Chris Smith

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to join Rep. Hyde, Chairman of the International Relations Committee, in sponsoring an important resolution urging Ukraine to ensure a democratic, transparent, and fair election process for the upcoming presidential election. By urging the Ukrainian authorities to abide by their freely undertaken OSCE commitments on democratic elections, this resolution emphasizes our commitment to the Ukrainian people and the goal of Ukraine's integration into the Western community of nations. As Chairman of the Helsinki Commission, I have been a steadfast supporter of human rights and democracy in Ukraine, and I value independent Ukraine's contribution to security and stability in Europe. The stakes in the upcoming elections are high, not only with respect to the outcome, but also as a fundamental indicator of Ukraine's democratic development. Recent events have dramatically underscored the need for this clear statement of resolve to support a truly democratic process in Ukraine. The pre-election environment in Ukraine has been discouraging, with examples of obstacles to free assembly and free speech, the limiting of access to Radio Liberty, Voice of America and other international broadcasts, and substantial transgressions in recent parliamentary by- elections and mayoral elections. Mr. Speaker, the most blatant of these took place just a few weeks ago in the city of Mukacheve. These elections witnessed violence, intimidation, fraud and other massive violations both of the electoral code and any standards of civilized human behavior. The mayoral elections have been roundly and rightly criticized by the United States, Europe, and the OSCE. Many observers fear that Mukacheve is a harbinger of things to come. As Chairman of the U.S. delegation to the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, I join OSCE PA President Bruce George in calling upon Ukrainian President Kuchma to ensure a proper investigation of the violations which took place and to rectify the situation so that the will of the voters is realized. Mr. Speaker, Ukraine remains at a crossroads. Developments with respect to democracy have been discouraging over the last few years. The elections represent a real chance for Ukraine to get back on the road to full respect for the tenets of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. The United States stands in solidarity with the people of Ukraine as they strive to achieve these essential goals.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with my colleagues, Chairman Hyde, Ranking Member Oberstar, and Rep. Peter King and Donald Payne, to introduce legislation on a critical and timely issue of interest to both U.S. and Irish companies operating in western Ireland and the impact on jobs in that region. The concern arises out of negotiations between the United States and Ireland that will determine the status of Shannon Airport, an important gateway for commerce and tourism between our two countries. Under the ``dual gateway'' policy international carriers currently operating flights between to and from the United States through Dublin are required to undertake an equal number of flights to Shannon Airport and Dublin Airport over each calendar year. The Dual Gateway Policy Review Act we are introducing today provides for an economic impact study proposed changes to the ``dual gateway'' policy might have on U.S. businesses operating in western Ireland, Irish businesses operating in and around Shannon Airport, and U.S. air carriers serving Ireland. This matter came to my attention recently through the persistent efforts of Dana Rosemary Scallon, a Member of the European Parliament representing much of western Ireland, the region that would be most adversely affected by changes actively under negotiation between Washington and Dublin. In fact, it is my understanding that talks are underway this week in Washington between American and Irish negotiators. At Ms. Scallon urging, I arranged for us to meet with the chief U.S. aviation negotiators in February, here in Washington. I was shocked and dismayed to learn that no consideration whatsoever had been given to the potential loss of jobs and negative economic impact that such a policy change would have on western Ireland. A key element missing from these talks--a glaring omission in my view--is an expert assessment of the economic impact of changing the status of Shannon Airport, an economic hub critical to development in western Ireland and the estimated 140 U.S. corporations operating in the region. My legislation would correct this shortcoming. Mr. Speaker, in a series of meetings arranged last week by Ms. Scallon, I met with representatives of scores of U.S. corporations deeply concerned over the potential impact of modifications or discontinuance of the ``dual gateway'' policy on their operations. Approximately half of U.S. investment in Ireland is made in the western part of the country. Many of these corporations have made sizable investments in western Ireland and are keen to maintain their presence in the region, but would be forced to reevaluate their positions should Shannon Airport's status be downgraded. These business executives estimate that 40,000 jobs on the western corridor from north of Galway to south of Limerick are directly affected by Shannon Airport. An additional 80,000 jobs are indirectly affected by Shannon operations according to these business representatives. I also met with local leaders along the west coast who were united in their concern over the likely economic and social consequences of a downgrading of Shannon Airport's status. Business leaders from County Donegal warned of the ripple effect their region would feel from such a change. The potential threat posed by possible changes to the ``dual gateway'' policy have galvanized U.S. business executives representing many different sizes and types of enterprises along the west coast to speak out with a single voice on this matter. They highlight the fact that Shannon Airport is a major access point to and from the U.S. and European cities necessary to sustain and promote development and growth in the region. Mr. Speaker, for nearly six decades Shannon Airport has served as a vital gateway for the United States to Ireland and beyond. Indeed, many Americans, including me, trace their family roots back generations to counties along the rugged western coast of Ireland. Hundreds of thousands of American tourists pass trough this gateway each year. An estimated 140 U.S. corporations have come to rely upon Shannon Airport as a vital gateway to doing business in western Ireland.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) estimates that there are 200,000 or more homeless veterans living on the streets on any given night. Other organizations dedicated to assisting homeless populations believe that that number is higher, closer to 300,000. Either number is far too high and a national travesty. For these veterans, access to VA benefits, specialized services and effective outreach are vital components to any hope of individual stability and improvement in their prospects. With the passage of Public Law 107-95, the Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act of 2001, Congress established the goal of ending chronic homelessness in the veteran population within a decade. Today, I am introducing H.R. 4248 along with Mr. Evans of Illinois, the Committee's ranking member, that would extend the authority of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to continue making grants to expand or modify existing programs for homeless veterans. The current authority for this program will expire in September 2005 without this legislation. VA also requested an increase in the grant and per diem program spending limit from $75 million to $100 million, in its fiscal year 2005 medical care budget proposal. This legislation would authorize that spending increase along with extending the program authority through 2008. The VA's Homeless Grant and Per Diem program provides competitive grants to community-based, faith-based, and public organizations to offer transitional housing or service centers for homeless veterans. Between grants and per diem-only awards, VA is contributing support for approximately 10,000 community-based supportive housing beds and services to homeless veterans in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Current recipients of these funds are contributing in very significant ways to the fulfillment of the objective to reduce homelessness among veterans. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the homeless veterans who need these services and the programs that are achieving successful outcomes, I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation to recognize and commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Allied landing at Normandy during World War II. I am pleased that the ranking member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, Mr. Evans, has joined me as an original cosponsor of this measure. I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this resolution. The well-known phrase ``freedom is not free'' perhaps never meant as much as it did on June 6, 1944. Over 6,500 American troops suffered casualties on that day. Our allies also suffered great numbers of killed and wounded. Many more observed horrible images that were burned into their memories for the rest of their lives. Sadly, this was the beginning of a campaign that would cost the lives of thousands of Americans in order to end the ``Thousand Year Reich'' hundreds of years prematurely. There are many concentration camp prisoners--and their descendants--alive today because of the price paid by thousands of young men. One of the reasons I feel strongly that Congress should debate and pass legislation such as this is that there are fewer and fewer original participants in the event, and our collective societal memory can become skewed and distorted. As the interval of time lengthens between our current understanding of a historical event, and when the event originally took place, its significance can sometimes become blurred or almost lost. Many of us look back upon the Normandy Invasion at D-Day, June 6, 1944, and think of it as the beginning of Europe's liberation from the clutches of one of the most evil systems of government ever devised by mankind. In many ways, this understanding is correct. But sometimes I feel as if too many historical observers minimize the fact that the Allied victory at Normandy, and the subsequent liberation of Europe from Nazi and Fascist tyranny, was not inevitable. Many historians today are so obsessed with finding and identifying ``fundamental historical trends'' and isolating various factors and causes that they often overlook that much of history occurs by chance and by the sheer human will of key individuals. On June 6, 1944, failure was possible. In fact, when you pause and consider the magnitude and scale of such an enormously complicated military operation waged by multiple