Chris Smith

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for her leadership, and thank Chairman Levin for sponsoring this very important resolution. I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1314, commemorating and honoring the memory of victims of the abominable act perpetrated against the people of Ukraine from 1932 to 1933. Seventy-five years ago, millions, and the estimates are as high as 10 million, men, women and children were murdered by starvation so that one man, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, could consolidate control over the Ukraine. In an attempt to secure collectivization and to break the spirit of the independent-minded Ukrainian peasants, Stalin ordered the expropriation of all the foods in the rural population. It was shipped to other areas of the Soviet Union or sold abroad. Peasants who refused to turn over grain to the state were deported or executed. Without food or grain, mass starvation ensued, as was Stalin's intention. Madam Speaker, food was used as a weapon in a crime against humanity staggering in its scope. This famine was man-made, the planned consequence of a deliberate policy which aimed to wipe out a substantial part of the Ukrainian people in order to crush the spirit of those who remain. In short, genocide was committed against the Ukrainian people. Madam Speaker, over the years I have read many works of Stalin's genocide against the people of Ukraine, but I recall a moment back in the 1980s when I saw the unforgettable documentary, Harvest of Sorrow. It documented and depicted the horrors of the famine, so that no one since has denied this mind-boggling crime and tragedy. In its bare, stark truth, it was one of the most moving films I have ever seen. I also recall the fine work of the congressionally mandated Ukraine Famine Commission, which issued its well-documented report in 1988. I am happy that Mr. Levin's resolution notes that there were those in the West, including the New York Times correspondent Walt Duranty, who deliberately falsified their reporting so to cover up the famine because they wanted to ensure that the Soviet Union got ``a good press.'' The fact is that for over 40 years the planned famine was hardly spoken or written about in our country, due to an academic skepticism and silence enforced by political correctness. When Ukrainians and others tried to break through the wall of silence, they were treated with derision. This silence, which lasted from the 1930s through the publication of Harvest of Sorrow, made a sorry chapter in the history of American intellectual life. Madam Speaker, this resolution will continue to recognize one of the most horrific events in the last century in the hopes that mass murders of this kind never happen again. I support this resolution unreservedly. I hope that the full membership of this body supports it unanimously.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Thank you to the distinguished ranking member, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, for her leadership, for her leadership on human rights. She has been a stalwart for years, and I want to thank her for her tremendous leadership. I want to thank Mr. McGovern for sponsoring this, and for his commitment as well. And I especially want to thank Congressman Frank Wolf with whom I've been in Congress now for 28 years. And there is no one that I know or have ever met who cares more deeply, more passionately, more fervently, nor works more effectively to promote human rights around the globe. I have traveled with Frank. I would be more than happy to carry his bags. He is just such a tremendous individual. I'll never forget when the International Religious Freedom Act was being considered. It was his legislation. He was the prime sponsor. I held a number of hearings on it as chairman of the Global Human Rights Subcommittee on the Foreign Affairs Committee, and there was significant opposition to that legislation. The Clinton administration was against it, on the record, said so in hearings. Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Labor and Human Rights, John Shattuck, couldn't have made it more clear. They made a bogus argument that the legislation would set up a hierarchy of human rights, vis-a- vis, all other human rights. Our argument was religious freedom was integral, and a necessary part of a fabric of protecting everyone who was weak and disenfranchised. That includes religious believers, regardless of what their belief system might be. And we wanted to speak out in a very powerful way. Mr. Wolf pushed that bill to a successful completion. It ended up being signed into law and the International Committee for Religious Freedom, its designation of countries of particular concern, those egregious violators of religious liberties now get put on a list. They're subject to sanctions. We have an ambassador at large who combs the Earth promoting religious liberty and freedom, and then issues reports that holds countries to account and speaks truth to power. That's all a direct result of Congressman Frank Wolf, the prime sponsor of legislation that was as dead as a door nail when he introduced it because of opposition in very high places and indifference. So it is very fitting that Mr. Wolf will be serving as cochair of this extraordinarily important Human Rights Commission, named very aptly and very importantly after another great man, Congressman Tom Lantos. No one has done more on such issues as anti-Semitism than Congressman Lantos, Chairman Lantos, who is not, sadly, with us, but I'm sure is looking down from heaven with a great smile on his face because he cared passionately about human rights as well. Madam Speaker so it ought to be clear, I believe it is time to turn the Caucus into a Commission. When the Human Rights Caucus was founded back in 1983, human rights was, at best, a foreign policy sideshow, an obligatory mention, often uttered after the more ``weighty matters'' of statecraft took place, like trade and other issues. It was always at the end if at all. An afterthought. It always had some asterisk next to it on the talking point memo. In case after case, high level diplomats would essentially say, oh yeah, by the way, I have to bring up human rights, because when I go back home I have to mention it. And many of our Secretaries of State, with some exceptions, often would take it to that point. It was never a central core issue in our foreign policy. There was little predictability or consistency. The Caucus certainly has helped move human rights concerns forward. The Commission, I believe, will take it to the next level. I hope that more Members will realize that genuine respect for human rights is the key to good governance. It's also the key, if you want intellectual property rights respected. If you want contract law observed and honored in places like China where human rights are violated with impunity, respect fundamental human rights for the individual. Stop torturing. Protect women from the violence of coercive population control and forced abortion. Help the Falun Gong and the Christians and the Uighurs and the Buddhists and all the others, the Catholic bishops who are languishing in prison. Get it right on fundamental human rights and you also