Frank Wolf

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and others who have been strong supporters with regard to speaking out on behalf of those being persecuted in China. I heard the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) talk about the Tiananmen Square demonstrators. We saw them making socks. I still have the socks in my office. That was 15 years ago. Madam Speaker, I ask Members, what were they doing 15 years ago? For the last 15 years, what were you doing? For the last 15 years, these men and women have been in prison, and very few people really speak out. I rise in strong support of this resolution. Every Member of Congress should be outraged that the men and women in China are routinely being persecuted by the government. Every Member of Congress and everyone in the administration ought to imagine a country and think about a country where factory workers have no workplace safety, labor and environmental protections, and are required to work 80 hours a week for no more than $110 per month for goods exported. Imagine a country which boldly supplies missile and chemical weapons technology to countries that harbor terrorists. Imagine a country that oversees a network of espionage operations against American companies. The Chinese have a spying program against American industry second to none. The KGB could not hold a candle to what the Chinese Government is doing. Imagine a country which is plundering a neighbor and wiping out its religion-based culture. Imagine a country which tortures and imprisons Catholic bishops. There are 11 Catholic bishops according to the Cardinal Kung Foundation in prison today. Eleven. You almost never hear anybody speak out on behalf of them. You have a large number, 250, 300 Protestant house church leaders. I had a Protestant pastor come by to see me 2 weeks ago, a pastor that we had helped and worked with; he had been in prison 10 years. He said his last job in a slave labor camp was making Christmas tree lights. A Protestant pastor in a Chinese prison making Christmas tree lights to celebrate the birth of Jesus. What is wrong? Yet you never really hear anybody speak out with regard to that. Buddhist monks and nuns, persecuted severely. Keep in mind the leader of the Chinese Government now is the guy who brought down all of the persecution of those who were Buddhists with regard to the Drapchi prison and what took place in Tibet. As the gentleman from New Jersey said, the Muslims are being pounded left and right. If you need a new organ or kidney, you can go to China and for $50,000, they will go into the prison, take your blood type, take his blood type, find a match, kill him, take him away, transplant the kidney for $50,000. Slave labor camps. There are more slave labor camps in China today than there were when Solzhenitsyn wrote that Nobel Prize-winning book, ``Gulag Archipelago.'' There are more in China today than there were then. We all know what country this imaginary country is. It is China. The other day I was coming in and I heard Simon and Garfunkel on the radio sing the words of ``The Boxer.'' It really struck me: ``Man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.'' This administration and this Congress hears only what it wants to hear and disregards the rest. I had an opportunity several weeks ago to go to Berlin. We went to a train stop called Grunewald Station. It is where they took people who were Jewish and put them on trains and sent them away. I was there kind of late. As it was getting dark, I looked out, I looked at big, large homes that were all around this station. I said to myself, these people must have known what was taking place in 1941 and 1942 and 1943. They had little signs of how many were put on the trains in 1942 and 1943. Thousands and thousands. It got down to 1944 and 1945, in one train 17 or 18. But the people that lived in the neighborhood had to know what was taking place. We have a 71-page report that the State Department has put out. So it is kind of like saying, We did not know. But we know. We cannot now say, We do not know what's taking place in China. The one-child per family, the human organ transplants, the slave labor camps. We cannot say we do not know because you get the 71-page report and you read it, 71 pages about China. Later on when the Chinese Government falls, and it will fall, they will go the way of the Ceausescu government; and God bless Ronald Reagan when he spoke out and called the Soviet Union the Evil Empire and put the cruise missiles into Europe when nobody else wanted them. But they will fall and when they go back and open up the records, nobody will be able to say, we did not know, because now we know. We read the human rights report that came out of the State Department 3 days ago. Madam Speaker, I am going to put the rest in the Record and just say this administration ought to follow this resolution. If it does not follow the resolution and yet it followed that 71-page report, I do not see how it can live with itself. Let me just say, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, it is cheap grace for the Congress just to pass a resolution urging them to do a resolution. We ought to be doing a lot more and speaking out on behalf of those who are being persecuted. Many people will tell you when the Reagan administration and the Carter administration used to go to the Soviet Union, they always met with the dissidents. They went into their apartments. They had them into the embassy. Somewhere there are bracelets with their names on them. They stood in solidarity with the people in the Soviet Union that were being persecuted. I find that when delegations, both congressional and executive branch, go to China, they meet with the leaders. They have their shark fin soup, and they meet in the big halls; but they do not meet with the people. We have a lot to learn, we in Congress and in the administration, to emulate President Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan always spoke out on behalf of the persecuted. Sharansky will tell you that his life got better when Ronald Reagan and the Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, raised the Sharansky case. He sometimes just got more food. He got more visitations. We need the administration, one, to introduce a resolution. Secondly, this Congress ought to do more or else the words from Simon and Garfunkel, ``The Boxer,'' ``Man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest,'' will in essence be the theme song for us in the United States where we say Congress hears only what it wants to hear and disregards the rest. Madam Speaker, there are 71 pages. We cannot ever again say we did not know, because now we know. I urge the strong passage of this resolution. