffed out, killed in a very--as Joe Pitts just said a moment ago--a violent procedure, as you know so well as a medical doctor, of dismembering a child. I hope the American people finally at long last rip away the facade, the veil of secrecy that has so enveloped the abortion issue all of these years, whereby children are hacked to death by the abortionist, poisoned, as you know so well, with chemical poisons that effectuate the death of a fragile innocent body, a little child who wants to live and yet he's killed.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I would also point out that this Congress almost 4 years ago passed legislation, got 250 votes in favor of legislation that I offered, cosponsored by Mr. Pitts and many other colleagues, that basically said that unborn children feel pain. The evidence is overwhelming, at least from the 20th week on and probably before. And while this hacking maneuver, the D&E abortion is occurring, the child in that first few minutes of that gruesome, brutal decapitation--but it starts with arms and legs--suffers and feels excruciating pain. And as Dr. Sunny Anand has said, who is one of the pioneers in anesthesia for unborn children for benign reasons, surgeries and fixing children or at least helping to ameliorate spina bifida and other problems, you have to give anesthesia to these children or they feel it. Well, the abortionist has no such concerns and brutally kills the child. Let me just say a couple of points, and again, we have got to ask the questions, and Americans really have to ask the question, why the rush to enact Mr. Obama's exceedingly expensive, complex and potentially ruinous restructuring plan without the benefit of comprehensive hearings on it and a thorough vetting of the actual bill text, rushing right to a markup before the Americans can look at it and decide what are the consequences, short, intermediate and long term to the legislation? ObamaCare, as we now are seeing so clearly, is the greatest threat ever to the lives and the well-being of unborn children since Roe v. Wade itself legalized abortion right up to the moment of birth. We have made serious, modest but serious, attempts that have passed at the State and Federal level to mitigate abortions' reach by denying Federal funding, by putting in things like women's right-to-know laws, parental notification, waiting periods, all of which have lessened and reduced the number of abortions. All of that is at risk right now with this ObamaCare recommendation. Despite Mr. Obama's oft-repeated statement that he wants to reduce abortion, just last week he told that to the Pope, a couple weeks before that to a big audience at Notre Dame University, and he says it over and over again. Well, words should have meaning. They should have consequences and actions should comport with those words. And in this case, they are diametrically opposed. He says one thing and does precisely the opposite. The ugly truth is that if his so-called health care reform care bill, if enacted, will lead to millions of additional deaths to children and millions of mothers will be wounded. Even the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute has found that between 20 and 35 percent of Medicare-eligible women who would choose abortion carry their pregnancies to term when public funding is not available. I remember when Henry Hyde was told, and it was like a revelation, the great Henry Hyde, the human rights leader, the finest orator perhaps ever in the history of this institution and the Hyde amendment author that proscribes Federal funding for abortion in the Medicaid program, when he learned that, by this extrapolation, that it was really true that millions of kids had survived because of his legislative leadership, and Jim Oberstar who was there that day and helped craft that legislation of the Hyde amendment in the 1970s, Henry Hyde had a big tear in his eye, knowing that there were kids walking all across America, now some of those kids, young adults, having their own children because the money wasn't there to facilitate their violent death. Henry Hyde and all of us who have been part of this know that because of these efforts, uphill as they are, children will survive, and mothers will avert this irreversible decision. ObamaCare opens the spigot of public funding and does more to facilitate abortion than any action since Roe, and this is the big issue. And I hope every American realizes, despite all of the cheap sophistry that is being thrown about here, what is at the core of this is an abortion promotion and the facilitation of it and spending for it. Despite the fact that a majority of Americans don't want to fund abortion, and every poll shows that, the Obama-Dingell-Kennedy bill will force every taxpayer and premium payer in the United States to pay for and facilitate every abortion in the country. ObamaCare will absolutely mandate abortion on demand, even in private insurance plans, which will lead to many more abortions. On April 2, Secretary Sebelius admitted that most private plans ``do not cover abortion services except in certain instances.'' That radically changes under ObamaCare. The legislation vests new, and you have gotten into this, Doctor, new huge, sweeping powers into an Obama-appointed committee that will be crafted after the legislation is signed into law, establishing essential health benefits all plans must include. That is the dirty little secret about this bill. They are waiting until after it is all inked and signed by the President, and then these so-called experts will say, this is what every minimum plan needs to have in it, and we have no doubt whatsoever that abortion will be in the mainstay of what they provide. NARAL's president has said, If indeed we can advance a panel or commission, then I'm very optimistic about reproductive health being part of the entire package. In 2007, Mr. Obama told Planned Parenthood, Reproductive care is essential care, we are absolutely in favor of reproductive care. But then as Hillary Clinton said in response to a question I posed at the Foreign Affairs Committee, she said, of course, reproductive health includes access to abortion. So they use word games to cloak and stealth it. But the bottom