help on the trade side as well, because if they respect one, if they respect their own people, they'll adhere to contract law and intellectual property rights. I do believe that we must care for and protect all, no exceptions, everywhere, every place, every time from violence; and from my point of view, that includes unborn children, newly born children, the handicapped, disabled; it includes those who are of a religious denomination that some government official thinks ought not to have their rights or liberties. It is about everyone being included. Nobody being excluded. The politics of inclusion. And again, for me that means the unborn child and everyone else who is weak and at risk. I do believe that we have to, Madam Speaker, realize that human rights can be respected. It is a matter of political will. It is a matter of understanding and empathizing. Get in the minds and hearts of victims and get motivated. Go into the prison, empathize with someone who has been victimized by torture. And we all come out with a different, enlightened, compassionate perspective. Empowered and knowledgable, we then must--we have a duty--to act! We'll never know the full extent of the Caucus's success over these 25 years, the impact that it has had, but I believe it has had a tremendously positive impact, as a result of broad bipartisan action, Democrats and Republicans, staff, doing yeoman's work. Hans was mentioned a moment ago. He's a fighter. There are so many who have done so much, often without any kind of accolade whatsoever, but they stand up and they do the hard work of human rights, and they do it each and every day because they care, because they love and because they have compassion. Again, this is a resolution that takes the Human Rights Caucus to the next level, and I think it's about time we did it. This Congress, I think, will be much improved; we will have more insights. Good staffing does make a difference. We've had great staffing, but I think now as we build out that staff, I think more victimized people everywhere will be represented.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 100th Anniversary Celebration of Georgian Court University (GCU). For the past 100 years, Georgian Court has been a leader in higher education, encouraging intellectual inquiry, ethical professionalism, and community involvement. Founded as a women's college in 1908 by the Sisters of Mercy, Georgian Court is dedicated to the success of women. The Women's College at GCU provides a liberal arts education tailored to women's learning styles and an environment conducive to achievement. Georgian Court's Women in Leadership Development program is one of the most powerful programs for young women today. By participating in university committees, making presentations, lobbying legislators, and networking with mentors, students develop the skills and tools needed by today's successful women leaders. In the 1970s, Georgian Court established a coeducational graduate program. Today, the University College caters to men and women adult students and offers flexible class schedules with online components at a number of locations throughout the state. With 29 undergraduate and 8 graduate degree programs, Georgian Court University continues to develop new academic programs to meet the changing needs of the time. A new nursing program established in this Centennial Year will help stem the serious nursing shortage in our state. Accelerated and Executive M.B.A.s allow busy executives to gain the information they need to advance their careers. As 1 of only 50 NASA Educational Resource Centers, Georgian Court ensures that our children's teachers have the most up-to-date scientific information for their classrooms. Georgian Court University has preserved the estate that comprises its campus and is on the National Register of Historic Places and the New Jersey Register. Over the decades, GCU has added buildings to meet the growing student population--starting with 7 students in 1908 up to more than 3,000 today. Within the past several years, a new wellness center, residence hall, chapel, and science wing have been added to the Georgian Court landscape. Georgian Court University is an economic force in Lakewood and the surrounding areas, providing employment to thousands over its 100-year history and fueling the local economy. The university is also a cultural gathering place for the community, bringing notable artists, musicians, poets, writers, and political figures to campus for lectures and concerts that are open to the public. Sending teams of students and staff to poverty-stricken areas of Honduras to install water systems, to New Orleans to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina, or right here in Lakewood to help provide the necessities of life for the homeless, Georgian Court University is a good neighbor and is committed to making the world a better place. Georgian Court is also an ecologically aware citizen, contributing to the sustainability of our environment. Its new wellness center complex has been built with energy efficiency in mind and is being considered for LEED--Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design--certification. With an abiding commitment to its students, the community, and the greater good, I commend Georgian Court University on its 100 years of academic excellence and community service.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend, the distinguished ranking member, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, for yielding. And Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution. Despite the passage of 7 years, Madam Speaker, the scars from the attack on our country on September 11, 2001 remain. They remain from the loss of the lives of nearly 3,000 innocent men, women and children, including over 50 men and women from my own district, the 4th District of New Jersey. Over the course of these several years--as a matter of fact, almost right away--I got to know several of the widows and the loved ones and was so moved and so impressed by their love for the victims. Their loss was--is--excruciatingly painful. But the families also had a great sense that we needed to do more to ensure that this never happens again. And whether it be the ``Jersey Girls'' who walked the halls of this Congress, strongly advocating for the establishment of the 9/11 Commission, or the others--I even actually hired one of the individuals who lost a loved one in my office to do case work. And her sensitivity and her sense of concern for those who suffered irreparable loss that day has been inspiring to me as it has been to members of our delegation in New Jersey and so many others as well. The scars remain, obviously, Madam Speaker, in the painful void in the lives of the families who sought in vain to make some sense of their horrific and tragic loss. And the scars remain embedded in the fabric of our society, which has had to learn to cope with the reality of a world where indiscriminate large-scale attacks on human life are a constant threat. Madam Speaker, while recognizing the extraordinary efforts and courage of America's first responders--the firefighters, police officers, emergency response personnel, the heroes--it was also apparent from the terrorist