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 530 urging the United States to introduce a resolution highlighting China's human rights record at the 60th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights this month. Every Member of Congress should be outraged that men and women in China are routinely persecuted by the Chinese Government. Imagine a country where factory workers have no workplace safety, labor, or environmental protections and are required to work 80 hour- weeks for no more than $110 per month to produce goods for export. Imagine a country which boldly supplies missile and chemical weapons technology to countries that support or harbor terrorists. Imagine a country that oversees a network of espionage operations against American companies. Imagine a country which is plundering a neighbor and wiping out its religion-based culture. Imagine a country which tortures and imprisons Catholic bishops, Protestant church leaders, Muslim worshipers, Falun Gong followers, and Buddhist monks and nuns just because of their faith and systematically destroys churches and confiscates bibles. Imagine a country which has a thriving business of harvesting and selling for transplant kidneys, corneas, and other human organs from executed prisoners who are thrown in prison with no trial or sentencing procedures. Imagine a country which maintains an extensive system of gulags-- slave labor camps--as large as existed in the former Soviet Union that are used for brainwashing and ``reeducation through labor.'' That country is not imaginary. It is the People's Republic of China. I was appalled last year when the United States administration chose not to introduce a resolution condemning China at the U.N. Commission on Human Rights meeting in Geneva. We were told over and over again that China's human rights record was improving and that change was coming. The recently released State Department country reports on human rights unequivocally states that over the last year China didn't improve its human rights record. In fact, there was backsliding. I would like to share with you some facts from that 71-page report. The Chinese government has failed to demonstrate its willingness to abide by the internationally accepted norms of freedom of belief, expression, and association. Citizens lacked both the freedom peacefully to express opposition to the political system or the right to change the system. Violence against women (including imposition of a birth limitation policy coercive in nature that resulted in instances of forced abortion and forced sterilization) continued. Last year alone the government executed more prisoners than any other country. All over China Catholic Bishops and Priests are in jail, some for decades at a time, simply for practicing their faith. Over 250,000 persons are serving sentences in ``reeducation through labor'' camps. As many as 2,000 people remained in prison for their activities during the June 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations. The government used the international war on terror as a justification for cracking down harshly on suspected Uighur separatists. The government continues to deport thousands of North Koreans, who face persecution upon their return. And the list goes on. China cannot fool the international community any longer. The Chinese Government continues to commit well-documented human rights abuses against the Chinese people. America must be a country that stands up for basic decency and human rights. America must speak out on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves--men and women who are being persecuted on account of their religious or political beliefs. Our foreign policy must be a policy that helps promote human rights and freedom. Not a policy that sides with dictators who oppress their own citizens. The facts are before us. The United States can no longer say that things are improving in China. Each day we fail to speak out is another day that a Catholic Priest is arrested. Another day a Falun Gong practitioner is tortured. Another day that innocent voices are silenced. Will the United States step up as the leader of the free world and sponsor a resolution on China, or will the world sit by and watch China suppress its citizens for another year? How will history judge us? We must not be afraid to act.