nations, it sometimes seems amazing that the operation ever succeeded. After all, roughly two years earlier, several thousand Canadian and British troops launched an amphibious raid near the town of Dieppe, and this operation proved to be a complete disaster. Some of the highest casualty rates of the entire war were suffered during the operation. As a result of this military debacle, there were over 1,000 allied soldiers killed, and 2,000 prisoners taken by the Germans. The Allied raid failed because troops were inadequately prepared and lacked experience in battle, the plan was poorly conceived, overly complex, and lacked sufficient fire support from aircraft and artillery. As planning for Operation Overlord was underway, Winston Churchill injected much needed caution and urged careful planning. Stalin was putting heavy pressure on Roosevelt and Churchill to move quickly and launch an invasion in 1943 to relieve the enormous pressure on the Soviets along the Eastern Front. Churchill worried that a 1943 invasion would fail, and feared that the beaches of France could end up ``choked with the bodies of the flower of American and British manhood.'' Fortunately, the Allies learned the bitter lessons of the 1942 Dieppe landing, and put these hard-won lessons to good use during the Normandy invasion. But there was nothing historically inevitable about the success of Operation Overlord. The famed historian Stephen Ambrose put the significance of this operation in perspective: You can't exaggerate it. You can't overstate it. [D-Day] was the pivot point of the 20th century. It was the day on which the decision was made as to who was going to rule in this world in the second half of the 20th century. Is it going to be Nazism, is it going to be communism, or are the democracies going to prevail? If we would have failed on Omaha Beach and on the other beaches on the 6th of June in 1944, the struggle for Europe would have been a struggle between Hitler and Stalin, and we would have been out of it. It is also worth noting that General Dwight D. Eisenhower himself was not completely confident of victory. Prior to the launch of the great amphibious assault, he scribbled a brief note about what he would say to the press in the event that the invasion failed, and put it in his wallet. He later added it to his diary. The note read as follows: ``Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based upon the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that Bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone. When the words of this note were first revealed to the American public, I thought how wise President Franklin Roosevelt was to pick a man of such character and humility as Dwight Eisenhower to lead the single most important military operation in American history. Here was a man who was asked to oversee and execute the most complicated military plan ever devised, one in which so many things could have gone wrong that you could have blamed hundreds of different variables had it not succeeded. A great invasion force stood off the Normandy coast of France as dawn broke on June 6, 1944: in all, there were 9 battleships, 23 cruisers, 104 destroyers, and 71 large landing craft of various descriptions, as well as troop transports, mine sweepers, and merchantmen. Combined, these forces constituted nearly 5,000 ships of every type, the largest armada ever assembled. Allied Air Forces flew 11,000 sorties to provide air cover, bomb beach-head fortifications, and most importantly, pin down the armored Panzer tank reserves that the Germans had available to counterattack and drive any Allied beachhead back into the sea. Eisenhower had reasonable faith in his war plan, to be sure. He did not recklessly cast over 150,000 Allied soldiers into harm's way without taking every possible precaution to ensure success. But he was fully cognizant of just how badly things could go awry even if everything he could control went perfectly and on schedule. He was fully prepared to shoulder the entire blame himself if the outcome did not go well. And there was much to be worried about. As the day of the invasion approached, the weather in the English Channel became stormy. The U.S. Army Center of Military History (CMH) reports that heavy winds, a five- foot swell at sea, and lowering skies caused General Eisenhower to postpone the assault from June 5 to June 6. Weather conditions remained poor, but when weather forecasters predicted the winds would abate and the cloud cover would rise enough on the scheduled day of the attack to permit aerial support, Eisenhower reluctantly gave the command. Eisenhower also understood the awesome and heavy burden of leadership that comes with knowingly sending thousands of men to a place where many would not return home alive or uninjured. Planners had expected casualties of up to 80 percent among the airborne forces and glider troops. Eisenhower, knowing full well what was likely to face these airborne troops, traveled to an air base at Newbury, England to bid farewell to the members of the 101st Airborne Division before their tow planes and gliders carried them off to battle. The U.S. Army Center of Military History reports that a newspaper man who accompanied Eisenhower later told friends he had seen tears in the general's eyes. Eisenhower's love and fear for his men was grounded in reality. Fewer than half of the gliders assigned to the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division ever reached their assigned landing zones on D-Day. Those that missed their targets either became stuck in hedgerows, struck German obstacles constructed specifically to counter glider troops, or were mired in swampy terrain. By midmorning of June 6, 1944, 4,000 men of the 82nd were unaccounted for, along with 60 percent of the equipment they had carried into battle. Several of the beach landings went relatively smoothly and according to plan. But at the beach landing code-named OMAHA, many things seemed to go wrong all at once for the primarily American force. Naval and aerial bombardment of enemy mortar and artillery positions had failed to inflict substantial damage. As American infantry tried to take the beaches, they were pounded mercilessly by the German defenders. Allied rocket ships tried to bring additional indirect fire support, but they were launched at the outer limits of their effective range. When missiles fell short, they often hit Allied troops on the beach. The high winds and strong currents blew many of the landing craft off course, making it difficult to coordinate artillery support and leaving troops miles from their objective with useless maps. And where the Allied forces had appropriate maps, they didn't have the necessary radios with which to call in for fire support, reinforcements, or to coordinate their attacks. A lot of radios had gone to the bottom with their ships and landing craft. Many of those who landed were seasick or weary from the journey through choppy waters. Nearly half of the amphibious tanks accompanying the invaders sank, swamped by the high waves their design couldn't accommodate. Wreckage at the water's edge piled up and landing craft became hopelessly entangled in barbed wire and uncleared beach obstacles placed by the German defenders. Arriving at the battlefield during a rising tide, many landing craft became stuck on sandbars that were 50 to 100 yards from the waterline. Enemy machine guns, firing from heavily fortified bunkers, mowed down rank after rank of U.S. troops who had to wade to shore with fifty, eighty, or sometimes a hundred pounds of equipment through water that was often neck deep. According to some estimates, barely one-third of the first wave of attackers ever reached dry land. Few heavy weapons made it to shore in the first wave at OMAHA making it extremely difficult to take out the mortars, machine gun emplacements, and artillery batteries that were raining death upon Allied forces. Some were killed the moment the landing doors dropped, as was so poignantly captured during the memorable film, ``Saving Private Ryan.'' Those who were wounded and unable to move sometimes drowned as the tide moved in. Making matters worse, the force opposing them were seasoned German veterans from the 352nd Infantry Division. Only sheer bravery and the monumental effort of human will posed against impossible odds carried the day at OMAHA beach. About 2,500 men were killed or wounded at OMAHA alone. By the end of the day, the total tally of dead and injured topped 9,000. The American share was about 6,500. Among the American airborne divisions, about 2,500 became casualties. Canadian forces experienced about 1,100 casualties and another 3,000 British soldiers were killed or wounded. Approximately one-third of the casualties were killed in action. At roughly 10 p.m., June 6, 1944, Eastern Standard Time, President Franklin D. Roosevelt broadcast a radio address to the nation, and led a prayer for the many thousands of soldiers committed irrevocably to battle that day: Last night when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our Allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far. And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer: Almighty God: our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity. Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith. They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph. They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest--until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men's souls will be shaken with the violences of war. . . . Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom. . . . With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace--a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil. Thy will be done, Almighty God. Amen. Incredibly, the high casualties suffered were less than Allied planners had actually expected. There were many who feared that Hitler would order the use of chemical weapons to prevent the Allies from gaining a toehold on the European mainland. According to the U.S. Army Center of Military History, Eisenhower's chief surgeon, Maj. Gen. Albert W. Kenner, and the Chief Surgeon of the U.S. Army's European Theater of Operations, Maj. Gen. Paul R. Hawley (who later served with distinction as the chief medical officer of the VA), had prepared their staffs to process at least 12,000 killed and wounded in the First U.S. Army Division alone. Despite the losses, and the unspeakable hardships endured by so many, the invasion succeeded. More than 100,000 men and 10,000 vehicles had come ashore that day, the first of millions who would hammer the final nails into Nazi Germany's coffin. The skilled German Commander of Army Group B, Field Marshall Erwin Rommel, was quoted before the battle as saying ``If we do not succeed in our mission to close the seas to the Allies, or in the first 48 hours, to throw them back, their invasion will be successful. . . . In the absence of strategic reserves and due to the total inadequacy of our navy and of our air force we will have lost the war.'' Rommel's assessment was ultimately to be proven right. Less than one year later, Nazi Germany would be beset on both sides by victorious Allied armies and surrendered. Mr. Speaker, our nation must never forget or take for granted the sacrifices that were made to liberate Europe and put an end to Nazi tyranny. We must never turn our backs on the veterans who scaled the cliffs of Normandy against overwhelming odds. As long as I have the privilege of serving as Chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, I will make it my highest priority to ensure that those who risked everything for the sake of our freedom, are honored and served appropriately by the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, Easter is usually a joyous time for Christians throughout the world. Unfortunately, that was not the case this year for many Montagnards Christians, ethnic minorities in Vietnam's Central Highlands. On Saturday April 10, more than a thousand ethnic minority Christians assembled in the streets of Buon Ma Thuot to protest ongoing religious repression and confiscation of tribal lands. Their peaceful protests were met with brutal force by the Vietnamese police, who attacked and arrested the protesters and sealed off the area to foreigners--much like the Chinese Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. Numerous reports state that hundreds may be dead with many others arrested, injured, and or in hiding. This follows years of ongoing persecution and a brutal crackdown in December of 2001, when the government also forcibly suppressed mass protests in the region, after which the Vietnamese government closed hundreds of Christian Churches. Religious persecution in Vietnam against Catholics, Christians, members of the Unified Buddhist Church, and members of Vietnam's indigenous religious groups has been well documented in the State Department's Country Reports on Human Rights and International Religious Freedom. Last year, the Commission on International Religious Freedom recommended Vietnam should be designated as a Country of Particular Concern for ``systematic, egregious, and ongoing'' religious freedom abuses. As if there was any doubt, the Easter crackdown confirms the fact that Vietnam should be designated as a Country of Particular Concern for violations in religious freedom. Protections and assistance for Montagnard asylum seekers should be provided also be provided by the Cambodian government and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. Congress will continue to keep up the pressure on the regime in Hanoi. We will work to pass H. Con. Res. 378, a resolution calling for the release of Father Nguyen Van Ly, a prominent and outspoken Catholic priest, that was reported out of the House International Relations Committee and has nearly 90 cosponsors. And we will also work to pass H.R. 1587, ``The Vietnam Human Rights Act,'' which calls for careful monitoring of human rights in Vietnam. Similar legislation cleared the House 410-1 in the 107th Congress but stalled in the Senate. Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the following articles by Human Rights Watch detailing the events of the Easter crackdown, to the Congressional Record. The United States and the world cannot turn a blind eye to this Easter crackdown and continual persecution of Montagnards and religious groups in Vietnam. We must take a stand. [Article from Human Rights Watch] Vietnam: Open Central Highlands to International Observers Reported Killings of Montagnard Protesters Must Be Investigated Immediately (New York, April 22, 2004)--Vietnamese security forces appear to have coordinated with armed men in civilian clothing to savagely attack Montagnard protesters at more than a dozen mass demonstrations during Easter weekend, Human Rights Watch said today. ``The international community must act now and insist that Vietnam allow independent observers into the highlands to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation,'' said Dinah PoKempner, General Counsel for Human Rights Watch. ``We've received alarming reports that scores of protesters were wounded during the demonstrations, and that some protesters were beaten to death.'' Large-scale unrest involving between 10,000 and 30,000 indigenous minority Montagnards occurred in the Central Highland provinces of Dak Lak, Gia Lai, and Dak Nong on April 10 and 11, according to Vietnam's state media and independent accounts. Montagnard activists in Vietnam and abroad say that their movement seeks to peacefully press for religious freedom and return of ancestral lands in the Central Highlands. The Vietnamese government has charged that ``anti- government'' and ``counter-revolutionary'' elements are inciting the Montagnards to seek a separatist state. Human Rights Watch has received firsthand reports that security forces and men in civilian clothing, armed with metal bars, shovels, clubs with nails attached to them, machetes, and chains, confronted Montagnard protesters at more than a dozen locations leading into Buon Ma Thuot, the capital of Dak Lak province, on the morning of April 10. According to witnesses, the demonstrators were not armed, although some defended themselves when attacked by throwing stones at the police. In twelve eyewitness accounts obtained by Human Rights Watch, sources from seven different locations in Dak Lak, Gia Lai and Dak Nong provinces described seeing Vietnamese police, and civilians working with the police, beating protesters. Vietnam's state-controlled media reported that two protesters were killed--one from rocks thrown by other protesters and another who was run over by a tractor driven by Montagnards. While it is impossible to confirm the numbers of casualties because the government is barring outside observers from the region, to date Human Rights Watch has received credible eyewitness accounts that at least ten Montagnards were killed--one from a gunshot wound to the head and the others from beatings and hundreds were wounded. Clashes broke out at more than a dozen locations when security forces and ethnic Vietnamese in civilian clothes blocked demonstrators on roadways leading into Buon Ma Thuot, including Phan Chu Trinh Road northwest of the city; at Ea Knir Bridge on the road from Ea Kao commune, which lies east of the city; and at three locations along the road leading to Krong Pak district town, which lies northeast of the city, including the Ea Pak and Krong Ana bridges. Particularly hard hit at Phan Chu Trinh Road were 3,000 protesters from several villages in Cu Mgar district, northwest of Buon Ma Thuot. ``The security forces were well prepared for the protesters,'' said PoKempner. ``They had set up ambushes at key places such as bridges and the main roads into the city, and assembled people dressed as civilians holding crude weapons to block the roads and attack the protestors.'' Security officials confiscated and burned hundreds of the farm tractors and makeshift trailers that many Montagnards were traveling on, which had been packed with food and supplies in preparation for several days of protests. In Gia Lai province, Vietnamese state media reported that demonstrators from Ayun Pa, Cu Se, Dak Doa, Duc Co and Chu Prong districts gathered at the provincial administrative offices in Pleiku provincial town on April 10. on April 11, Montagnards gathered to demonstrate in numerous communes in Ayun Pa, Cu Se, and Dak Doa districts of Gia Lai. Human Rights Watch has received reports of clashes in at least seventeen locations in Gia Lai, with the fiercest incidents occurring in Ha Bau, A'Dok and Glar communes of Dak Doa district and Ia Tiem commune of Cu Se district. State media reported that the provincial hospital in Pleiku received fifty-two injured people. The provincial hospital in Dak Lak reported forty injured people on the night of April 10. Prior to a government-imposed news blackout on hospital personnel, staff at Pleiku hospital told reporters that they had received scores of wounded people on Sunday night, many with deep gashes and head injuries, and that at least two demonstrators died that night. Many other wounded demonstrators, fearing arrest, have not gone to the hospitals despite being in need of medical attention, Human Rights Watch said. Witnesses said authorities quickly collected wounded people and dead bodies from the Phan Chu Trinh area, and that within days, the blood on the roadway had been washed away. Human Rights Watch stressed the urgency of an independent investigation. ``We fear that a huge cover-up operation has likely already taken place,'' said PoKempner. ``The Vietnamese government needs to account for the large numbers of people who never returned to their villages after the demonstrations and are now feared to be dead or detained at unknown locations.'' Hundreds of Montagnards have fled their villages and gone into hiding, Human Rights Watch said. In violation of Cambodia's obligations under international law, Cambodian security forces have been instructed to deport any Montagnards who try to cross the border. Testimony: The Killings on Phan Chu Trinh Road A twenty-six year old Ede woman described a deadly incident she witnessed on Saturday morning, April 10 when several thousand Montagnard protesters, some riding on their farm tractors, arrived at Phan Chu Trinh road, an industrial area of machine shops and welding supply stores on the outskirts of Buon Ma Thuot. Police had lined up students and ethnic Vietnamese men in civilian clothing holding metal bars, shovels, and machetes along the roadway, she said. ``They suddenly rushed at the unarmed crowd, beating the demonstrators until many were lying in the streets,'' she said. ``They chased demonstrators who tried to flee, including children and women.'' She and many other demonstrators fled to the coffee fields behind the shops lining the roadway, chased by security forces. She described what happened: ``A thousand people tried to get away from the slaughter by the police and civilians. They were beating us with metal bars and sticks. People were bleeding from their throats, noses, mouths, and eyes. The villagers were crying as they tried to get away from the slaughter by the police and civilians. We were running helter-skelter. Those who tried to hide in the coffee plantation were caught, beaten and killed on the spot. Police, students, and Vietnamese threw rocks at us. Many of us were bleeding from being hit on our heads with rocks. Many people were injured and bleeding. We didn't have any first-aid for their wounds. They were bleeding from their throats, noses, mouths, and eyes. A blind woman sitting on the farm tractor was killed on the road by a dozen Vietnamese people, including police. They asked her to get down from the tractor but she could not because she was blind. They rushed at her and beat her until she fell from the tractor and died. The police and Vietnamese civilians smashed and stepped on our food, clothing and blankets we had prepared for a long- term peaceful demonstration asking for freedom and the end to harassment of our religion and our Montagnard life.''