attacks that our Nation had much to learn. We had to craft policies to better protect our people. I was one of those, among so many others, who advocated early and consistently for a commission to chronicle the facts, missteps and opportunities lost leading up to the tragedy and to develop a well- informed, thoughtful strategy to reduce the future risk of an attack. The 9/11 Commission--that was chaired so ably by Governor Tom Kean, the former Governor of New Jersey, and former chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Lee Hamilton--issued an historic, incisive report, a comprehensive report which, together with subsequent legislation, was not only thoroughly examined by House and Senate committees, but virtually all of the recommendations were enacted into law. The whole thrust, post 9/11, Madam Speaker, is to mitigate and, God willing, prevent such a tragedy from ever occurring again. Madam Speaker, we must be diligent in searching for and implementing new means for responding to developing threats. Our enemies are constantly searching for our vulnerabilities, and our ability to remain ahead of them is critical to our very survival. I want to thank Mr. Hoyer for introducing this piece of legislation which gives us the opportunity to have an official solemn expression. It extends our deepest condolences to all who suffered the loss of a loved one as a result of the attacks here in Washington and in New York and in Pennsylvania. To honor those who courageously risked and even sacrificed their lives, some firefighters bravely went up those stairs at the World Trade Center knowing that it was fraught with unbelievable danger to their own lives. The legislation recognizes the service and sacrifice of our military personnel and their families who continue to strive to protect our country both here and abroad, and to continue to take all appropriate actions, and to do so, I would submit, in a bipartisan way to defend and protect our Nation. This is a very good resolution and a very solemn day for America.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I rise to offer my heartfelt support and congratulations to the Bordentown Little League All-Stars who on Wednesday, won the New Jersey State Championship tournament and the right to now advance to the regional championship. Powered by some big bats--that turned in 17 hits and 4 home runs--the Bordentown Little League's 11/12 year old team easily defeated Pequannock 14 to 3 to win the State Championship. By winning the New Jersey title, the team now moves onto Bristol, Connecticut, to participate in the Mid-Atlantic Regional Tournament where they will take on Haverstraw, the New York State Champions. The A. Bartlett Giamatti Little League Leadership Training Center in Bristol, Connecticut, is hosting the Mid-Atlantic and New England tournaments. I especially want to recognize Manager Pat Welsh and Coach Dave Revay for their outstanding efforts developing this championship team. And of course, congratulations go out to the guys on the field who hustled throughout the season to win the New Jersey State Championship--Tommy ``T-Walt'' Walters, Zachary ``Zack'' Gakeler, Ryan ``Shinny'' Shinn, Patrick ``Otrick'' Welsh, Cole ``ColeTrain'' Clauser, Tyler ``Ty'' Revay, Clarke ``Clarkey'' Laba, Nick ``Hammer'' Callahan, Edward ``Eddie'' Holmes, and the teams three Austin's--Austin ``Goke'' Goeke, Austin ``Char-zar'' Chaszar, and Austin ``Big Pappi'' Papp. Gratitude also has to be given to the Bordentown community for their spirit and the continuing support they offered which helped make fielding this outstanding team possible. Community leaders--Mayor George A. Chidley, Deputy Mayor Bruce Hill, Committeeman William J. Morelli, Committeeman Robert Delaney, and Committeeman Mark Roselli from Bordentown Township; and Mayor John William Collom III, Deputy Mayor James Lynch, and Commissioner John Wehrman from the city of Bordentown have to be recognized and thanked for making this State Championship possible. As the Bordentown Little League All-Stars now move onto the Regional Championship, we join with family and friends in the entire Bordentown and Burlington County communities to wish them good luck.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding. I thank the chairman for bringing this important resolution to the floor and thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) for his fine leadership and that of Ranking Member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. A few years ago, Madam Speaker, Liu Jingmin, vice president of the Beijing Olympic bid committee, famously asserted that ``by allowing Beijing to host the games, you will help the development of human rights.'' At the time, the argument seemed plausible, at least to the naive, but in the long run-up to the Olympics the reality has been numbingly disappointing and yet another wake-up call concerning bogus promises made for political and financial gain by the Beijing dictatorship. The pre-Olympic crackdown on political dissidents and religious believers and the crushing of cyber-dissidents is yet another antithetical manifestation to everything that is sane, compassionate or just. In recent months, the Chinese government has been filling its jails, house arresting, surveilling and warning all known dissidents. These men and women are persecuted simply because they seek to exercise fundamental human freedoms guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and ironically by the Chinese constitution itself. Tragically but predictably, the Olympics have been the occasion of a massive crackdown designed to silence and put beyond reach all those Chinese whose views differ from the government line. For so many brave Chinese men and women, for the Tibetans, many of them Buddhist monks and nuns, for members of Falun Gong, Chinese Christians, Uighur Muslims, democracy and labor activists and others, this has been a terrible summer, not in spite of but precisely because of the Olympic games. The fact is this is a reproach to the International Olympic Committee and to all those who believe in fundamental human rights. As we meet here, right now in HC-7 several key human rights leaders, including the great Harry Wu and Wei Jingsheng, are speaking out against the atrocities committed with impunity by the government of China. I would note parenthetically that Wei was let out of prison-- Wei, father of the Democracy Wall movement--simply to try to garner Olympics 2000. When the government didn't get that from the Olympic committee, they rearrested Wei Jingsheng and tortured him almost to death. That is the reality of the people we're dealing with. In fact, let me just point out to my colleagues that any number of the Chinese government's human rights violations should have been a deal-stopper for the International Olympic Committee. Take the one- child-per-couple policy, Madam Speaker, with its attendant evils of forced abortion and rampant sex-selective abortion. In effect since 1979, the one-child-per-couple policy constitutes one of the gravest crimes against women and children in all of human history, and our resolution before us today has appropriate language condemning that atrocity. The Chinese government massively violates Chinese women with a state