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with sadness in my heart as we mourn the loss of Macedonian President Boris Trajkovski. He was a moderate leader who helped unite his ethnically divided country. He was killed on Thursday when his plane crashed in bad weather conditions in mountainous southern Bosnia. President Trajkovski was a great friend of the United States. He led the efforts to establish relations with the United States and attended the National Prayer Breakfast here in Washington a number of times where he became friends with many Members of Congress and many individuals in the administration. He was a man of great faith. His great faith drove him to be a man who led reconciliation throughout his region of the world. President Trajkovski was inaugurated as the second President of the Republic of Macedonia on December 15, 1999. Prior to that, Mr. Speaker, he served as deputy minister of foreign affairs of the Republic of Macedonia and as chief of the cabinet of the mayor of the Kisela Voda municipality in Skopje from 1997 to 1998. Since taking office in 1999, President Trajkovski was active on the international level, giving numerous speeches at international forums, such as the World Economic Summit in Davos, the Council of Europe, the United Nations and the South East European Cooperation Process, and addressed the parliaments of several countries. He was dedicated to greater cooperation between states on behalf of the Republic of Macedonia. President Trajkovski participated in numerous international conferences on conflict resolution, religious tolerance, religious freedom, and served as president of youth work in the United Methodist Church in the former Yugoslavia for over 12 years. President Trajkovski was widely respected in Macedonia for his neutral stance in the former Yugoslav Republic, where tensions persist between Macedonians and the country's ethnic Albanian minorities after a 2001 war. He had called for greater inclusion of ethnic Albanians in state bodies and institutions. He has many friends, Mr. Speaker, throughout Europe and the entire world. Macedonia is a good friend and partner to the United States and plays an important role in its support of U.S. and NATO operations in Kosovo. This loss will certainly be felt throughout the international community. Our thoughts and prayers are with the Trajkovski family and the Macedonian people. The United States has lost a great friend.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H. Res. 157 and strongly condemn the Chinese government for the continued detainment and torture of Tibetan political prisoners. I remain extremely concerned that men and women in China are routinely persecuted by the Chinese government. China has for too long been at liberty to detain, torture, intimidate and oppress its people. The Tibetan people are denied basic human rights guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including the right to self- determination, freedom of speech, assembly, movement, expression and religious belief. Hundreds of Tibetans are currently in prison for peaceful expressions of political or religious belief. The majority of Tibetan political prisoners are Buddist monks and nuns. Each year the situation in Tibet worsens. The unchecked migration of Chinese into Tibetan areas is resulting in social, economic and cultural destruction of Tibetans. His Holiness the Dalai Lama considers this demographic strategy the greatest threat to the survival of the Tibetan culture and identity. More than 6,000 monasteries and nunneries and their contents--irreplaceable jewels of Tibetan culture--have been destroyed since the Chinese occupation and thousands of monks and nuns have been kicked out of their monasteries for refusing to renounce the Dalai Lama. The Chinese government routinely refuses to allow independent international human rights monitors, including U.N. human rights representatives, to conduct unhindered investigations into the human rights situation in Tibet. Religious freedom in Tibet is nonexistent. Tibetans are routinely imprisoned for participation in-non-violent political activities, such as hanging flags or promoting independence. Prisoners serve lengthy sentences and are routinely mistreated and tortured while in prison. I visited Tibet in 1997 and was able to witness first hand the conditions there and the continued repression of the Tibetan people. I met with monks, nuns and Tibetans on the street who revealed to me how bad the conditions are in Tibet. I visited the prisons and heard first hand accounts of the brutality taking place deep in the shadows. The following is a firsthand account of the arrest of Phuntsog Nyidron, a 20-year-old nun arrested in 1989 for peaceful demonstration in Lhasa. ``During arrests nuns are kicked, beaten and given electric shocks on their hands, shoulders, breasts, tongue and face. During the interrogation, they are suspended by their hands, which are shackled behind their backs, for prolonged periods and beaten with iron rods.'' As I close, 10 Catholic bishops are in China today under house arrest. The Protestant Church is being abused and beaten in China. The Falun Gong are being persecuted on a daily basis. The Chinese have plundered Tibet. America must do more to force China to adhere to fundamental human rights and religious freedom. The clock is ticking for Tibet. If nothing is done, a country, its people, religion and culture will one day be lost.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the resolution introduced today to honor the life and legacy of Paul Simon. I learned with great sadness of his death in December. Senator Simon epitomized all that is best about Congress. He served in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and was a distinguished member in both chambers. His presence was a constant example of the importance of hard work, discipline, and compassion. Senator Simon believed that government could serve the people, and serve them in a positive way. He served his State and his Nation beginning in 1954, when he entered the Illinois State legislature. His service would continue until his death as a professor in Illinois, where he shared a lifetime of wisdom with the leaders of the future. Senator Simon's season of service would take him to the House of Representatives, the United States Senate, and the campaign trail as a candidate for the presidency. His work included fighting against television violence, working for those without jobs, and trying to balance the budget. I was pleased to join with him in raising the issue of gambling's ill effects on families, individuals, and communities. He was concerned about the welfare not only of Illinois, but of the entire Nation. Senator Simon's talents were not limited to Congress. In his lifetime, he wrote over 20 books and was awarded over 50 honorary degrees. He was cerebral as