line is that what they are talking about is abortion on demand. Pro-abortion organizations believe they are on the verge of the biggest expansion of abortion ever. The president of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice said, Let there be no mistake, basic health care includes abortion service. ObamaCare will also exponentially expand the number of abortion mills in this country by requiring that any insurance provider contract with essential community providers. And guess what? Planned Parenthood, which itself does over 300,000 abortions every year, a staggering loss of children's lives, many of those children are from adolescents, young minor girls who get abortions there, often without parental notification or consent, on June 17 billed itself in a media blitz as essential community health care providers. So they will be integrated with the health care insurance companies and a number of clinics which have dwindled and gone down over the years, as well as doctors willing to commit these grizzly acts will grow because there will be a mandate from Uncle Sam, from the White House and from this Congress if this is allowed to happen. So I just want to say to my colleagues one last thing. In the early 1980s I was the prime sponsor of the Federal funding ban under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. We had a very big floor fight in this battle. We won it. President Reagan signed it into law, and the government plan that I'm in, and I suspect all of you are in, and many government employees, if not all, but most, all of a sudden did not provide for abortions. In the first year, when President Clinton had his Presidency, and the Democrats controlled the House and the Senate, we lost that rider in the Treasury-Postal appropriations bill. The Clinton administration swung into action and ordered all of the insurance companies to carry abortion. There was no language in the bill, no pro-life language, no pro-abortion language, no language, but that meant they could order, just like they did with the Hyde amendment under President Carter in the 1970s that necessitated the Hyde amendment in the first place. So let me say to my colleagues on the Democratic side, and perhaps those on the Republican side who haven't really gotten it yet, if there is no language in here proscribing abortion, explicit language, it will be there. The Benefits Advisory Committee will order it, and as we have found with public funding, no language equals abortion subsidization, which leads to a significant skyrocketing of abortions in this country. We want fewer abortions. We want to affirm life and love them both, mother and child. So I thank you, Dr. Fleming, for giving us this opportunity to hopefully alert the American people that the abortion industry is looking really, in a very quick way, in a hurry-up offense, to take the most offensive acts against children, innocent children, and with their taxpayer dollars, yours and mine. I yield back, Dr. Fleming.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Dr. Fleming, thank you and say to my friend from Ohio, thank you for that extraordinarily eloquent statement, as usual.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Let me just make a couple of points, Doctor. The abortion industry is seeking a bailout. This is the abortion bailout bill and it needs to be seen as that. The number of abortions are going down because of ultrasound and because of educational efforts. This would mandate private insurers to cover abortion--and public as well--expand venues, the killing centers, to do abortions. But there's something that I would like your take on. The former director of the National Abortion Federation has said that the number of abortions are going down, also, because there are physicians who either can't or won't perform this, quote, essential service in her view. The American Medical News reported that abortion is a matter of choice in this country, not only for women but for physicians as well. All over the country most physicians are choosing not to do it. The San Francisco Chronicle has said those who run abortion clinics, even in large cities, say that recruiting doctors is now their most serious problem. To which we say, thank God that doctors are doing what the Hippocratic oath has told them and admonished them to do. I would like your take on that.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3183. The bill includes funding to allow the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to take a greater role in ongoing efforts to fix significant recurring environmental hazards posed by Wreck Pond, located in my district. On an average summer day, Wreck Pond is a picture-perfect postcard. However, just below the surface lie dangerous concentrations of high levels of fecal coliforms as well as other nasty contaminants. When it rains, this poison goes onto the beaches, and it has caused, on average, about 80 percent of all beach closings in New Jersey in the past few years. When Wreck Pond floods, this poison pours into the basements and first floors of nearby homes, which I have seen myself on several occasions. Immediate action is necessary to improve the water quality conditions and mitigate the serious health and environmental hazards caused by its pollution to local residents. The Corps' work at Wreck Pond will be greatly enhanced and proceed to construction earlier than normally anticipated because of extensive analysis already completed by other agencies at the Federal, State and local level, including work of a $400,000 EPA study, surveillance work by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, as well as the State's installation of provisional storm water outflow pipes and the upstream watershed management programs. These actions have been effective. However, they are not the best long-term solution, and a permanent fix can be achieved only after the Corps begins its work. I want to especially thank my good friend and colleague, Mr. Frelinghuysen, for his work, and Chairman Oberstar, of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, who actually made a trip to Wreck Pond in 2007 to view this himself. I thank them both. Rodney, thank you for your great work on this.