policy of mandatory monitoring of all Chinese women's reproductive cycles, mandatory birth permits, mandatory contraception or sterilization, and ruinous fines up to 10 times the annual salary of both husband and wife if they don't comply with the one-child-per- couple policy. This policy has imposed unspeakable pain, violence, humiliation and degradation on hundreds of millions of Chinese women, many of whom suffer life-long depression as a direct consequence. It is no wonder more women commit suicide in China than anywhere else in the world. As a direct result of this egregious human rights violation, tens of millions of girls are missing today, dead, due to sex-selective abortions, creating a huge gender disparity, a new dark manifestation of genocide which is perhaps more appropriately called gendercide. The lost girls of China, and the estimates are between 50 to 100 million lost girls, murdered simply because they were girls. Madam Speaker, 3 weeks ago, Frank Wolf and I visited Beijing in order to press for respect of fundamental human rights. The Chinese Secret Police threatened eight human rights lawyers with whom we had planned to meet for dinner in a public restaurant and placed several of them under house arrest. We did, let me conclude with this, present the Chinese government with a list of people, 734 prisoners, a short list by Chinese standards, of people who are advocating for democracy and freedom. And with the Olympics now underway, we ask again, let those people and all like-minded human rights activists who languish and are tortured in prison, please let them go. The resolution is a great one, and deserves everyone's support.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to thank Mr. Chabot for authoring this very important and very timely resolution. I rise in support of H. Res. 1351, which condemns the July 8, 2008, attack on UNAMID peacekeepers deployed in Darfur, Sudan, and expresses the support of Congress for this critical mission. According to the United Nations, seven peacekeepers were killed and an additional 22 were wounded when their patrol was ambushed by unidentified assailants utilizing 40 vehicles mounted with heavy machine guns and anti-aircraft weapons. This is the worst attack against the A.U. mission since it first deployed in July of 2004. Unfortunately, it does not appear to be the last. Given continued deterioration of security in Darfur and the upsurge in deliberate attacks against humanitarian and peacekeeping operations, it is now more critical than ever to ensure that the U.N. peacekeeping mission is properly equipped. I would note parenthetically, Mr. Speaker, that I've been to Darfur. I've met with the A.U., African Union, troops before it came under the blue helmet auspices, and I was shocked and dismayed during my visit there how underpaid, how they lacked needed materiel, the command-and- control equipment was lacking even then. And now, regrettably, to discover or to find out that there are huge gaps in their capabilities because that has not been provided by the international community is unconscionable. They lack critical air assets, armored personnel carriers, and even the pilots to fly the helicopters. Anyone who has been in Darfur knows how hard it is to move across that terrain. There are huge gaping potholes. They are not even potholes--it looks like craters on the moon--moving from one place to the next. And if there's a torrential rain, bridges and roads are often completely washed out. And obviously, it is very difficult to get the critical resources to the camps--and I've been to two of those camps, Mr. Speaker, Mukjar and the Kalma camp. And again, if it wasn't for the U.S., as Mr. Chabot pointed out, it is the U.S. and the generosity of the U.S. taxpayers that contribute most of the food and most of the medicine that is utilized by those beleaguered refugees. I, again, want to thank him for his leadership in bringing this newest concern which needs to be reiterated over and over again. We have to make sure that those troops have the capability, have the wherewithal to carry on this battle with those who would subjugate and hurt and kill the Darfurians. Responsible nations must come together and do everything we can to end the violence and restore peace to Darfur. You know, just because it's not on the front burner and it's not in the news media the way it was for a while doesn't mean that the issue has gone away. If anything, it has actually gotten worse in many aspects. Finally, I'm one of those Members of Congress who actually met with General Bashir, the dictator to Sudan, in Khartoum. We had a very contentious meeting. He was denying that these kinds of atrocities are actually going on, and all he wanted to do was lift the embargo that the United States Government, through the work of Congress in a bipartisan way, had imposed upon Sudan. That's all he wanted to talk about. I wanted to talk about the atrocities and the ending of those atrocities. Well, now we know the chief prosecutor of the War Crimes Tribunal at the Hague has asked for an indictment against Bashir. So he will join, in a very similar fashion, Joseph Coney and Charles Taylor, who is being held to account by the tribunal in Sierra Leon, for the crimes that he and like-minded individuals have committed. We've got to send the message unmistakably by backing this U.N. force and by doing everything humanly possible to bring the perpetrators of these crimes to justice that ``never again'' will mean never again. We keep saying that, and genocide just keeps going from one part of the world to another. And certainly, the Darfurians are suffering genocide today. In line with what we just discussed about the Olympics resolution, the Chinese Government, Mr. Speaker--and it's not necessarily in this resolution but it's germane to the issue--the Chinese Government has enabled the dictatorship in Sudan to carry on the atrocities in Darfur by providing the materiel so that the Government and the troops have the guns and the helicopters to strafe and kill and maim in Darfur. Let's not forget, 2 million people died in southern Sudan with the full complicity of the Chinese dictatorship, and now upwards of 450,000--the high estimate, some put it at a lower number--have been killed and over 2 million made homeless in Darfur as a direct result of the Chinese enabling and facilitation of this terrible series of atrocities. Again, at the minimum, the African Union troops that have put their lives on the line need to have the support, they need to have the guns, the ammunition and the air lift capabilities and all the other assets in order to carry on their mission. Again, I thank Mr. Chabot.