Pete Stark

Mr. STARK

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior], distinguished minority whip.

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Watt].

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie].

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Engel].

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from California [Ms. Sanchez].

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller]. (Mr. MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes, the remaining time, to the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Gephardt], the distinguished minority leader. (Mr. GEPHARDT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. STARK. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes. Mr. Speaker, I suggest for those of us who live in such grandeur and have the most productive Nation in the world, why not risk? Why not risk ending slave labor? Why not? Because the other side will say that we cannot offend Boeing who wants to sell jets to China, and Motorola their cell phones. Why do we not risk stopping the murder of female babies? No way. Wal-Mart needs those cheap T-shirts and sneakers. Or why not encourage religious freedom? Forget it. Agriculture needs to sell grain and cotton to China, those small family farmers like Archer and Daniels and Midland. Why did it work in South Africa? They tell us we were not alone in South Africa. We were all alone when we voted the Helms-Burton bill, were we not? And why is it that Cuba is treated real tough and China is not? Maybe it is because Cuba did not make big political contributions to Clinton-Gore and other campaigns. Maybe that is why. And maybe that, Mr. Speaker, is why we are seeing human decency sell out to big money. If Members believe that they can stand up for human decency, and if Members believe that this country is strong enough to compete with anyone based on its human values, then they will vote for this resolution and send a message to China that may get them to change.

Mr. STARK

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. DeFazio].

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Brown].

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Stupak]. (Mr. STUPAK asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to comment, I have been informed that the Dalai Lama did not endorse MFN and suggest that it was necessary. Quite the contrary, he supports our position. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Kucinich].

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pascrell]. (Mr. PASCRELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Kennedy].

Mr. STARK. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to point out, as I listen to this debate, that it becomes very clear what the issues are. The issues are, do you believe in human rights? And everybody does. But there are some who believe in making money more, and feeling that trade and money and campaign contributions from major corporations in this country are more important than human rights. So that while we all believe in human rights, are you willing to forgo the money to enforce them?

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Stark County, OH [Mr. Traficant], one of the experts on foreign trade in this House.

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. Berman]. (Mr. BERMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Cardin].

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I just want to see if there is not one other myth. There has been a myth that we have a different policy for Cuba than we do for China. But I do not think that is true, because I think the President continues to deny medicine and food to the children in Cuba at the same time that the President countenances children who are selected for starvation in China. So I see a very consistent policy in our administration toward both Cuba and China, and that is to ignore the plight of children in both of those countries. Mr. Speaker, would the gentlewoman agree?

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 9 minutes to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi], who has been a leader on the issue of trying to bring human rights and reasonable policy to China.

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield half of my time to the distinguished gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Bunning], and that he in turn be permitted to control that time.

Mr. STARK. I am, Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that I be yielded half of the time and that I be permitted to control that time.

Mr. STARK

Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, we have just received the June report from our congressional hospital payment advisory panel--the Prospective Payment Assessment Commission--and it carries a dire warning about the future of the Nation's safety net hospitals in the era of managed care. The report, ``Medicare and the American Health Care System, Report to the Congress, June, 1997,'' contains the following statement and table. It is a matter of life and death to millions of our fellow citizens that we address the problem of the uninsured in these good economic times. When an economic downturn comes, the pressure on these safety net hospitals will be unbearable--and then who will care for the uninsured and poor? Rising financial pressure has raised concern about the willingness or ability of many hospitals to continue providing uncompensated care in a more competitive marketplace. A previous ProPAC analysis suggested that high managed care enrollment is associated with increased financial pressure from private payers and with greater reductions in the amount of uncompensated care hospitals provide.\43\ Between 1992 and 1994, private payer payment to cost ratios declined 4.5 percent for hospitals located in urban areas with high managed care penetration; uncompensated care burdens for these hospitals also fell by 4.5 percent (see Table 3-14). The experience of hospitals located in areas with low managed care penetration was quite different: Their private payer payment to cost ratios rose 4.1 percent, while uncompensated care burdens fell only 0.1 percent.