Chris Smith

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), who has spoken out on behalf of human rights in Vietnam with great faithfulness, is also a cosponsor of this legislation, and also promoted legislation that was successful in expanding Radio Free Asia.

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

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume and rise in support of H. Res. 238, which commends the momentous Democratic elections held in Aceh, Indonesia this past December. For decades, that region of northern Sumatra was caught in seemingly endless cycles of retribution. Separatist violence by the Free Aceh Movement, known as the GAM, provoked brutal crackdowns by the Indonesian military, and far too often it was the civilians in the middle who paid the price. That conflict and the mistrust of both sides appeared insurmountable. Then, on December 26, 2004, an even more terrible tragedy struck the area. The Indian Ocean tsunami suddenly snuffed out over 165,000 lives in Aceh alone, devastated the coastline, and displaced hundreds of thousands more. In January of 2005, within days of the tsunami, I visited the devastated coastline and the Banda Aceh aid center, along with the United States Navy crews who were providing water and logistical support from the USS Abraham Lincoln for humanitarian relief efforts. It was a cataclysm of biblical proportions. But the immensity of the suffering it caused also diminished the relative significance of the political conflicts that had afflicted those communities for so long. Since then, we have seen progress towards democracy and reconciliation that would have not appeared possible beforehand. The signing of the Helsinki Memorandum of Understanding, the withdrawal of Indonesian troops and military from outside of Aceh, the demobilization of the GAM forces and the enactment of the law on the governing of Aceh were all and are very positive and hopeful signs. Over 80 percent of the eligible Acehnese voters participated in last December's peaceful district and gubernatorial elections, and in an unmistakable sign of change, the former GAM leader, Irwandi Yusuf, was elected as governor. Of course, the work of long-term reconciliation and building of a strong civil society will take time and continued cooperation from all parties. Thus, it is appropriate that this resolution encourages both sides to live up to their commitments under the Helsinki Memorandum, particularly with regard to establishing a Human Rights Court for Aceh and a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Having personally witnessed the suffering of the Acehnese and the devastation of their homes and livelihoods following the tsunami, I am particularly hopeful that we are witnessing the springtime of democracy, peace and development in Aceh. I want to thank Mr. Crowley for presenting us with this opportunity to congratulate the people of Aceh and the Government of Indonesia on the progress they have achieved so far. Mr. Speaker, I 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. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support of this resolution offered by Ms. Ros-Lehtinen that asks the Chinese Government to recognize the rights of the Uyghur people and to free the children of Rebiya Kadeer, an extraordinary human rights activist and Uyghur spokeswoman. At turning points in history, Mr. Speaker, of oppressed peoples, one honest and courageous man or woman often comes to represent the entire people in the eyes of the world. In the United States, on matters related to civil rights, it was the Reverend Martin Luther King. In Burma, it is Aung San Suu Kyi. In India, it was Gandhi. For Chinese Catholics, it was Cardinal Kung. In Poland, it was Lech Walesa and John Paul II. For Tibetans, it is his Holiness, the Dalai Lama. For the Uyghur people, deprived of their religious freedom, robbed of their cultural and linguistic rights and marginalized in their own homeland by the government-organized Han Chinese migration, it is Rebiya Kadeer. For years, Ms. Kadeer was a voice crying in the wilderness, asking the serial human rights abusers in Beijing to recognize the rights of the Uyghur people. In 1999, the Chinese Government imprisoned her. In 2005, it released her into exile into the United States, warning her not to advocate for her people. Her husband and several children were already in exile here. Others remained behind. In 2000, while she was in prison, one of her daughters testified at a human rights hearing that I chaired on the Uyghurs, and she was very powerful in her statement on behalf of her mom. Even though some of her children still lived in China, this incredibly brave woman established a Uyghur human rights foundation. Now she has become the quintessential symbol of Uyghur aspirations and hopes. She is a recognized leader in the Uyghur exile and human rights communities, a Nobel Peace Prize nominee, and a friend of President Bush after their meeting in Prague this past summer. Mr. Speaker, we all want Beijing to act like a responsible stakeholder in the world. I make no secret of my conviction that Beijing has a very long way to go. The list of serious human rights abuses committed by the Chinese Government is long. It includes the persuasive systematic exploitation of women and the murder of their children through forced abortion as part of its coercive one-child-per- couple policy. Against the Uyghurs, it is used as a means of genocide, of trying to destroy an entire race and ethnic group of people because of their ethnicity. The imprisonment of democratic dissidents and religious believers remains a serious and pervasive problem in the PRC, as does the marginalization of the Tibetans in their homeland on the roof of the world. The extensive use of torture has been documented time and time again. Manfred Nowak, the Special Rapporteur for the United Nations, went to China and came back, and his report is literally an indictment. If you are arrested, if a Han Chinese, a Uyghur or anyone is arrested, the way they get a conviction is they torture you. Eventually you sign on the bottom line and you admit your so-called crimes. They have also forcibly repatriated North Korean refugees. Again, there is abuse after abuse after abuse, and the Uyghurs are at the brunt of it. The oppression of the Uyghurs in their homeland along the Silk Road must be included, Mr. Speaker, on any list of Chinese Government's most serious abuses. In the United States, Ms. Kadeer has ensured that the world does not forget the oppression of the Uyghur people, and the Chinese Government has retaliated now, as they have in the past, by harassing her children who live in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region