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, on July 25, 1995, Zepa, one of the six ``safe havens'' that the U.N. declared during the 1992-1995 war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, fell to the Army of Republika Srpska. This happened 2 weeks after U.N. forces abandoned the Srebrenica ``safe haven'' to the same force, which committed genocide by killing 8,000 Bosniak men and boys, and raping an unknown number of Bosniak women. Madam Speaker, before the war Zepa was a village of great natural beauty. Three thousand people lived there, and 750 children attended its primary school. Today the village is a standing reminder of the evil history of ethnic cleansing: only about 500 returnees live there and most of them are unemployed. On July 11th of this year hundreds of diplomats and members of the international community joined thousands of Bosnian mourners and elected officials to mark the 13th anniversary of the fall of Srebrenica. Madam Speaker, tomorrow let us mark July 25th with the same solemnity and remember the victims of Zepa. Let us share the painful memories of the horror that befell the village 13 years ago and let us never forget that only justice and democratic governance will lead to a stable and prosperous Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I want to thank my good friend for yielding, and thank her for her great work on this legislation, as well as Chairman Berman and my good friend, Don Payne, and so many others who have made this day possible in this launching of a new initiative, building on the old. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5501, as amended, will literally mean the difference between life or death to millions, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. As Members know, close to 70 percent of the estimated 33 million people with HIV live in Sub-Saharan Africa. Of the 2.5 million children afflicted with this dreaded disease, 90 percent of them live in Africa as well. When combined with opportunistic infections like tuberculosis--the number one killer of individuals with HIV--and malaria, which kills at least one million people a year--again, mostly in Africa--the HIV/AIDS pandemic compares among humanity's worst. Our distinguished late chairman, Henry Hyde, prime sponsor of the original PEPFAR program, frequently compared the sickness to the bubonic plague--the black death--an epidemic that claimed the lives of over 25 million during the mid-1300s. So with that much at stake, I want to remind my colleagues how important it is that we get this right. And I think, after a lot of hard work, we have managed to come to a consensus, first in the House, and now also in the Senate, and I hope it will be a sustainable consensus. I want to note that Congress has unequivocally rejected the attempts of abortion-promoting organizations who wanted to hijack the Global AIDS program and link their abortion agenda to the compassionate effort to prevent this illness or to relieve the deleterious effects of HIV/ AIDS. Look at the progression of this bill. The congressional intent is clear with respect to diverting HIV funding to reproductive health/ family planning programming: It was rejected. In the first House drafts, there were numerous provisions mandating not only ``integration'' and ``linkages'' between HIV programming and reproductive health and family planning services, but even explicit authorization to fund those services. This priority is wrong. We are trying to prevent HIV/AIDS, not children. I know some Members are likely to wince at the cost of the bill, $48 billion over 5 years. But that sum of money will likely provide treatment for millions suffering from the disease, prevent some 12 million new HIV infections worldwide, support care for 12 million individuals with HIV/AIDS, including five million orphans and vulnerable children, and will help train and deploy at least 140,000 new health care professionals and workers for HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment and care. On the prevention side, the legislation requires that the Global AIDS Coordinator provide balanced funding for sexual transmission prevention activities that promote abstinence, delay of sexual debut, monogamy, fidelity, and partner reduction. If less than 50 percent of sexual transmission prevention monies are spent on the abstinence and be faithful part of the ABC model, the coordinator must provide a written justification. Five years after PEPFAR first began, the efficacy and importance of promoting abstinence and be faithful initiatives has been demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt. The legislation before us also retains the antiprostitution/sex trafficking pledge, an amendment I sponsored in 2003 designed to ensure that pimps and brothel owners don't become, via an NGO that supports such exploitation, U.S. Government partners. Current law ensures that the U.S. Government is not in the position of ``promoting or advocating the legalization of prostitution or sex trafficking.'' Prostitution and sex trafficking exploit and degrade women and children and exacerbate the HIV/AIDS pandemic. Finally, we have come a long way since 2003 when significant opposition materialized against an amendment that I offered to include faith-based providers with conscience clause protection. The conscience clause in H.R. 5501, as amended, restates, improves, and expands conscience protection in a way that ensures that organizations like Catholic Relief Services, which has a remarkable record of HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care, are not discriminated against or in any way precluded from receiving public funds. This legislation is clearly a great legacy and a great honor to our former Members Tom Lantos and Henry Hyde and certainly to President Bush, who led so ably and so nobly on this initiative. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to submit several items of clarification for the Record concerning a provision in HR 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008. One of the major differences in this bill today from when we voted on it in April, is an amendment that adds Title VI--an Emergency Plan for Indian Safety and Health. Because it is a new addition and because there has been some confusion about how this Title should be read and how it would be implemented, I wanted to make the intent of Congress clear with these submissions to the Record. First, I have been told by the Congressional Budget Office that this amendment is an authorization of appropriations and consequently has a score of 0 since there is ``no direct spending or revenues implications.'' Since there has been some confusion on this point, I want to restate that Title VI of HR 5501 is exclusively an authorization of appropriations and a further act of Congress would be necessary before any money could be provided to this Emergency Fund. Second, I also want to clarify that according to the author of this amendment, Senator John Thune of South Dakota, the Emergency Fund, including all health-related contracts or compacts, programs, or other services authorized in this amendment will be conducted exclusively as programs of the Indian Health Service, subject to all regulations and restrictions that ordinarily apply to the Indian Health Service. This is what the amendment language means and I want that to be clear, so I'm including the letter I received from Senator Thune which clarified this point. Last, I would also like this letter from the Department of Health and Human Services to be included in the Record. This letter makes it clear that the Administration and the relevant Department also understand that this amendment does not appropriate funds and that all health- related programs that will later receive appropriations will be administered through the Indian