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I draw to the attention of my colleagues the plight of Russian scientist Dr. Igor Sutyagin. On April 5th of this year, he was convicted of espionage by a closed court and sentenced to 15 years of labor camp. Sutyagin's attorneys have filed an appeal with the Russian Supreme Court. As part of project initiated in 1997, Dr. Sutyagin was commissioned by the Institute of USA and Canada Studies, a prominent think tank in Moscow, to conduct research on civilian-military relations in Russia and eleven other Eastern European countries. As described by its initiators, this project was designed to provide the new post-Soviet democracies with Western expertise in military reform and to help civilian governments gain oversight over their militaries. The research was conducted through interviews with military and civilian government officials and was supplemented by open sources such as newspaper articles. At no time were researchers privy to, or expected to use classified materials. Military officials of the countries participating in this project were informed prior to the beginning of the research. Despite the transparency of the research conducted, Dr. Sutyagin was arrested in October 1999 by the Russian Federal Security Office and charged with espionage, specifically passing information to a British organization allegedly associated with British intelligence. A thorough search conducted by the FSB in the home and office of Dr. Sutyagin produced no evidence of any classified documents. At the end of the day, the FSB concluded that the research conducted by Dr. Sutyagin did not use classified material, but that his conclusions were so accurate he must have used classified documents to reach them . . . a rather unique approach to scientific inquiry and national security. As Ludmilla Alexeyev, chairperson of the Moscow Helsinki Group, put it so succinctly, ``The FSB tends to make up spies.'' Dr. Sutyagin spent the last four and a half years in jail under investigation. In March 2001, the case went to court, but the judge found insufficient grounds for conviction. However, as occurs frequently in these ``spy'' cases, the prosecution got another bite of the apple. The FSB was allowed to begin the investigation anew, and, with a reputedly more compliant judge presiding, the second trial opened on March 15 of this year. The Washington Post of November 12, 2001 compared this case to a bad parody of Kafka: ``The FSB wants Russians to know that it has the ability to jail anyone who somehow displeases the authorities, regardless of evidence or the law.'' Mr. Speaker, it would be presumptuous of me, from the halls of Congress, to make a blanket judgment as to Dr. Sutyagin's innocence or guilt. However, I would point out that even the director of his institute, who was not sympathetic to Sutyagin's work with foreigners, confirmed that he did not have access to classified information. Sutyagin was paid for newspaper clippings, he told the press. Moreover, it is instructive that even Sutyagin's detractors in the security services, as quoted in the media after the trial, did not claim that he possessed or passed to foreign sources classified material. His only crime, in the words of the former U.S. Defense Attache in Russia, was that ``he had a passion for navies and he liked to talk to foreigners.'' Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the Helsinki Commission, I have watched Russia move from an authoritarian police state under communist rule to a sovereign nation with democratically elected leadership and many of the civil liberties that we in our country take for granted. I have encouraged these positive trends and have been encouraged by them. But the Sutyagin case is a sobering reminder that the free flow of information, a principle encoded in many international agreements, remains vulnerable to the whims of the security apparatus in today's Russia. I hope the Russian Supreme Court will review this case with the utmost care.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, on April 6 of this year, one of the true giants of the Soviet and Russian human rights movements, Larisa Bogoraz, passed away. Born in eastern Ukraine, Larisa Iosifnova Bogoraz was by profession a linguist. In 1950, she married the writer Yuli Daniel who, together with Andrei Sinyavsky, was subsequently arrested by Soviet authorities in 1965 for publishing their stories abroad. This trial, marking the first prosecution of Soviet writers for their literary activities since the time of Stalin, gained international attention and laid the groundwork for the Soviet human rights movement. Daniel and Sinyavsky were convicted by a kangaroo court and sentenced to long terms in a Soviet labor camp in the Mordovia region. Traveling to visit her incarcerated husband, Larisa Bogoraz met relatives of other political prisoners. Soon she was deeply involved in drafting and distributing petitions calling upon the Soviet Government to observe the basic civil liberties enumerated in the 1936 Soviet constitution. In early 1968, Larisa Bogoraz joined Pavel Litvinov to produce a petition addressed to the international community and protesting the trial of dissident Alexandr Ginzburg, who had compiled the well-known ``White Book'' on the trial of Daniel and Sinyavsky. In August of that year, when, as Ludmilla Alexeyeva wrote so eloquently, ``the Politburo decided to `strengthen peace' by invading a sovereign country,'' Larisa and six other brave souls met on Red Square and unfurled banners in defense of Czechoslovakia and condemnation of the crushing of ``Prague Spring.'' For their noble efforts, they were arrested by the KGB, tried, and convicted of ``slander'' against the Soviet Union. Bogoraz was sentenced to 4 years of internal exile in the Irkutsk region of eastern Siberia, where she worked in a wood-processing factory. In a show of solidarity and respect for her, Larisa's dissident friends combined their resources and bought her a house to live in while she served her exile term. When she completed her sentence, she sold the house and gave the proceeds to a fund for political prisoners. By 1976, she was back in Moscow actively involved in the compilation of the ``samizdat'' publication ``Memory'' dedicated to chronicling the repressions of the Stalin era. Meanwhile, personal tragedy struck. Lansa's second husband, Moscow Helsinki Group member and political prisoner Anatoly Marchenko, died of a hunger strike in Chistopol Prison in December 1986. The Helsinki Commission, which I am proud to chair, had raised the Marchenko case on several occasions, and the late Warren Christopher, our head of delegation at the CSCE meeting in Vienna, led a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Marchenko. The Soviet and East German delegations walked out in protest, but a few weeks later Dr. Andrei Sakharov was released from his Gorky exile, and in February 1987 General Secretary Gorbachev initiated the wholesale release of Soviet political prisoners. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Larisa Bogoraz continued her involvement in human rights activity, working with her colleagues from days past as well as a new generation of activists from Russia and the newly independent countries of the former Soviet Union. Mr. Speaker, in its eulogy to this dissident heroine, the Ryazan Memorial Society writes, ``. . . texts that were signed `L. Bogoraz still remain,' and our children will learn from them.'' So might we all.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to introduce H.R. 4175, the Veterans' Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 2004. Veterans' Affairs Committee Ranking Member Lane Evans, as well as the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Benefits Subcommittee, Henry Brown and Michael Michaud, respectively, join me as original cosponsors of the bill. H.R. 4175 would provide a cost-of-living adjustment to veterans' benefits, effective December 1, 2004. The VA Committee periodically reviews the service-connected disability compensation and dependency and indemnity compensation (DIC) programs to ensure that the benefits provide reasonable and adequate compensation for disabled veterans and their families. Based on this review, Congress acts annually to provide a cost-of-living adjustment in compensation and DIC benefits. Mr. Speaker, Congress has provided increases in these rates for every fiscal year since 1976. The Administration's fiscal year 2005 budget submission includes funding for a projected 1.3 percent increase. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I join my colleagues in strong support of House Resolution 558, welcoming the accession of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. During my tenure in Congress, I have had considerable interaction with the leaders of these countries, as well as the opportunity to witness the transitions which have occurred. For several of our new NATO allies I first encountered as one-party communist states, as Warsaw Pact adversaries and as ``captive nations.'' As Chairman of the Helsinki Commission, I have closely monitored their human rights performance and encouraged their democratic development. The transition for some has been particularly difficult, particularly with the effects of regional conflicts, political or economic crises. Throughout, their peoples have been our friends. Now, they become our allies. While we must congratulate these countries, first and foremost, on the progress which brought them to this historic point, we can also take some credit for the investments we decided to make, through the human resources and bilateral assistance which planted the democratic ideals that now have triumphed. In my view, the returns on those investments have been notable. In addition to these seven new NATO members, the resolution before the House also encourages the three members of the Adriatic Charter to continue their efforts toward eventual NATO membership. I particularly want to comment on Croatia. That country has had a particular challenge since 1990. As Yugoslavia fell apart and Croatia asserted its independence, the country faced not only the challenges of democratic transition but of surviving the Yugoslav conflict. From 1991 to 1995, significant portions of the country were destroyed or occupied. The conflict in neighboring Bosnia led to massive inflows of refugees. Croatia itself was vulnerable to those leaders with highly nationalist and less than democratic instincts. While all of this slowed their transition, Croatia has rapidly moved--especially since 2000--to meet their democratic potential. In the last elections, a smooth transition in government took place, and we have a bilateral relationship which continues to strengthen over time. In addition, Croatia has become a key contributor to stability in a part of Europe where stability is highly fragile. It is my hope, Madam Speaker, that we recognize this progress as Croatia seeks membership in NATO. Once Croatia meets the criteria for membership, the invitation to join should be extended. I would hope that the upcoming Istanbul summit will make this clear and mandate an assessment of Croatia's progress in this regard. It would be wrong and counter to U.S. interests to leave Croatia or any other country otherwise qualifying for NATO membership waiting unnecessarily. I believe that taking this action would also encourage its Adriatic Charter partners, Albania and Macedonia, in meeting the criteria for membership more quickly. Rather than abandon its partners, Croatia will help them make progress as well. Albania and Macedonia are also good friends of the United States and would benefit from this encouragement. Ultimately, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia and Montenegro would benefit as well, all in the interest of European security and, therefore, U.S. security interests.