by placing them under house arrest, by incarcerating them and by beating them. Today, Mr. Speaker, the House of Representatives, both Republicans and Democrats alike, ask that Beijing end this campaign of retaliation against the Kadeer family. We join the voice of those who care for those kids, an anguished mother who cries, ``let my children go.'' We also ask that Beijing immediately release Hussein Celil, an ethnic Uyghur who is a citizen of Canada, so he can rejoin his family living in that country. Finally, in the darkness of the political oppression of the Uyghur people, Rebiya Kadeer stands out as a beacon of light and hope. Let us honor her and her family and her work by enthusiastically supporting this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, the U.S. Congress has an obligation to work to ensure a healthy and safe environment for the benefit of current and future generations. To reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and achieve a healthier environment, we need a multi- faceted approach that addresses broad spectrums of inter-related issues and fosters both energy independence and clean energy reliance. As a cosponsor of various global warming reduction initiatives, I urge my colleagues to support today's legislation, H.R. 3221, a comprehensive plan to combat global warming, provide national security by reducing dependence on foreign oil, help to better protect our natural wildlife, and offer international assistance to developing countries to promote clean and efficient energy technologies. Among its many good provisions, I am pleased that H.R. 3221 includes the full text of legislation that I, along with Foreign Affairs Chairman Tom Lantos sponsored--H.R. 2420, The International Climate Cooperation Re-engagement Act of 2007. The Lantos-Smith bill was approved and reported from the Foreign Affairs Committee in May and is now Title II of H.R. 3221, the underlying bill before us today. It is no secret that climate change has a disproportionate impact on the vulnerable, poor populations in our world. Accordingly, the Lantos- Smith provisions of H.R. 3221 are designed to push and assist developing countries as they seek to implement positive renewable energy practices. Specifically, these provisions authorize $1 billion over five years to provide U.S. aid to support the overall purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The monies can also be used to increase institutional abilities to provide energy and environmental management services including outreach programs for India and China-- two of the world's largest emitters of greenhouse gases. The bill also authorizes trade missions, programs to strengthen energy research and educational exchange, and an interagency working group to support a Clean Energy Technology Exports Initiative. These provisions are an important aspect of creating local, sustainable capacity and will complement well other program goals of our foreign assistance. Another vital provision found in Title II of today's legislation is similar to one that I proposed over 17 years ago to create an office, ideally within the State Department, with the sole mandate of working with foreign countries and others to mitigate the international impact of global climate change. During my tenure in Congress, I have witnessed how the designation of an office within the State Department has bolstered efforts on a single critical issue with notable results within a short time period. This has been the case, for example, with the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons as created by P.L. 108-193, my legislation the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. Similarly, I know that the establishment of an Office on Global Climate Change at the ambassadorial level within the State Department as provided for in H.R. 3221 will demonstrate to the world that the United States is targeting needed resources to address this challenge and is completely engaged in the worldwide fight against global warming. Title II of H.R. 3221 also creates an International Clean Energy Foundation to serve the long-term foreign policy and energy security goals of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. The foundation will be charged with promoting programs that serve as models for significantly reducing emissions through clean and efficient energy technologies, processes and services. The creation of the International Clean Energy Foundation promises to add a particularly effective tool in our arsenal against adverse climate change. Mr. Chairman, global warming continues to be one of the most pressing environmental concerns in the world today. Given sea level rise, the increasing severity of storm surges and continued warming temperatures, the impact of global climate change is undeniable. Unless we act now-- the future posseses an even greater threat to our way of life on this planet. With its incorporation of H.R. 2420, H.R. 3221 represents an important step--both domestically and internationally--in reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and promoting 21st century clean energy solutions. Legislative action by this Congress to promote investment in renewable energy development, availability and implementation will help ensure a healthy environment. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3221.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, on Monday, July 30, Patriarch Teoctist, the head of the Romanian Orthodox Church, died in Bucharest of complications after a surgery. He was 92 years old and had not been in good health for several weeks. As a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Helsinki Commission, I have been very concerned and active on issues regarding the promotion of human rights and children's rights in Romania. I have visited Romania five times--both when it was under Communist rule and since 1990--and I know Patriarch Teoctist was respected and beloved by millions of Romanians. He became patriarch in 1986, resigned immediately after the revolution in 1989 that overthrew the dictatorship of Nicolae Ceaucescu, but was recalled by the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church. Madam Speaker, after 1990 Teoctist promoted ecumenical dialogue. He invited Pope John Paul II to visit Romania. This visit took place in 1999 in Bucharest, where Teoctist met with Pope John Paul II, embraced him fraternally and prayed with him. What a magnificent gesture! It was the first time the Roman pontiff visited a predominantly Orthodox country since the schism of 1054. At this time of sorrow, I wish to express my condolences to the Romanian Orthodox believers and confidence and prayers that Teoctist rest in peace.