Health Service. They go on to explain that this Emergency Fund is, by legislative requirement, subject to the provisions of the Hyde Amendment, which are currently set forth in section 507 of the FY08 L/HHS/ED appropriations act as referenced by 25 U.S.C. Section 1676. U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, July 23, 2008. Hon. Chris Smith, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Congressman Smith: Thank you for your interest in my Amendment # 5076 to S. 2731, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008. As you may know, my amendment, which was accepted by voice vote, authorizes $2 billion in appropriations over the next five years to tribal public safety, health, and water projects. My amendment requires that the Attorney General, the Secretary of Interior, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services establish an emergency plan to address the law enforcement, health, and safe drinking water needs of Native Americans across the nation. Specifically, the amendment provides an authorization totaling $750 million, to be used by the Attorney General and Secretary of Interior, to address tribal law enforcement, court, and detention facility needs. Additionally, the Amendment established $250 million in authorization to be used by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through the Director of the Indian Health Service (IHS), to provide IHS contract care, health facility construction and rehabilitation, and sanitation facilities. Finally, $1 billion in authorization is to be used to implement Indian drinking water projects that have been approved by Congress. Again, thank you for your interest in my amendment. Once enacted, I am hopeful that this modest authorization will begin to meet the critical public safety, health, and water needs that many of our nation's reservations face subject to future appropriations by Congress. Sincerely. John Thune, United States Senate.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to welcome our guest chaplain, Father John Garrett, the parochial vicar of Our Lady of Sorrows-St. Anthony's Church, located in my hometown of Hamilton, New Jersey. I have known, respected, and admired Father Garrett all of his life. Even as a young man, I was deeply impressed by his innate goodness, generosity, enthusiasm, motivation, tenacity, and above all, deep faith. It was a privilege for me to nominate Father Garrett, then known as J.C., as my first page, way back in the 1981-1982 school year. That's how far back we go. Throughout his life, Father Garrett has always applied his enormous talents in ways that benefit others. In addition to living and preaching the gospel, he is also a board certified psychologist. His expertise includes helping those with depression, anxiety, panic disorders, PTSD, personality disorders, and the chronically mentally ill. Along with his doctorate in psychology, Father Garrett has two master's degrees and has served as director of the graduate program at Columbia College in Missouri. A man of deep faith, Father Garrett has and continues to make enormous contributions in promoting and securing the mental and spiritual health and well-being of others. I welcome him back to the House of Representatives and thank him for his extraordinary commitment to serving others and for so effectively and faithfully radiating the love, the mercy, and the compassion of Christ. Welcome, Father Garrett.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to ask a very serious question: Why is Congress, why are we, subsidizing the abortion industry? Most Americans, I suspect, probably have no idea whatsoever that our tax dollars have enabled abortionists to establish and to run hundreds and hundreds of abortion mills throughout America. Indeed, America's biggest abortion chain is Planned Parenthood. Each year, approximately 290,000 children are aborted in Planned Parenthood clinics. Each year, Planned Parenthood gets more than $335 million in taxpayer funds, including huge amounts from the Department of Health and Human Services' title X program. Tragically, as their business grows, and they now have some 850 clinics and they have embarked on a building binge, and this chart clearly shows that as the taxpayer funds go up, the number of abortions go up because more venues are then provided to destroy the unborn child. It may come as a surprise to at least some of my colleagues and the American people that the babies lost and women wounded by abortion are disproportionately African American and Hispanic. A study in 2005 found that 62 percent of Planned Parenthood abortion mills are located in African American communities. And when Hispanics are included, that percentage rises to over 70 percent. Of course, every human life is sacred regardless of race, gender, disability or condition of dependency. Every human life is of infinite value. But the disproportionate number of minorities who are aborted in Planned Parenthood clinics begs the question. Two weeks ago, Dr. Alveda King, niece of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, said here in Washington, ``Defending human life is part of the civil rights struggle.'' She said, ``We are uniting civil rights and moral rights to fulfill the dream of what my uncle called the beloved community.'' She goes on to say that ``America needs to know that black leaders do support life. We start where life begins, with the babies, and we will march until abortion, racism, and all of society's ills bow to the truth that we are all one race.'' Dr. King, who has had two abortions herself, now boldly speaks out for both victims of abortion, the unborn child and his or her mother. She has said, ``The government should not be subsidizing racism, but that is exactly what it's doing through Planned Parenthood.'' Mr. Speaker, it is time, it is long past time, for us to take a serious, and for some a second, look at Planned Parenthood, its origins, and the fact that since 1973, the year the U.S. Supreme Court issued its infamous Roe v. Wade decision and legalized abortion, that approximately 4.5 million babies, disproportionately African American and Hispanic, have died in Planned Parenthood clinics. It is time to look past the slogans and the rhetoric and the cheap sophistry, the euphemisms that are used to mask and to cloak this deed that kills a child. Abortion is big business and it is destroying the next generation of Americans, and you and I, Mr. Speaker, are subsidizing it. Tragically, the seemingly benign Planned Parenthood, which works overtime to market its image and its brand, is in the grisly business of dismembering the fragile bodies of unborn children with chemicals, sharp knives, and hideous suction machines that are 25 to 30 times more powerful than a vacuum cleaner used at home. Planned Parenthood ought to be known as Child Abuse, Incorporated for the large number of children, 4.5 million, that it has already killed and continues to kill all while being subsidized by American taxpayers. This is not a business of healing or nurturing or caring. This is a business of destroying the most vulnerable and weakest members of our society. For Planned Parenthood, business is good. Violence against children pays handsomely. In 2006, it actually