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, the 183rd anniversary of Greece's revolt against the Ottoman Empire is an opportune time to congratulate the people of Greece for their ability to prevail against great odds in creating their modern, progressive state. Having just returned from Athens with my colleagues Ben Cardin, and following the recent elections that resulted in a change in government, I think we should take this opportunity also to review the numerous challenges Greece faces if she is to meet her obligations as a participating State of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Since 1821, the people of Greece have overthrown the Ottoman Empire, survived a war with Turkey which created 1.3 million refugees, turned back an invasion by Italy and suffered through occupation by Nazi Germany. Since World War II they have lived through a full-fledged civil war against communism in which 100,000 Greeks were killed and 700,000 were internally displaced. And, from 1967 through 1974, they were under the control of a right-wing military junta. It is important to remember this tumultuous history of Greece when we acknowledge their success, and when we discuss outstanding issues. Security for this summer's Athens Olympic Games is a matter of concern among Members of Congress due to our ongoing War against terrorism. The United States has helped Greece by providing funding and manpower to develop as fine a security system as possible, and I hope the American people will take advantage of the joint efforts between our government and the Government of Greece and enjoy the Games. As Chairman of the U.S. Helsinki Commission, I am concerned also about the efforts Greece must make to fulfill her OSCE human rights obligations, particularly those involving trafficking in persons, freedom of religion and rights of the Greek Roma minority. Through the assistance of Ambassador Thomas Miller, Rep. Cardin and I met with officials of the Government of Greece and representatives of various NGOs to discuss Greece's progress in addressing and solving problems involving human trafficking. As the author of the US Trafficking Victims Protection Act, I am concerned that Greece has just barely moved from Tier Three to Tier Two. The police-based Committee on Trafficking, created in November 2001, clarified how their victims of trafficking screening process works and reported that in 2003, 49 criminal organizations had been broken up with 284 arrests, and 93 victims had been liberated with 28 characterized as victims. Others did not get victim status because they either opted to go home or were in Greece legally with passports. They described their two major anti- trafficking units, in Athens and Thessaloniki, and the training in anti-trafficking that is being taught at all levels of the police academies. The Committee has produced, in thirteen languages, ``Know Your Rights,'' a pamphlet explaining to the trafficked steps toward safety. Victims are sent to NGO-supported shelters. After touring a shelter in Athens we were struck by the positive attitudes of the women, and came away with renewed hope for them. While these are all positive steps, the visit made clear that Greece needs to put more effort and funding into curbing human trafficking, especially in supporting the NGOs who are providing critical services in the field. I urge the new government of Prime Minister Karamanlis to focus on this issue. We sought clarification of the problems non-Orthodox religious believers face in Greece and met with Muslim, Jewish, Protestant and Catholic religious leaders. The Thrace Muslim Association pointed out that although there are more than 11,000 Muslims in Athens, there is no mosque, and yet 22 unofficial houses of prayer with no imam. As there is no Muslim cemetery, Muslim dead must be transported over 800 kilometers to Thrace for proper burial. Ironically, there is a new mosque being constructed in Athens--it is nowhere near where the Muslims live, and it will be funded by Wahabi Saudis, a sect not particularly welcome by the local Moslem community nor by the Greek Government. We heard their complaints about limited military promotions, no work in the judiciary, limited job availability, and a poorly applied immigration law. Non-Orthodox Christian leaders spoke about discrimination as opposed to persecution, emphasizing the need to change society for their acceptance. Greek Jews--the Jewish community that, at 80 percent, lost a larger portion than any other country under the Nazis--number around 10,000, concentrated in Athens and Thessaloniki. With 3 functioning synagogues, Rabbis must be brought in from other countries for the High Holidays. We were told ``anti-Semitism is not widely and visibly expressed, but is expressed in many ways.'' The press is anti-Semitic under the guise of anti-Zionist or anti-Israeli statements, and is pro-Palestinian Liberation Army. School texts continue to have anti-Semitic materials and lack acknowledgement of the Holocaust, but have improved since the past. Vandalism of Jewish sites occurs, with little to no police follow-up. Finally, we visited the relocated Roma camp in Spata, near the Athens airport, which is on an abandoned toxic NATO dump. They lack reliable running water or sewers, which is justified by the authorities since this is an illegal settlement on airport land, yet the 24 families, all with legal papers, live in portable homes supplied by the municipality and the children go to public school. They are never visited by local authorities, including doctors, despite promises. Their village is only accessible by terrible mud roads, which become a barrier in wet weather. It became clear that the two most important things needed for this community are permanent homes and a job for everyone that is seeking the opportunity. These are snapshots of Greece, the invisible Greece that tourists and the outside world, even many Greeks, never see. Trafficked women who are forced to serve as sex slaves. Jews, Muslims and non-Orthodox Christians treated as second-class citizens. And Greek Roma whose basic needs are disregarded. Yes, we should commemorate the 183rd anniversary of the fight for freedom, but still must wait for all Greeks to equally share that freedom. The new government under Prime Minister Karamanlis has a great opportunity to step forth and work toward solutions in these matters. In my capacity as OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Special Representative on Human Trafficking Issues, and as Chairman of the U.S. Helsinki Commission, I look forward to working with the Prime Minister and with Greek parliamentarians to help find answers to these problems.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing H.R. 4020, the State Veterans Home Nurse Recruitment Act of 2004, a bill to assist state veterans' homes in hiring and retaining nurses. Mr. Evans, the gentleman from Illinois and Ranking Member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, joins me as an original cosponsor of this important legislation. H.R. 4020 would allow states which already receive per diem payments and have an established employee incentive programs to apply to receive up to 50 percent of the annual cost of such incentive programs, but no more than 2 percent of the annual amount of per diem payments per fiscal year. These funds would be paid from VA's health care budget, just as the per diem payments are now being paid. State veterans' homes first began serving veterans in the wake of the Civil War. In 1888, Congress authorized the first Federal aid to states which maintained homes for disabled American soldiers and sailors in need of long term care. At the time, the payments amounted to about 30 cents per resident per day. In the years since, Congress has made several major revisions to the program to expand the base of payments to include specialized hospital, nursing home, domiciliary, and adult day health care. Now the largest provider of long-term care to our nation's veterans, the state veterans' home system plays a vital role in caring for the growing number of aging veterans. The veteran population most in need of nursing home care, those veterans 85 years or older, grew from about 387,000 in FY 1998 to 870,000 in FY 2003, more than a 100 percent increase over the past five years. This veteran population is expected to continue to rise to about 1.3 million by mid-decade. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in 2002 surveyed the 50 states and Puerto Rico to learn how states are responding to needs for health care workers. Ninety percent reported a shortage of nursing staff as a major concern in their responses. In efforts to respond to these nursing and other health work force shortages, 44 of 50 states reported establishing task forces and commissions to study and seek solutions. The focus of the task forces or commissions in 25 states was to study shortages in the long-term care work force. While the HHS study documented the extent of the problems nationally, I am aware of difficulties that the three New Jersey state veterans' homes in Vineland, Paramus and Menlo Park, have faced over the past several years in recruiting and retaining quality nursing staff. The nursing shortage in my state of New Jersey was reported by HHS to be among the three highest in the nation. Mr. Speaker, we have an obligation to ensure that our veterans receive the benefits that they have earned through their service, including long-term care of high quality. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor H.R. 4020.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing a resolution which expresses the sense of the House regarding the recent violence in Kosovo. Supporting the resolution as original co-sponsors are my colleagues on the Helsinki Commission: Mr. Cardin, Mr. Pitts and Mr. Hastings. Last week, close to 30 people were killed, hundreds were wounded and over 3,000 persons were displaced by renewed ethnic violence in Kosovo. In addition, considerable property was damaged or destroyed, in particular Orthodox Churches. In retaliation, protesters in Serbia damaged or destroyed several mosques. This violence was noteworthy mostly in its scale. As a practical matter, the situation for minority communities in Kosovo, including Serbs and Roma, has not been good since the United Nations, backed by a NATO-led peace operation, took control in 1999. A few weeks ago, I met with Serbian Orthodox Bishop Artemije, who presented documentation of attacks on churches and monasteries in Kosovo. As Chairman of the Helsinki Commission, I recall the horrors which Slobodan Milosevic and his regime inflicted on the Albanian population of Kosovo. Attacks on places of worship and the lack of measures to stop these obviously vulnerable sites from being attacked again and again are inexcusable, as are the attacks on innocent people, be they Serbs, Albanians, Roma or anybody else. This resolution says that the violence must stop. It supports Kosovo achieving benchmarks which, if met, would effectively mean the protection of human rights and democratic development as well. It support the international community taking greater action, including providing more security, in order to achieve this progress. I believe this resolution should be able to garner wide support. This House should be on record as condemning the violence and saying that the human rights situation for the people who live there, regardless of their ethnicity, must improve. Resolution Whereas the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) successfully intervened in 1999 to stop the continued, brutal repression of the Albanian population of Kosovo by the regime of Slobodan Milosevic; Whereas NATO has subsequently led a multinational peace operation in Kosovo, known as KFOR, while the United Nations has deployed an international civilian police force to enhance peace and security; Whereas the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has deployed a mission to help develop democratic institutions, including a professional and multiethnic Kosovo Police Service, and encourage respect for human rights; Whereas the United States and the international community as a whole have called for all parties to respect the terms of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 (June 10, 1999) as the basis for progress in Kosovo; Whereas the United Nations has developed benchmarks in Kosovo, progress in the achievement of which would include increased respect for human rights and adherence to the rule of law; Whereas ethnic communities comprising the population of Kosovo, including an Albanian majority and Serb, Romani, and several other minority communities, have yet to reconcile their differences despite efforts by the international community and several nongovernmental organizations; Whereas the OSCE has issued several reports critical of the respect shown in Kosovo for the rights of persons belonging to minorities; Whereas ethnic tensions remain high in Kosovo due to the lack of freedom of movement, the inability of displaced persons to return to their homes, and sporadic and recurring attacks on individuals, their property, and particularly their places of worship; Whereas separate and tragic incidents in Kosovo led to a massive outbreak of violence on March 17, 2004, which has left dozens dead, hundreds wounded, and thousands more displaced; Whereas Orthodox churches and monasteries in Kosovo have often been targeted for attack, and in recent days several additional churches and monasteries have been severely damaged or destroyed; Whereas mosques in Serbia have also been attacked, damaged, or destroyed, in apparent retaliation for the violence taking place against minority populations in Kosovo; Whereas this violence in Kosovo threatens the dialogue which has just been established on issues of common concern, such as resolving the cases of missing persons from the earlier conflict; and Whereas it should be beneath the dignity of any individual who was persecuted or otherwise suffered under the repressive regime of Slobodan Milosevic to violate the human rights of others, to support the persecution or repression of those belonging to other ethnic groups, or to encourage or participate in their ethnic cleansing: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that-- (1) the outbreak of violence in Kosovo deserves the strongest condemnation by the United States and the international community, and all sides should refrain from encouraging or engaging in any further violence; (2) the attacks on places of worship in Kosovo and in various Serbian cities should be viewed as especially reprehensible; (3) those who can be identified as responsible for acts of violence should be brought to justice; (4) the elected leaders of Kosovo have a primary responsibility to take action to stop any continuing violence, to prevent future violence, and to encourage ethnic reconciliation and respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities in Kosovo; (5) the presence of additional military forces in the NATO- led multinational peace operation in Kosovo, known as KPOR, as decided by NATO with the support of the United States on March 18, 2004, is warranted and welcomed; (6) the international community should take necessary measures to protect people and property facing the threat of violence in Kosovo; (7) dialogue on issues of common concern in Kosovo, including the resolution of missing persons cases, should continue; (8) the benchmarks established by the United Nations parallel the democratic standards established and encouraged by participating states of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE); (9) the United States and the international community as a whole should maintain an active and effective presence in Kosovo not only until violence subsides but until there is significant progress in meeting the benchmarks established by the United Nations, including the return of displaced persons and greater freedom of movement for all persons throughout Kosovo; and (10) authorities in Serbia should maintain efforts to protect people and property vulnerable to retaliatory violence.