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, most of my colleagues are aware of the tragic fact that since 1973, approximately 49 million innocent unborn babies have been brutally dismembered or chemically poisoned to death in what is euphemistically called choice. Abortion methods are extraordinarily cruel. They are painful and violent. Indeed, abortion is an act of violence against children. Unborn children in America today have less protection than most animals, including fighting dogs and eagles. It is dismaying and disappointing to me that H.R. 3162, a bill that purports to assist sick and disabled children, explicitly fails to acknowledge an entire class of children, unborn children. The aggressive demands of the abortion culture distorts reality even here. The impulse to deny unborn children any value or worth or dignity is so extreme that the bill doesn't include and wouldn't even make in order Mr. Pitts' amendment to include acknowledgment that these young and vulnerable patients often need intervention, including microsurgery and blood transfusion, just like any other patient. Why the bias against the innocent unborn? The Bush administration's policy promulgated in 2002 is put at risk. That was and is a progressive policy--a policy of inclusion.. I am very disappointed in my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for failing to include all kids under this administration. By way of background the administration promulgated the Unborn Child Rule to give states the option to explicitly include unborn children as unique patients in their SCHIP programs. Eleven states, including California, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Texas, Wisconsin, and Michigan now include explicit coverage for unborn babies in their programs. H.R. 3162 puts that enlightened and progressive policy at risk. It's worth noting that the Bush 2002 Unborn Child Rule was savaged by the pro-abortion lobby. Planned Parenthood included it in their list of actions they regard as a war on women. Which of course is absurd. I guess when your organization kills 265,000 unborn children in Planned Parenthood clinics each year, you find it hard to think or say anything good about an unborn baby. But, the underlying prejudice and bias that makes this vulnerable class of humans expendable and persona non grata should not be endorsed by this bill. Vote ``no'' on the rule--give the Pitts amendment a chance to be voted on.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 121, which calls on the Government of Japan to formally acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility for its role in the coercion of young women and girls, euphemistically known to the world as `comfort women', to serve as sex slaves in Japanese military comfort stations from the 1930s through World War II. I would especially like to thank Mr. Honda for his leadership on the issue of `comfort women' and for his expression of solidarity with these exploited women and urge each and everyone of my colleagues to support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, as you well know, the friendship and alliance that exists between the United States and Japan establishes stability and prosperity in Asia and the Pacific and is essential to our security interests in that region. This resolution calls on the Government of Japan to strengthen that tie by acknowledging the facts forever enshrined in history and by publicly denouncing these past heinous human rights abuses in one of the largest cases of human trafficking in the 20th century. Only in recent years have these victims of Imperial Japanese brutality relayed their stories to the world. In fact, just this year, on February 15, 2007, three women who knew firsthand the unequivocal pain, suffering and horror of sexual servitude at the hands of the Japanese military testified at a subcommittee hearing chaired by Mr. Faleomavaega. These women relayed heartbreaking real life accounts of years of torment, disease, and separation from their families. These women are still plagued today by the physical and emotional scars of the horrendous human rights abuses committed against them. On April 26 of this year, my good friend and the former chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Henry Hyde and I co-authored an op-ed in the Washington Times urging `the Japanese people to courageously acknowledge and redress the wrongs perpetuated by Imperial Japan' on these women and `to come to grips' with the history of their past. In light of Japan's recent wavering on the accuracy of historical fact regarding comfort women, I stand with my colleagues in urging the Japanese Government to very clearly acknowledge, apologize, and accept historical responsibility in a clear, unequivocal manner for its Imperial Armed Forces' coercion of young women into sexual slavery. Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 121, which calls on the Government of Japan to accept formal historical responsibility for one of the darkest chapters of World War II history in Asia and the Pacific, the Japanese military's use of ``comfort women'', the practice of coercion of young women into sexual slavery. I would first like to acknowledge our distinguished colleague, Mr. Honda of California, for introducing this important resolution and for his persistent efforts in giving voice to the victims of these crimes against humanity. Japan, a loyal ally and one of U.S.' closest partners, plays a critical role in maintaining the geopolitical balance in a still volatile region. The Japanese government's refusal to acknowledge the despicable war-time practice of its Imperial Army known as ``comfort women'' stands in stark contrasts to the courageous humanitarian stand the Japanese government has taken in a number of humanitarian crises around the world and to its role as guarantor for peace in the region. Facing up to one of the darkest chapters of its history is a genuine test for the maturity of a nation. In the aftermath of World War II, the German nation and its government found the courage to account for war crimes that the Third Reich committed during the war and occupation. There can be no denying that the Japanese military committed those crimes involving thousands of women, mostly of Chinese and Koreans descent. It is particularly disturbing that some in Japan are still trying to distort the historical record and are denying that these crimes took place. The same parties are going even a step further and blaming the victims for engaging into prostitution. It is up to this House to call for the Japanese government to set the record straight, not just for the sake of the past, but also because rape has been used across the globe today as a weapon of war. By supporting this resolution we send a strong and unambiguous signal to the Japanese Government to acknowledge its historical responsibility. We will also state Congress' strong l condemnation of rape as weapon of war. While support of the resolution will finally give voice of the numerous victims of these despicable crimes, the Congress' intent is to assure our ally Japan that the resolution aims at forging the process of healing by facing certain historical experience and is not intended as retribution against a partner and ally. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me In supporting this important resolution.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor of H.R. 180, The Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act, I am pleased to see this bill brought before the full House and I urge all our colleagues to vote for its final passage. The Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act is an important part of our ongoing efforts here in Congress to influence, pressure and alter the conduct of the Sudanese regime, the government complicit in the genocide being perpetrated and abetted in Darfur. The deaths of 450,000 innocent women, men and children and the displacement of 2 million others demand nothing less. H.R. 180 comes amidst recent reports of additional population displacements of about 12,000 households in West Darfur. Those who are fleeing express fears of attacks by Sudanese government forces in addition to general insecurity in that area. Despite the Sudanese government's announcement that it will accept a proposed hybrid UN-African Union peacekeeping operation in Darfur, it will take far more action on the part of the Bashir regime to convince me--and I am certain my other colleagues here in the House as well-- that it is finally succumbing to the world's outcry for peace. Withdrawing American investments, both public and private, from Sudan will help to ensure that we get that government's attention. On August 1, 2005, my home State of New Jersey became the first State to divest from Sudan. Earlier that year, Representative Don Payne and I had sent a joint letter to State leaders encouraging this action. Our NJ law directs the State Treasury to divest State pension funds from foreign companies doing business with Sudan until the Sudanese government stops the genocide that is ravaging that country. Eighteen other States have since followed New Jersey's lead and have adopted divestment policies. Mr. Speaker, as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations, I advocated forcefully for divestment provisions in the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act of 2006. Unfortunately, the Senate removed those provisions prior to final passage of the bill. I am pleased that H.R. 180 revisits the divestiture issue and builds on those initial efforts in several important ways. H.R. 180 requires that the Secretary of the Treasury publish every six months a list of companies that have a direct investment or are conducting business operations in Sudan's power, mineral, oil or military equipment industries. The bill excludes several important categories of companies, including those that are dealing directly with the government of southern Sudan or that are helping the marginalized populations. Companies that are on the Treasury list will not be able to enter into or renew contracts with the United States Government. State and local governments may also authorize prohibitions for those governments to enter into or renew contracts with these companies. The bill further authorizes State and local governments to divest based either on this list created by the Treasury or on a list that they create on their own, without risking a lawsuit by doing so. Perhaps most importantly, H.R. 180 provides a safe harbor for mutual and pension funds by allowing them to divest from companies on the Treasury list without risk of a lawsuit alleging that they are failing to invest in a manner that brings about the highest yield. All of these measures will provide the practical and legal foundation for our country to do what is in our national tradition--to place the dignity of the human person and the well-being of our brothers and sisters, regardless of where they live or their national or ethnic identity, above financial and commercial interests. Promoting fundamental human rights and removing financial support from those who subsidize an abusive regime in Darfur is clearly in the best interests of the Sudanese people as well as our U.S. foreign policy. I urge my colleagues to support The Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman for that support.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I yield to my friend.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I understand. I thought you might be persuaded by Mr. Oberstar's very eloquent intervention, but I understand this is legislating on appropriations. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

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

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Chairman, in 1995 the Congress passed and President Clinton signed the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act, Public Law 104-88. As a direct consequence, the Surface Transportation Board created by the law is now in the business of facilitating solid waste transfer stations that are not subject to local or State environmental laws or regulations. This Federal preemption of local environmental laws is fraught with danger to the public and must be reversed, which would be accomplished if my amendment or a similar amendment that has been proffered by Senator Lautenberg and already adopted in committee were to become law. During the past several years, small rail companies, many apparently formed for the expressed purpose of securing Federal exemption from local and State regulations, have filed numerous verified notices of exemption with the STB for the purpose of establishing solid waste transfer stations along rail lines and spurs. In one case in North Bergen, New Jersey, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection fined the New York Susquehanna & Western Railway Corporation $2.5 million for violation only to have this year a Federal judge nullify that important State enforcement. Thus far the STB has not acted on New Jersey's complaints of health, environmental, and fire risk and concerns the State raised concerning high levels of lead, arsenic, mercury, and copper. Now at the property in my district in Freehold, New Jersey, a small class 3 rail company, Ashland Railroad, has filed a verified notice of exemption with the STB to operate a 1.5 mile track for the establishment of another solid waste transfer station. The proposed site would be situated right next to a wetlands area that poses significant hazards to the health, safety, and well-being of my constituents. This is especially important in light of the fact that the wetlands feed directly into the Manasquan Reservoir, the source of the potable water for hundreds of thousands of people in the Monmouth County area. The proposed site is also adjacent to residential housing, again raising serious concern, especially because there are many prevailing winds and other issues concerning the health and safety of those folks. A waste transfer station, Madam Chairman, should not be established without significant local input. Preemption voids numerous meaningful State health and safety environmental laws, including those enacted in my State. I believe that people deserve the protection of these laws and the protection that these policies do provide.