increased the number of abortions it performed by nearly 25,000, while abortions nationwide were in decline, for a total of 289,750, a new pathetic record of kids killed even for Planned Parenthood. For so-called medical abortions, Planned Parenthood quotes prices from $350 to $650. For surgical abortions, they earn $350 to $900 apiece. These fees for so-called ``services rendered'' boosts the bottom line of this big business. To put the annual number of child deaths in perspective, I ask my colleagues and the American people to picture this: 71,000 fans filled the University of Phoenix stadium to watch the Super Bowl this past February. It was a great game, my team won, the Giants. But the number of unborn babies whose lives were taken from them before they could take their first breath by this one corporation in one year could have filled that enormous stadium more than four times over. Planned Parenthood is now responsible for committing more than one out of every five abortions performed in the United States of America. If the number of abortions performed alone doesn't convince you of Planned Parenthood's agenda, just compare it with other services it provides to pregnant women. Planned Parenthood, they have got the word ``parenthood'' in their slogan, in their name, but they provided a mere 11,000 clients with prenatal care. You walk into what is called a Planned Parenthood clinic, and you would expect to walk out with a baby, but prenatal care is not something they put an emphasis on. That is a ratio of one parent to every 26 women who lose their children to abortion. After it was revealed that Planned Parenthood had referred a meager 1,414 clients to adoption services in 2004, Planned Parenthood stopped reporting this miniscule adoption referral number. So, again, those children who go to abortion clinics with their mothers, in utero that is, don't walk out as potential adoptees. To me, Mr. Speaker, this record doesn't seem to be that of an organization dedicated to preserving women's choices. I might add that these tiny lives are being extinguished. There are thousands of American families waiting to adopt, and we all know that. There are upwards of 2 million families who would love to adopt, but unfortunately, the babies are aborted. Finally, if that is not enough, this so-called ``pro-choice'' organization does everything within its power and massive budget to prevent women from knowing all of their options and from being certain that their choices are truly informed. Let's not forget that Planned Parenthood lobbies this Chamber and the Senate and, certainly, in each legislature throughout the country, and they litigate and litigate and bring court cases over and over again in all of the States, against virtually every child protection initiative at both the State and Federal levels, including that of parental notification, spousal notification, women's right-to- know laws, informed consent laws--which actually bring down the numbers when women get the booklet and are informed about the growth and about the development of their child as well as about deleterious effects to their health--waiting periods, partial-birth abortion, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, statutory rape reporting laws, and of course, abortion funding bans. Can we trust Planned Parenthood? They say their vision is to be the Nation's most trusted provider of sexual and reproductive health care. This is from an organization that targets minorities, that performs millions of abortions and barely even attempts to help women carry the babies to term. Reproductive health should include, not exclude, babies. Mr. Speaker, the truth about Planned Parenthood's long, systematic destruction of vulnerable human life, at long last, must be brought to light. The cover-up must end. I would like to yield to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) for 5 minutes.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for his very eloquent statement, and I thank him for his leadership. This is the human rights issue of our time, and it's about time people recognized it as a human rights issue. I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence). (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I want to thank my friend for his eloquent statement. I yield to Michelle Bachmann such time as she may consume, and I understand some of the other Members may want to ask you to yield for a colloquy or for some comments.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my friend for his statement and for his leadership on this important human rights issue. I yield to my good friend from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. At this time, I yield to our friend and colleague, Mr. Sali.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for his very, very powerful statement. I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my friend for his statement and for his leadership. I yield to Mr. Franks, the gentleman from Arizona.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my friend for his eloquent statement and for his very strong and passionate defense of the unborn and their mothers. I yield to Dr. Broun, the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Dr. Broun, thank you so much for those very strong comments and for the insights that you bring as a medical doctor. I yield 30 seconds to my friend and colleague, Michele Bachmann.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, let me conclude with just a couple of comments. First of all, I think most people need to realize who Margaret Sanger really was. And I've read her books; I've read her writings. She wrote in a book called ``The Pivot of Civilization'' that ``we are paying for,'' and I quote her, ``and even submitting to the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who should never have been born at all.'' In chapter five, she has a chapter called the ``Cruelty of Charity'' and takes to task those who would provide maternal health care and outreach to those women, poor women especially, in her writings. And I will put them in the Record. She says that ``such benevolence is not merely superficial and near- sighted, it conceals a stupid charity.'' To her, these babies and these mothers should have never been born. Let me conclude, Madam Speaker, abortion mills don't nurture, they don't heal, they don't cure disease. Abortion is violence against children. Some abortion methods dismember and rip apart, the fragile bodies of children. Other methods chemically poison children. Abortion has turned children's bodies into burned corpses, a direct result of the caustic effect of poisoning. Consider a dismemberment abortion, this is called the D&E abortion. It is used later term, at least from the 20th week or so onward. These children, Madam Speaker, feel pain. My colleagues will remember that last Congress we brought forward a bill called the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act which would at least inform the woman that a child at this age feels excruciating pain. Sadly, the abortion lobby, including Planned Parenthood, lobbied vigorously against informing women that these children feel such excruciating pain, sometimes as much as four times that which would be felt by a newborn or a child later in his or her life. We need to, again, Madam Speaker, respect all human life. In the life of an unborn child, birth is just part of a process. It's an event in a child's life; it is not the beginning of life. These children deserve their fundamental human rights.