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) for authoring this very important resolution. Mr. Speaker, much of the dark and unseemly world of Saddam Hussein is only now coming to light, and it is significantly worse than many of us had thought. The fact that as many as 400,000 victims were systematically brutalized and raped and tortured to death ranks the Hussein dictatorship as one of the worst in modern history. Had the United States and coalition forces not gone in to liberate Iraq, there is no doubt whatsoever that the killing fields would have continued unabated and that tens of thousands Iraquis or more would have met a terrible fate. Mr. Speaker, on the issue of chemical weapons, we know that chemical weapons used by the Iraqis are not mere conjecture. Hussein used weapons of mass destruction and used them with impunity both in the Iran-Iraq war and he used them against the Kurds. We know for a fact, according to Human Rights Watch and many other organizations and the U.S. Department of State, that upwards of 5,000 Kurdish people died a horrific death from those chemical attacks. There have also been, as my colleagues know, a staggering number of disappearances, believed to range between 250,000 to 290,000. Mr. Speaker, the Armed Forces of the United States and our coalition partners have conducted themselves in Iraq with incredible valor, professionalism, and commitment. Our forces and those of our allies are peacemakers. We often talk about peacekeepers, soldiers who go in when the situation, while volatile, presents the opportunity to ensure that the combatants can be separated. Our men and women went into Iraq and they ``made'' the peace. They are peacemakers in a place in the world where peace was an oxymoron. The recently adopted interim Iraqui constitution, Mr. Speaker, will more likely get further worked once the new assembly is up and running next year, is historic; a constitution which articulates basic fundamental human rights and the rule of law in the Middle East. After Israel, which has an excellent constitution, we now have Iraq. And I think there is a great opportunity for democracy to break out and the rule to be respected and that also mitigates the danger of Iraq which now is a peacemaker itself to its friends and allies in the region. Finally, just let me say, a previous speaker talked about shame when it comes to our veterans and our men and women who are returning home. I chair the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs. We have seen, since the Bush Presidency began, and it continues the trend line of the late 1990s, more than a 30 percent increase in health care funding and we will increase it again this year, and we will do so significantly. President Bush has signed no less than 16 separate bills to enhance, to expand veterans benefits. The Veterans Benefits Act of 2003 was signed on December 16. There were seven titles to it, filled with very important provisions to enhance veterans benefits. The Veterans Education and Benefits Act contains a 46 percent increase in the GI Bill, 46 percent increase in college funding. I know, because I authored it. I was the prime sponsor of the bill. With no fanfare whatsoever, this President signed that legislation and 15 other bills into law. Mr. Speaker, I would hope that these trying to use veterans issues as a political football would cease on this floor today. We are trying, in a bipartisan way, to meet the obligations and the needs of our veterans. I stand committed to that. This party, and I would say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, to do so as well, we should all be pro-veteran, and we are matching our words and our rhetoric with funding and with responsive and responsible laws.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today, along with Mr. Evans, and Mr. Skelton, I am introducing H.R. 3936, a bill to authorize the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, now located in commercial office space in the District of Columbia, to seek a new location in the greater national capital region. This measure would also express the sense of Congress that a dedicated Veterans Courthouse and Justice Center should be provided for the court and the veterans it serves. It would be located, if possible, on one of three small parking lots next to I-395 on the Pentagon Reservation. The court, created by statute in 1988, is an independent Article I judicial tribunal that for the first time gave our Nation's veterans the right to judicial review of the Department of Veterans (VA) benefits decisions on their disability, pension, education and other claims. It should, like all other article I courts, have a permanent courthouse. In addition to the court, occupants of the new Courthouse would be members of those constituencies that regularly practice before the court, for example, the Veterans Consortium Pro Bono Program, the National Veterans Legal Services Program, and the appellate attorneys of veterans service organizations. The court and the offices of its constituents pay over $3.7 million per year for their rent. The General Services Administration anticipates that the court's rental costs will increase substantially in the not-too-distant future, so it would be desirable to relocate the court on a government-owned site, if possible. H.R. 3936 would also require the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Administrator of General Services to submit a joint report to the House and Senate Committees on Armed Services and Veterans' Affairs on the feasibility of locating a new Veterans Courthouse and Justice Center at an appropriate site owned by the United States that is part of or near the Pentagon Reservation. Mr. Speaker, given the past, present, and future sacrifices of the many men and women of our Armed Forces, I cannot imagine a better use for one of the present parking lots near the Pentagon, than a stand- alone, dedicated Veterans Courthouse and Justice Center to embody the gratitude and respect this Nation has for the service of every veteran. I invite my colleagues to cosponsor this legislation as a first step toward a Veterans Courthouse and Justice Center for the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 530) urging the appropriate representative of the United States to the 60th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to introduce a resolution calling upon the Government of the People's Republic of China to end its human rights violations in China, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time. I want to thank, first of all, the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) of the Select Committee on Homeland Security for his very eloquent statement and to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) and to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum) and especially to the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde), who is a very strong and steadfast supporter of human rights around the globe, including China, and of course the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), who also speaks out boldly on these issues. I would just say finally, Mr. Speaker, that one of the great leaders of the whole human rights movement in China is a man by the name of Harry Wu. Most people know about him. He is a man who has an impeccable reputation for honesty, for courage. He spent 19 years in the Chinese laogai system and suffered immensely for it. I will never forget when he helped us organize one of our first committee hearings when I chaired the Committee on International Operations and Human Rights on the laogai. He brought in six survivors of the laogai. One of those survivors was Palden Gyatso, a Buddhist monk who tried to get through security into the Rayburn Building bringing the instruments of torture that are routinely used and deployed to abuse prisoners in the laogai, including cattle prods and the like, horrible, horrific implements, and he was stopped, obviously, by the guards who were wondering what is this all about. We had to go down and usher him through. Those kinds of instruments, Mr. Speaker, are commonplace. Torture is commonplace. The gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) talked about all these promises that are made time after time. They sign covenants. They say they are going to do this. The Chinese government routinely does not follow through, and so it will be with the most recent property rights. They make promises, and routinely it is predictable they do not follow through. And I just want to pay a special tribute to Harry Wu for his great leadership. The ICRC has been trying for years, the Red Cross, to get into the Chinese prisons. They cannot get in because it is closed, because torture is routinely used against political and religious prisoners and against other prisoners as well. If they are arrested for just about anything, the way they get their conviction is to compel a confession out of them by torturing them. Let me also remind Members, too, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) made mention of this as well, forced abortion is commonplace in China. Brothers and sisters are illegal. Women are compelled to have their children destroyed because they do not fit into a grandiose plan by this dictatorship. That too is an egregious human rights abuse. At the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal it was construed to be a crime against humanity. It is a crime against humanity in 2004 as it is practiced in the People's Republic of China. This resolution puts us on record against it and says let us take our case to the UN Human Rights Commission and hopefully we can garner sufficient votes to censure this despicable behavior. I hope we have unanimous support for this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank, first of all, the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) of the Select Committee on Homeland Security for his very eloquent statement and to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) and to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum) and especially to the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde), who is a very strong and steadfast supporter of human rights around the globe, including China, and of course the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), who also speaks out boldly on these issues. Mr. Speaker, one of the great leaders in the whole human rights movement in China is a man by the name of Harry Wu. Most people know about him. He is a man who has an impeccable reputation for honesty, persistence, and courage. He is a hero of democracy. He spent 19 years in the Chinese laogai system and suffered immensely for it. His witness is a rebuke to the hardliners in Beijing. I will never forget when he helped us organize one of our first committee hearings on PRC abuse back when I chaired the Committee on International Operations and Human Rights. The hearing was on the laogai. He brought in six survivors of the laogai. One of those survivors was Palden Gyatso, a Buddhist monk who tried to get through security into the Rayburn Building bringing the instruments of torture that are routinely used and deployed to abuse prisoners in the laogai, including cattle prods and the like, horrible, horrific implements. He was stopped, obviously, by the guards who were wondering what is this all about. We had to go down and usher him through. Sadly those kinds of torture instruments, Mr. Speaker, are commonplace in the PRC. Torture is commonplace.