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, this morning the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health held a hearing on the impact of agricultural development on food security in Africa. Living in a country of plenty as we do, at least for most of us, where local grocery stores have aisles of fresh produce, cereal and even pet food, one can easily forget that other parts of the world are not similarly blessed, and what undernourishment that results from food insecurity means in practical terms. UNICEF estimates that undernutrition is a leading cause of mortality of children under the age of five, contributing to the death of about 5 million children every year. One to two percent of all children under 5 in the developing world, or almost 13 million, suffer from severe acute undernutrition. These children are far more susceptible to dying from childhood illnesses including diarrhea and pneumonia. Of course, undernutrition does not affect only children. Twenty-five percent of all undernourished persons in the world, or about 218 million, live in Sub-Saharan Africa. This constitutes about 30 percent of that region's population. Agriculture production is essential for addressing this crisis on both the local and national levels. And yet Africa faces numerous challenges in meeting the basic need of food and nutrition for its people. These include the simple lack of food in markets or fields; poor food delivery mechanisms; many people's inability to buy food or agricultural resources due to poverty; obstacles to food access due to social status; lack of sanitation and clean drinking water; and natural and man-made natural resources. I can attest to at least one aspect of these challenges from my own experience in Africa. I have traveled along a segment of the Pan- African Highway, which is one of Africa's primary transportation routes. The part that I rode on is a narrow, paved, two-lane road with numerous bicyclists, pedestrians and animals walking along the shoulder. I was told that another major segment was a dirt road that was taking far longer than anticipated to be re-paved. One often encounters open-air trucks overloaded with bananas or other produce broken down in the middle of the road, exposed to the sun and heat. I am told that they can remain there for hours or even days at a time. No one can travel this major road after dark, as the road is not lit and the danger of hitting one of these disabled vehicles or some other object on the road is too great. Even if a community is growing bumper crops of high quality agricultural produce, it would be next to impossible to transport food in a timely manner under these conditions. As we are noting time and again during the subcommittee hearings, inadequate infrastructure is a major obstacle to development generally in Africa, and that certainly applies in the case of agricultural development. African leaders recognized this when they named increased agricultural trade capacity and infrastructure as one of the four pillars of the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Program of the African Union's New Partnership for Africa's Development. The Subcommittee heard just three weeks ago how the Millennium Challenge Corporation is working to address this need. Congress should be looking for additional measures to create the infrastructure necessary to support agriculture businesses and rural farming populations. It is unfortunate that some attribute Africa's food crisis, at least in part, to the Continent's population growth rate, and name people themselves, especially children, as a cause of the problem of food insecurity. At a recent hearing on the shortage of safe water in Africa, the Subcommittee learned that the United Nations Development Programme has found that the global water crisis is attributable to power, poverty and inequal access to safe drinking water, not shortages in quantity resulting from population increases. I would propose that the same analysis applies with respect to the availability of food and levels of food security. Many researchers on this issue attribute food insecurity not so much to an absolute deficit of food, particularly at the national and international levels, as to the failure of socioeconomic systems, including markets and political processes, to distribute food equitably or efficiently. Many are of the opinion that better functioning and open market systems are equally or even more important to providing adequate food supplies as absolute increases in food production. While we should and must seek to increase the quality and quantity of food supplies, we must also address longer- term challenges of policy and infrastructure to attain a permanent solution for food security. People themselves should be considered not a source of the problem, but a valuable resource in achieving this goal.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I would be happy to yield.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I certainly appreciate that very generous offer.