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), ranking member of the Committee on Natural Resources. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas, Judge Poe.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing legislation that would close a loophole in the Department of Defense's whistleblowers' protection statute (10 U.S.C. Sec. 2409) and expand this safeguard to include the men and women of the DOD contracting business who report abuses to their superiors. Under current law, an individual is only protected--and therefore eligible for remedies--if he or she reports workplace security concerns to ``a Member of Congress or an authorized official of an agency or the Department of Justice.'' While I understand the importance of encouraging individuals to take their concerns to certain authorities, I believe it is imperative that we include in this authority an employee's superiors. It seems only natural, that once someone recognizes a problem within their work environment, they report it to their superiors. This is part of a normal progression of attempting to resolve issues and challenging tasks on the job. Few people initially contact their Congressman or the Department of Justice when they first observe an irregularity on the job. It is also important to note that many former military members migrate to the security contracting industry. Many of these men and women have years of previous service to our nation, have grown to respect their chain of command and understand the benefit it can provide in the workplace. When they have come to the conclusion that additional steps must be taken or when they have identified a significant problem in the work environment, these professionals are trained and encouraged to report their concerns to their superiors to enable them to assess the situation and foster a solution. Similarly, many in the federal security contracting industry come from a law enforcement background with a comparable command structure and respect for their superiors. The legislation I introduced today will ensure that those who identify problems within firms subcontracted by DOD are still afforded standard whistleblower protections even if they notify their employer about possible violations before they notify an agent of the federal government. The legislation does not require employees to notify their employer first and it does not preclude them from contacting federal officials, it simply protects employees who point out potential violations to their employer, the federal government or both. If an employee is dismissed prior to his/her notifying the government, but after notifying their employer, they will receive the necessary protections as well. The current loophole was brought to my attention by a New Jersey resident who worked for a private security firm that guards military installations in my district and throughout the country. This individual witnessed and documented a number of events that raised serious concerns regarding the contractor's ability to ensure the safety and security of the base and the surrounding community. Base security is not an issue to be taken lightly--anywhere and including in my state of New Jersey. As we all recall, in May of last year, the New Jersey U.S. Attorney's office arrested five men who were planning to attack another New Jersey installation, Fort Dix. After a thorough and aggressive law enforcement effort to thwart this attempted terror attack, the men accused have been detained and are awaiting trial. Still, the vulnerabilities at our military bases exposed by this incident cannot be minimized or dismissed. The individual who brought this loophole to my attention reported to his employer what he believed were unfulfilled contract requirements that resulted in questions regarding the firm's ability to provide adequate security. After his boss dismissed his concerns, he then scheduled a meeting with the base security personnel to discus the matter. Before this meeting could occur, the individual was fired by the firm and barred from the base. At that time, he brought these concerns to me. However, since the law requires that a potential whistleblower be a current employee at the time he/she discloses pertinent information to a federal official, it was too late for him to be eligible for protections and/or remedies. Specifically, my legislation would expand the universe of those to whom an individual can properly report concerns to include the individual's chain of command, before and after any retribution, so that the individual will be protected and have the right to be reinstated if an investigation shows that the individual was punished for bringing the matter to the attention of proper authorities. As we are all aware, in recent years the Department of Defense has looked increasingly to private security contractors to guard and police our military installations across the country. The men and women filling these positions deserve to be protected when they report violations and concerns to their superiors and especially if they are subsequently punished in an attempt by their employer to downplay or even cover up a violation. It is imperative that we amend the law to ensure that these employees are eligible for the same remedies as other whistleblowers.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 1230, which conveys a very clear and unmistakable condemnation of the violence we have seen in Zimbabwe following the elections in that country. I strongly support the resolution's call for a peaceful solution to the grave crisis there today. If anyone had a doubt about the regime of Robert Mugabe before this most recent wave of government-inspired violence, surely this thug has dispelled it now. Mugabe has clamped down on the press and has thwarted the assembly of the opposition, detaining his opposition figures on numerous occasions. We have heard gut-wrenching testimony and seen gruesome pictures of the intimidation, the violence and the torture of those who disagree with this dictator. And there are credible reports that some 36 people have been murdered by those loyal to Mugabe. The opposition candidate, Morgan Tsvangirai, was courageous to return to his country, but we have all held our breath as Mugabe's forces have detained him several times. No one feels safe in Zimbabwe today, Madam Speaker. Even United States diplomats attempting to monitor the regime's abuses have been harassed, their access to public places restricted. Mugabe has even stooped to the pilfering of food aid and has halted international relief operations. With a run-off election scheduled for June 27, we need to send a message, a good, strong, bipartisan message, that we in the United States and the world expect fair, peaceful balloting. The will of the people must be heard. I ask the support of my colleagues for this resolution and pledge my support for the people of Zimbabwe in these very difficult times. I reserve the balance of my time.