--An everyday occurrence. The gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) talked about PRC promises made but never kept. They sign covenants. They say they are going to do this. It makes good headlines. The Chinese government, however, routinely does not follow through, and so it will be with the most recent property rights announcement. They make promises, and it is predictable they do not follow through. The Internation Committee for Red Cross has been trying for years, to get into the Chinese prisons. To inspect and to hold the PRC to account. They cannot get in because it is closed, because torture is routinely used against political and religious prisoners and against other prisoners as well. If you are arrested for just about anything, watch out. The way PRC thugs get their conviction is to compel confessions out of the accused by torturing them. Let me also remind Members, too, and the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) made mention of this as well, forced abortion is commonplace in China. Brothers and sisters are illegal because big brother in Beijing says so. Women are compelled to have their children destroyed because they do not fit into a grandiose plan of quotas and permission slips by the dictatorship. That too is an egregious human rights abuse. At the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal forced abortion was construed to be a crime against humanity. It is a crime against humanity in 2004 as it is practiced in the People's Republic of China. This resolution puts us on record against China's brutal one child per couple policy. This resolution admonishes the administration to take our case to the UN Human Rights Commission and work to garner sufficient votes to censure this despicable government behavior. I hope we have unanimous support for this resolution.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), chairman of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and Central Asia.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Despite the hopes and expectations of some that robust trade with China would usher in at least a modicum of respect for basic human rights and fundamental liberties, the simple fact of the matter is that the dictatorship in China oppresses, tortures and mistreats tens of millions of its own citizens. According to the U.S. Department of State, the government's human rights record remains poor, and the government continued to commit numerous and serious abuses, and the repression is getting worse. The State Department Human Rights Report went on to say there was backsliding, their word, backsliding on key human rights issues, including arrests. Abuses include killing, torture, mistreatment of prisoners, and forced confessions. Amazingly, many years, 15 years after Tiananmen Square when we saw people protesting the government asking for simple liberties and simple rights, carrying around a facsimile of the Statue of Liberty, 15 years after that there are still some 2,000 people remaining incarcerated in prison camps and detention centers. That is unconscionable this many years afterwards. I remind my colleagues that people who argue that if we just traded with the Chinese, that things would get better. Back in 1989, the trade deficit was about $6 billion. Now it is $124 billion and counting. It goes up by the day. We trade; they torture, abuse, incarcerate, arrest and mistreat. Some years ago soon after Tiananmen Square, it brought this to life to me and I was thinking about it this morning, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and I went to Beijing Prison No. 1, a prison where 40 Tiananmen Square prisoners were being held. They were like modern- day concentration camp victims. Their heads were shaved. Men who had been out there protesting, asking peacefully that the government allow just some basic liberties that we take for granted in the United States and in many other nations of the world, and yet for that the book was thrown at them and there they were making jelly shoes and socks for export to the United States. The torture does not stop with those who demand political freedoms. On the religious front there is ongoing aggressive repression of those who want to practice their faith as they see fit. We see Falun Gong practitioners who are routinely rounded up and beaten and abused, and hundreds have been tortured to death while held in captivity. I remember meeting in 1994 with a Catholic bishop by the name of Bishop Su. He now, counting all of the years to date he was in Chinese prisons, has spent 27 years of his life being mistreated in Chinese prison and detention centers. Here is a man whose only violation of the law was to practice his faith with faithfulness. He is a very holy man. In 1994 when he was out of prison briefly, I met with him, and there was not one ounce of malice or hate in him for the dictatorship that was so abusing him. He spoke of forgiveness and reconciliation and how he hoped some day China would be free; and for that, he has been severely punished. After I left, he was made a captive again and spent 9 days. Then he went into hiding, and in 1997 was recaptured again and put back into prison. In mid-November, we discovered that this great man was still alive and was getting some medical care under heavy guard. Here he is 27 years, a Roman Catholic bishop, and he is just a tip of the iceberg. Protestant underground believers, Catholics who are underground Falun Gong, Tibetan Buddhists, and Uighur Muslims who have been rounded up under the pretext of post-9/11 saying somehow they are committing acts of terrorism, they are good, honest people, and the government of China enslaves them and mistreats them. As my colleagues know, China has been designated a CPC country, a country of particular concern, by the U.S. State Department because of its ongoing violations of religious liberties and rights. And as my colleagues know, since 1979 there has been the one-child per family policy. The policy says if the second child happens to come along, he or she has to be aborted. Heavy fines are imposed upon the women, particularly. They call it social compensation fees. Sometimes it is six times the annual salaries of the parents compelling them to abort that baby. Forced abortion and forced sterilization are commonplace in China. This resolution calls upon the government to cease that horrific attack on the human family and upon women. It is a violation of their basic human rights. It is violence against women, and the child as well. What this resolution does in a nutshell, it calls on the administration, it calls on all interested parties at the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, which will convene in mid-March, to take up a resolution to just bring out the facts and bring out the basic lack of human rights in China today and not bury it under the table, which unfortunately all of us have done to some extent; and certainly, the U.N. has done it for years. I would hope that the administration, and I believe they will, will try to get such a resolution passed. We have tried six times. We have not succeeded. One reason is that the Chinese government is very adroit at intimidating other countries or giving them foreign aid so they will back what we call a no-action motion that is offered in Geneva. Even with that as a possibility, and most likely a probability, I think we have a moral duty and obligation to raise it and raise it as aggressively as we can for the victims and those who will be victimized in the future. Madam Speaker, despite the hopes and expectations of some that robust trade with China would usher in at least a modicum of respect for basic human rights and fundamental liberties, the simple fact of the matter is that the dictatorship in China oppresses, tortures and mistreats tens of millions of its own citizens. According to the U.S. Department of State, the government's human rights record remains ``poor,'' and the government continued ``to commit numerous and serious abuses,'' and the repression is getting worse. The State Department Human Rights Report went on to say there was ``backsliding, on key human rights issues, including arrests. Abuses include killing, torture, mistreatment of prisoners, and forced confessions.'' Amazingly, 15 years after Tiananmen Square when we witnessed courageous Chinese protesting government abuse, asking for simple liberties and elemental rights, even carrying around Tiananmen a facsimile of the Statue of Liberty, 15 years after that historic outpouring there are still some 2,000 people incarcerated in prison camps and detention centers. That is unconscionable. I remind my colleagues that the people who argued that if we just traded more with the Chinese, that things would get better on the human rights front. Back in 1989, the trade deficit was about $6 billion. Now it is $124 billion and counting. It worsens by the day. We trade, they torture; we trade, they abuse; we trade, they incarcerate; we trade, they arrest and mistreat. Right after Tiananmen Square, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and I went to Beijing and visited Prison No. 1, a prison where 40 Tiananmen Square prisoners were being held. They were like modern-day Nazi concentration camp victims. Their heads were shaved. These men had been out there in Tiananmen protesting, asking peacefully that the government allow some basic liberties that we take for granted in the United States and in many other nations of the world, and yet for that they where hunted down, tortured and jailed. In the prison they were making shoes and socks for export to the United States. By now most Members know that the torture does not stop with those who demand political freedoms. On the religious front there is ongoing aggressive repression of those who want to practice their faith as they see fit. We see Falun Gong practitioners who are routinely rounded up and beaten and abused, and hundreds have been tortured to death while held in captivity. I remember meeting in 1994 with a Catholic bishop by the name of Bishop Su. Bishop Su is a saintly man of God who has spent 27 years of his life being mistreated, tortured and oppressed in Chinese prison and detention centers. Here is a man whose only violation of the law was to practice his faith with faithfulness. He is a very holy man. In 1994 when he was out of prison briefly, I met with him in Beijing and there was not one ounce of malice or hate in him for the dictatorship that was so harsh and cruel to him. It was stunning. He spoke of forgiveness and reconciliation and how he hoped some day China would permit religious freedom; and for that, he has been severely punished. After I left, he was arrested again and spent 9 days in jail. He was released and then he went into hiding, and in 1997 was recaptured again and put back into prison. In mid-November, we discovered that this great man was still alive, for we feared he might be dead, and was getting some medical care under heavy guard. Here he is 27 years in Chinese jails, a Roman Catholic bishop, a holy man, and he is just one example of many. Protestant underground believers, Catholics, Falun Gong, Tibetan Buddhists, and Uighur Muslims who have been repressed and even more so recently under the pretext of post-9/11 they are good, honest people, and the government of China enslaves them and mistreats them. As my colleagues know, China has been designated a CPC country, a country of particular concern, by the U.S. State Department because of its ongoing violations of religious liberties and rights. That's a serious designation shared by rogue states. And as my colleagues know, since 1979 there has been the one-child per family policy. The policy says that any child who happens to come along without explicit government permission is to be aborted. Heavy fines and pressure are imposed upon the women, particularly. They call it social compensation fees. The fee can be six times the annual salaries of the parents, compelling them to abort that baby. Forced abortion and forced sterilization are commonplace in China. This resolution calls upon the government to cease their horrific attack on the human family and upon women. It is a violation of their basic human rights. It is violence against women, and violence against the child as well. What this resolution does in sum is to call on the administration, and on all interested parties at the U.N. Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, which will convene in mid-March, to take up a resolution to bring out the facts and to scrutinize and condemn the lack of human rights in China today and not bury it under the table, which unfortunately all of us have done to some extent; and certainly, the U.N. has done it for years. I would hope that the administration, and I believe they will, will try to get such a resolution passed. We have tried six times. We have not succeeded. One reason is that the Chinese government is very adroit at intimidating other countries or giving them foreign aid so they will back what we call a no-action motion that will be offered in Geneva. Even with that as a possibility, and most likely a probability, I think we have a moral duty and obligation to raise Chinese human rights abuses and raise the issue as aggressively as we can for the victims who cannot speak or fend for themselves. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the man who authored the International Religious Freedom Act 5 years ago.