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Chair, 2 years ago the President signed the Stem Cell Research and Therapeutic Act into law. This bipartisan legislation is designed to turn medical waste to medical miracles by deriving stem cells from umbilical cords and placentas after the birth of a child. Cord blood transplantation is saving lives and is doing so today. It is one of the most promising and exciting fields in the area of regenerative medicine. The bipartisan legislation, Madam Chair, establishes a nationwide integrated bone marrow core blood stem cell transplantation program. The good news, according to a July 13 technical assistance briefing memo by HRSA, is that six major grant recipients, Duke, New York Blood, Puget Sound Blood Center, Stem Cyte, the University of Colorado and the Anderson Cancer Center at the University of Texas have received funds for state-of-the-art programs that are now part of the newly created National Cord Blood Inventory. With significant infrastructure now in place, and more blood grant centers imminent, and single point of access to facilitate the delivery of those units, more than 4,600 units of lifesaving cord blood has already been collected. HRSA reports that approximately $22 million from fiscal years 2004 and 2007 appropriations will make collection of some 17,000 cord blood units possible by the end of fiscal year 2007. ``The question is--then what? According to HRSA--in FY08--the new Cord Blood Program, just coming into it's own, will have to rely entirely on new appropriations. So the bad news, it seems to me, is that if funded at about $4 million for FY08, the amount in the bill, the current grant recipients will have to dramatically scale back in their cord blood banking initiatives just as they're ramping up; just as breakout is occurring. At $4 million, only about 3,000 units will be available in FY08 for medical realization of the goal of 150,000 units the experts tell us is needed to provide genetic matches for over 90 percent of Americans who can be aided by cord blood transplant. We've come so far--the network is in place. And that money buys more cord blood which means more people cured and more research to save even more lives. The $15 million that my colleague from Alabama and I are asking Members to support comports with the authorized level and is derived from within the HRSA allocation, which in the underlying bill is being increased by $69 million over last year and $1.3 billion over the President's request. Our shift represents less than \1/4\ of 1 percent of HRSA's $7 billion. Surely, we can accommodate an $11 million shift--the net effect of the amendment--to a proven regenerative medical treatment that will mitigate--even cure--a myriad of diseases including leukemia and sickle cell anemia.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, this morning the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health held a hearing on the African Growth and Opportunity Act. This law provides duty-free and quota-free access to the U.S. market for certain goods from designated countries in sub- Saharan Africa. It was based on the congressional finding that it is in the mutual interest of the United States and the countries of sub- Saharan Africa to promote stable and sustainable economic growth and development on the continent. The criteria for beneficiary countries includes evidence of progress toward a market-based economy, rule of law, economic policies to reduce poverty and promote economic growth, a system to combat corruption and bribery, and protection of internationally recognized worker and human rights. The recent report from the U.S. Trade Representative to Congress contains some impressive information about AGOA's impact. Since it was enacted in 2000, trade between the United States and sub-Saharan Africa has increased 143 percent, and AGOA has played an important role in this increase. In 2006, over 98 percent of U.S. imports from AGOA- eligible countries entered the United States duty-free. U.S. imports from AGOA countries totaled $44.2 billion in 2006, which was an increase of 16 percent over the previous year. It is disappointing, however, that most of this increase in 2006 was due to oil, and non-oil trade increased by only 7 percent after having declined a precipitous 16 percent in 2005. Non-oil AGOA trade constituted only $3.2 billion of the total. These latter statistics indicate a need for greater attention to the non-oil potential on the continent. The Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations that I chaired held a hearing on a five-year assessment of the act in October 2005, which included two witnesses who we heard from again today: Ms. Florizelle Liser and Mr. Steve Hayes. One of the issues that I raised at the prior hearing was the protection of labor and other human rights in AGOA-eligible countries. Ms. Liser testified at the time that AGOA was having a positive impact on worker and human rights, and she provided examples of reforms that had been undertaken by beneficiary countries which included the prevention of child trafficking and addressed the worst forms of child labor. It is important that this issue be examined, particularly in light of the 2007 Trafficking in Persons Report that was released by the State Department last month. It contains a ``Tier 2 Watch List'' of countries that have a serious trafficking problem and that do not fully comply with minimum standards to eliminate trafficking. These countries will be the subject of particular scrutiny by the State Department's Trafficking Office during the coming year to ascertain whether they are making sufficient efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards. It is disturbing that eight countries on the Tier 2 Watch List are AGOA beneficiaries, and that each of these countries are cited in the TIP report for child and/or forced labor concerns. Sexual exploitation, particularly of children, as cited in some of these reports would also be relevant in the AGOA context as gross violations of international human rights standards. In addition to the other human rights assessments that are legislatively mandated as part of the AGOA eligibility process, one would expect the tier placement for trafficking in persons to be a critical consideration. I would strongly encourage the U.S. Trade Representative to collaborate with the State Department Trafficking in Persons office on this issue. While questions may be raised concerning the relation between AGOA and improvement in human rights, it does seem that the act together with the Millennium Challenge Account is providing an impetus for other advances. The World Bank is reporting that corruption in Africa is declining, stating that even some of the poorest countries have made ``significant progress'' in improving governance and fighting corruption over the past decade. This trend is certainly attributable to a significant extent to the eligibility requirements for both of these U.S. initiatives. AGOA and the MCA are also addressing infrastructure and technical capacity that are essential for long-term development, but which are arguably not receiving sufficient emphasis from other assistance sources. As I indicated earlier and in the subcommittee's recent hearing on the MCA, Congress needs to look at ways to improve and strengthen these benefits in both pieces of legislation. And finally, one should not minimize the good will and positive bilateral relationships in Africa that are being reinforced through AGOA and the MCA, together with the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. This latter consideration, though intangible, is critical if the United States is to maintain and strengthen its presence in this region of the world that is becoming increasingly important for our own national security and global peace and prosperity.