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

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I wish to inform my colleagues of the steps Montenegro has undertaken to combat trafficking in persons. This progress was reported to me by Montenegro's Deputy Prime Minister and Interior Minister, Dragan Djurovic, the republic's anti- trafficking coordinator, Aleksandr Mostrokol, and Mirjana Vlahovic from the Montenegro Women's Lobby. All three were in Washington last month for a conference hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Montenegro is a republic of the former Yugoslavia, and the only one to remain in a state with Serbia. After some political changes took place in the late 1990s, Montenegrin authorities stood in opposition to Slobodan Milosevic's undemocratic rule at home and aggression towards Serbia's neighbors. Montenegro, however, has been plagued by official corruption and organized crime. Trafficking in persons, the human slavery of our day, has become a highly developed criminal activity in Montenegro, as in other places in the region. Last year, Montenegro received considerable attention for a case in which a trafficking victim--a woman from Moldova who had been raped, tortured and severely beaten for more than 3 years while enslaved in prostitution--escaped her captors, went to the authorities and provided testimony against several persons, including Deputy State Prosecutor Zoran Piperovic. What was a welcomed effort to prosecute traffickers even if they hold official positions, however, turned problematic as the victim was subjected to various forms of intimidation and her family in Moldova was threatened due to her cooperation in the investigation. When charges were suddenly dropped against Piperovic and three others, I issued a statement expressing outrage over this development. This set a dangerous precedent for going after traffickers with clout and connections elsewhere. Many likewise criticized the Montenegrin authorities for the failure to bring the case to trial. To its credit, the Montenegrin Government responded to the widespread criticism. Mr. Djurovic invited a joint team of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Council of Europe to examine the case and make recommendations. Flaws were found. As a result, both the accused Deputy State Prosecutor and the prosecutor responsible for dropping the charges were sacked and new prosecutors put into office. In addition, the Montenegrin Government adopted an anti-trafficking strategy and passed several new laws designed to combat trafficking as well as to prevent future manipulations of the legal system. Additional laws, including one on witness protection, are still being developed. In my meeting, Mr. Speaker, I welcomed the progress which has taken place in Montenegro in recent months. I also encouraged my guests to ensure that the new laws are properly implemented, and that the police, in particular, be made part of the effort to combat trafficking rather than part of the problem. Finally, I urged them to seek the reopening of the high profile trafficking case. In my view, it is insufficient to learn lessons from a crime and a subsequently botched investigation or prosecution; the perpetrators still need to be brought to justice. The meeting left me hopeful that progress is being made in Montenegro. I also hope, Mr. Speaker, that my colleagues will join me in supporting U.S. programs designed to combat trafficking in persons in Montenegro, in southeastern Europe, and around the globe.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 530, as amended.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, this on my left is a picture of Tracy Marciniak holding her son at his funeral. She met with me. She met with other Members. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) just spoke of this, to tell us what happened to her and to her son Zachariah. Minimum time was given to the attacker, her husband, and there was no penalty whatsoever imposed for the killing of this little baby. Tracy has written to Congress, and I hope you all stand up and take notice, and said ``Congress should approve the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. Opponents of the bill have put forth a counterproposal, known as the Lofgren amendment. I have read it,'' she goes on to say, ``and it is offensive to me because it says that there is only one victim in such a crime, the woman who is pregnant. ``Please hear me,'' she goes on to say. ``On the night of February 8, 1992, there were two victims. I was nearly killed. Little Zachariah died. ``Any lawmaker who is thinking of voting for the Lofgren `one-victim' amendment should first look at this picture of me holding my dead son at his funeral. Then I would say to that Representative, `If you really think that nobody died that night, then vote for the `one-victim' amendment.' '' Mr. Speaker, the Lofgren amendment stripped of its surface appeal trappings and enhanced penalty does have one proabortion strategic objective, and that is denial. Denial that an unborn child has inherent dignity, denial that an unborn child has worth, denial that an unborn child has innate value. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) said a few moments ago in this debate we all oppose violence against women. I thank her for that admission. Back in the 106th Congress I was prime sponsor of legislation that included the Violence Against Women Act, the 5-year authorization. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), who was then chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, worked to craft language that throws the book at those who commit violence against women, while providing shelters, and so many others worked on that. It was division B of that bill. I was the prime sponsor. So no one on that side of that divide takes a back seat to anyone that says that somehow we are not against violence against women. The gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin) said a moment ago that the woman is a victim and not the only victim. There is another victim, the baby. And I just want to say again, talking about the gentlewoman from California's (Ms. Woolsey) comments, while we are all against violence against women, we are not all against violence against unborn children. And this bill offered by the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the others who are leading the effort on this are saying a mugger or killer does not have an unfettered right or access to an unborn child to kill him or her. The amniotic sac is a protective covering over an unborn child, but it is not made of Kevlar. Those sacs can be pierced so easily by a knife or by a bullet, and we are saying when a knife or a bullet or a fist pierces and kills a little baby like Zachariah, there ought to be a separate offense. Yes, throw the book at the mugger for any offense that he commits against a woman, we are all for that, but do not deny a penalty for a child who has been killed by that mugger. Vote against the Lofgren amendment and for the Hart bill.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding time. Mr. Speaker, why would Planned Parenthood and a virtual who's who of abortion activists in America so vehemently oppose the Unborn Victims of Violence Act and promote a gutting substitute in its stead? Why would they take a position so extreme that 80 percent of Americans oppose it? Why is it that on the floor of this House, so many intelligent, talented, and gifted lawmakers to whom so much has been given are going to such great lengths to deny basic protections in law for an unborn child who has been shot, beaten, stabbed, or otherwise mauled by an attacker, even taking the irrational step of opposing a definition that was overwhelmingly passed in this body 417 to zero? Could it be that America's abortion culture, a culture of death, has so numbed our hearts and dulled our minds that we have become unwilling, or perhaps incapable, of recognizing the obvious? Could it be denial with a capital D? Amazingly, as a result of breathtaking breakthroughs in medicine, today unborn children are often treated as patients in need of curative procedures in healing just like any other patient. Is the concept of an unborn child as a victim really so hard to grasp, even when we are not talking about abortion, but assault by a mugger? Have the soothing voices of denial by credentialed people, especially in medicine and the media, ripped off our capacity to think? Has the horrific spectre of almost 45 million poisoned or dismembered babies legally enabled by Roe v. Wade robbed us of our capacity to see and understand and empathize? Is it a lacking in logic or courage or common sense or compassion? Have unborn children become mere objects, a dehumanizing and deplorable status that feminists rightly rebel against? Should a mugger, like an abortionist, have unfettered access to maim or kill a baby without triggering a separate penalty for the crime? For years, Mr. Speaker, Congress has updated and strengthened laws and stiffened penalties for those who commit violence against women, and that is as it should be. In December of last year, President Bush signed my comprehensive antitrafficking legislation, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2003, and before that President Clinton signed landmark legislation that I authored the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act, 2000. I would remind my colleagues that included in my law as Division B was the Violence Against Women Act, a $3.2 billion 5-year authorization for a multitude of efforts to mitigate Violence Against Women, provide shelters, and a myriad of protection initiatives. So women who are victims of violence clearly need every legal protection, shelter and assistance a caring society has to muster, but I would respectfully submit to my colleagues so do children. A victim is a victim, it seems to me, no matter how small. Why is it so difficult to recognize an unborn child as a victim who is also capable of suffering severe trauma, disfigurement, disability, or even death? Unborn children feel pain when they are shot or beaten. They bleed and they bruise easily. Unborn children are as vulnerable as their mothers to an assailant wielding a knife, a gun, or a steel pipe. Mr. Speaker, the amniotic sac is like a protective bubble, but it is not made of Kevlar. It pierces easily. Support the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.