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, this week the world paused to remember and reflect on the horrific acts of brutality, wanton cruelty and mass murder committed in Srebrenica a mere 12 years ago. On Sunday, I joined a distinguished group of leaders and survivors to honor those brave Bosniaks who suffered and died--victims of the genocide. Among those who led the solemn ceremony was Dr. Mustafa Ceric, the Reis-ul-Ulema, President of the Council of Ulema in Bosnia. Reis Ceric is an inspiring man of God and internationally recognized as a man of peace and extraordinary compassion--and a friend. Also there was President Haris Silajdzic, a Bosnian leader I have known and deeply respected since the early 90s. Dr. Silajdzic, throughout the darkness and moral confusion of the Balkan war was a powerful, persistent, reasonable and dynamic voice for peace, human rights, the rule of law and accountability for genocide. In my remarks, I tried to convey to our Bosnian friends that Americans and others of goodwill throughout the world again extend their deepest condolences and respect to the mothers and surviving family members who have endured unspeakable sorrow and loss that time will never abate. I assured the survivors of our earnest prayers. Madam Speaker, the international community must recommit itself to apprehending and bringing to justice once and for all those who perpetrated these heinous crimes, including Mladic and Karadzic. Justice is the essential prerequisite to sustainable reconciliation. No matter how long it takes, we must never tire or grow weary in the pursuit of justice. Renewal and a further consolidation of democracy must be rooted in systemic reform, including police reform. Perhaps some of the lessons learned from successful initiatives in Northern Ireland might have application there. Looking back, it is almost beyond comprehension that the Srebrenica genocide occurred at all. Future historians, Madam Speaker, will be hard pressed to ever understand how a UN Security Council designated ``safe area,'' guarded by a significant deployment of UN peacekeepers, backed up by NATO's superior air power, could have capitulated in the face of unmitigated evil and enabled one of the most despicable acts in human history. After Bosnian Serb forces attacked elements of UNPROFOR beginning in early July 1995, a series of gross miscalculations, mistakes and betrayal quickly led to the systematic slaughter of over 8,000 Bosniaks, mostly men. Adding unnecessary insult to injury some in the international community further exacerbated matters by employing euphemisms that masked the reality of the genocide. Somehow, they just couldn't utter the word genocide. Nevertheless, the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia found ``beyond any reasonable doubt that a crime of genocide was committed in Srebrenica.'' More recently, the verdict of the International Court of Justice that genocide occurred in Srebrenica begs the question: What are the consequences? Two years ago, I authored a resolution that overwhelmingly passed the U.S. Congress that clearly and unambiguously condemned the Srebrenica genocide and stated in part that ``all persons indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) should be apprehended and transferred to The Hague without further delay, and all countries should meet their obligations to cooperate fully with the ICTY at all times . . .'' Madam Speaker, the genocideurs would like nothing better than that we forget. And that, of course, is something we cannot do. Ever.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, this afternoon the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health held a hearing on the Millennium Challenge Corporation in Africa. The MCC program, which was announced by President Bush on March 14, 2002 and established in January 2004, marked an incredible new approach to U.S. foreign assistance. It is based on the principle that assistance is most effective when it promotes good governance, investments in people, and economic freedom. Its goal is to reduce global poverty through the promotion of sustainable economic growth. Grants from the Millennium Challenge Account are limited to countries with a per capita income less than $3,465. In addition, eligible countries must have an established record that satisfies 16 performance indicators in the three areas I just noted. One of the most important is a pass/fail test for fighting corruption. Seven grants--called compacts--have been signed so far for countries in Africa, with a total value of about $2.4 billion. Additional compacts are pending for the Continent. The establishment of the Millennium Challenge Account is innovative in several respects. For one, it mandates that program proposals be developed solely by qualified countries themselves with the involvement of a broad base of their civil society. It also provides assistance to countries without regard to U.S. strategic foreign policy objectives, providing an opportunity to countries that may normally be overlooked by the United States as well as other bilateral donors. However, it cannot be said that the MCC for that reason does not serve U.S. interests. In fact, authentic development as envisioned by the MCC principle leads to a more prosperous, peaceful, and just world for all of us. Finally, I would assert that MCC is most laudable because it recognizes the potential of the poor to lift themselves and their country out of the clutches of poverty if they are provided with the necessary infrastructure and tools. An important correlative to this is the incentive provided by MCC to the recipient country's government to focus on and respond to the needs of the poor segment of their population. The MCC provides an important means of empowerment for those who have the greatest difficulty attaining it. A glance at the various compacts and threshold programs in Africa highlights the extraordinary needs and the necessity of expanding those programs. The subcommittee held a hearing on Africa's water crisis just a few weeks ago on May 16th, where we lamented the fact that over 1.1 billion people in developing countries do not have adequate access to safe water and approximately 2.6 billion people live without basic sanitation. We heard testimony that the reasons for these deficiencies are rooted in inequalities. The poor not only have significantly less access to water, but even when they do have access, they pay significantly more for it. The MCC with its focus on programming for the poor is one mechanism that the United States is utilizing to address this issue at its root cause. On the political level, it is worth noting that our parliamentary colleagues in developing countries do not always have the resources they need to fulfill their role in a democracy. The MCC threshold program in Malawi will provide the National Assembly of that country with the capacity for all 13 committees to meet and perform their oversight function--a first in Malawi's history. As with all new programs, the MCC has encountered challenges in Africa that we examined in the course of the hearing. One of the greatest has been providing disbursements in a timely manner while ensuring accountability and sustainability. Another that we are encountering time and again in numerous development efforts for Africa, including programs for HIV/AIDS, is partner country capacity. It is extremely difficult to implement country-driven initiatives when the country itself is lacking educated, experienced personnel to do the work. However, neither of these or other challenges warrant scaling back on MCC programming, but instead provide the opportunity to search for solutions to these issues together with the recipient country government as well as other bilateral and multilateral assistance donors. The MCC is not the total solution to African development, but it is an important and significant contribution, both in terms of resources and philosophy, to a more global strategy.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, two days ago, on June 20th, the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health held a hearing on the occasion of World Refugee Day. This day was designated by the United Nations General Assembly in 2001 to be commemorated each year in order to honor the contributions of refugees around the world and to call attention to the plight of those who continue to suffer as refugees. This day also coincides with Africa Refugee Day, which has been commemorated since 1975 and was established by the Organization of African Unity Commission of Ten on Refugees as a way to raise funds for assistance for refugees in Africa. It is shocking to consider that 12 million people in the world are refugees today, and almost a quarter of those, 3.2 million, live in Africa. In addition, Africa has an estimated 12 million Internally Displaced Persons, most of whom are victims of conflicts within their countries. Floods and droughts have also contributed to the dislocation of large numbers of African people. More than half of the world's refugees have lived in camps for several years, with no foreseeable prospects for returning to their homes and a normal lifestyle. No one can measure the suffering that often comes with being a refugee--being a stranger in a strange land, the inability of children to attend school, the frustration of parents unable to provide the basic necessities for their families, the hardships and fears that come with living in a tent, or having no shelter at all. One might forget that refugees often also are suffering the emotional trauma that results from violence inherent in the conflicts that produce refugees. For that reason, it was particularly useful to hear the testimony of Neal Porter, the Director of International Services from the Center for Victims of Torture. Legislation that I have sponsored, including the Torture Victims Relief Reauthorization Act of 2007 which passed the House on April 25, 2007 and is now pending in the Senate, provides authorization for programming that helps refugees and others suffering the effects of torture. I would encourage my colleagues in the Senate to act on this bill so that the Center for Victims of Torture and others who provide services to torture survivors can receive the assistance they so desperately need. The international community accomplished a major milestone when it recognized refugees as having certain rights under international law in the 1951 U.N. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees plays a major role in ensuring that the promised resources and protection are provided. However, as laudable as international recognition and assistance are for assisting those forced to flee from their homes, far more needs to be done to prevent people from becoming refugees in the first place, and to accommodate the safe return and re-establishment of those already refugees or IDPs. This subcommittee hearing provided an important opportunity to examine what we in the United States and the world community can do in this respect. Although I and others have devoted significant attention in recent months and years to the tragedy in Darfur, one can never over-publicize the desperate situation of the victims of the Sudanese Government's genocide. When I think of refugees, my mind immediately recalls those who I met in the Mukjar and Kalma camps, only some of the 2 million who have been displaced from their homes in that region. The term ``displaced'' does not begin to describe the nightmare situation that these people must live in. As we have heard through testimony at recent hearings on Darfur, these people long most of all not for food or shelter, though they have little of either, but for protection. And with good reason--over 450,000 people have died in the violence of Darfur. On the occasion of World Refugee Day, we could not forget those who voluntarily subject themselves to the same harsh conditions in order to care for and protect refugees and displaced persons. It was necessary to pay a special tribute particularly to the men and women who have suffered violence, many to the point of death, in their efforts to assist the people of Darfur. Humanitarian groups there have reported being harassed by the Government of Sudan and deliberately attacked by rebel groups. Over a dozen humanitarian workers have been killed over the past year. In mid-December 2006, armed groups launched a major attack against NGO compounds in Gereida, South Darfur. On January 19, 2007, Sudanese Government security forces arrested and severely beat 20 UN staff members in Nyala, South Darfur. On February 5, 2007, a civilian police officer with AMIS was killed in an IDP camp in the North. The men and women who risk their welfare and their very lives to care for these refugees truly live out the words, ``I was hungry, and you gave me food; thirsty and you gave me drink; a stranger, and you welcomed me.'' I convey to these heroic men and women my personal gratitude for lending their hands and hearts to some of our poorest brothers and sisters.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Tennessee.