well as practical. Senator Simon lived a life of the mind as well as a life dedicated to enlightening and lifting up his fellow citizens. After he left the Senate, Paul Simon returned home, and taught at Southern Illinois University, to impart his wisdom to the next generation, to enlighten young minds, and to continue serving his state. His life was one of constant service in the public interest. Senator Simon lived many lives in one--editor-publisher, legislator, public crusader, professor. That he did so much is impressive. That he did it all so well and so selflessly is inspirational. Congress and the Nation is a lesser place for his passing, but both were greatly enriched by his life and his example. Senator Simon will be missed, but through the lives he touched, the life he lived, and the lives he inspired, he will not be forgotten. Our sympathies go to his family and our thanks to them as well for sharing this remarkable man with us. Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in honoring the late Senator Paul Simon. Certainly, many of us recall his involvement, his active support for U.S. bilateral assistance to Africa and his work in the fight against apartheid in South Africa. Today, however, I want to pay special tribute to the Senator's long time advocacy for historically Black colleges and universities, HBCUs. As the chair for the Postsecondary Education Subcommittees in both the House and the Senate, he lent his unwavering support for these institutions during reauthorizations of the Higher Education Act of 1965 as well as adding a pivotal endorsement of the creation of an endowment fund for HBCUs. While Paul Simon is a colleague who will always be remembered as a supporter of the disadvantaged, he will also be remembered for his belief that the disadvantaged could be successful with the right kind of assistance from government programs. Senator Simon will be sorely missed but we are all better from having known and worked with him.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the members of my subcommittee staff who have put in very long hours to produce the C-J-S portion of the omnibus appropriations bill. All members of the staff have worked long, hard hours through what was a difficult conference. I would like to particularly thank Mike Ringler, clerk of the subcommittee, who has led the subcommittee through the House and Senate conference. I would also like to thank Christine Kojac, John Martens, and Leslie Albright, for their tireless efforts. I also would like to thank the detailees, Anne Marie Goldsmith and Alan Lang, who have added their own expertise to help make the C-J-S portion of this bill great. In my personal office, I would like to thank Dan Scandling, Janet Shaffron, J.T. Griffin, Samantha Stockman, and Neil Seifring for their efforts and work with the subcommittee. Finally, I would commend David Pomerantz and Rob Nabors of the minority staff for their input and help in this truly bipartisan bill.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I want to provide some additional information to follow up on my Record statement of November 25 regarding the provision in the FY 2004 omnibus spending bill which would require the destruction of background records checks 24 hours after a gun purchase. I submit for the Record letters from two law enforcement officers groups who share my deep concerns about the impact on public safety of changing the current 90-day period for retaining data related to firearms purchase and approval. The Federal Bureau of Investigation Agents Association, wrote: ``The more the retention period is reduced, the more difficult it would become to use the paperwork to investigate or prosecute crimes related to the use of sales of the firearms in question. Any such efforts can only complicate the already difficult task of law enforcement and jeopardize public safety.'' Federal Bureau of Investigation, Agents Association, November 25, 2003. Re Issues Related to Retention of Firearms Paperwork. Hon. Frank Wolf, Chairman, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and Judiciary Appropriations Committee, H-309 Capitol Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Wolf: On behalf of the FBI Agents Association (FBIAA), I am writing to express the FBIAA's concerns regarding the possibility of an appropriations rider that might reduce the current 90-day retention period for data related to firearms sales and approval. The FBIAA is a non- governmental professional association with a membership of nearly 9,000 current and more than 2,000 retired FBI agents nationwide; neither the FBIAA nor I speak for the official

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I too wish to submit a statement for the Record regarding the Office of Federal Detention Trustee. On discussion of the role of the Office of Federal Detention Trustee at the Department of Justice, the statement of managers clearly indicates that the Office does not have the authority to solicit contracts to build a new detention facility. I would also point out that the committee revised the bill language to strike any reference to construction. I am fully aware that many States, including Maryland, Louisiana, Ohio, and others have excess prison bed space capacity. It was never the intention of the Congress to allow the Detention Trustee to build additional facilities, but to take advantage of existing State and local excess prison bed space. The committee will work with Mr. Hoyer of Maryland and other concerned Members in the coming year to address these concerns.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I wish the record to reflect my deep disappointment with the Justice Department and Attorney General John Ashcroft for supporting language in the FY 2004 omnibus appropriations bill reducing the amount of time background record checks for gun sales are maintained. As the son of a police officer, I believe this change could be detrimental to public safety and ultimately result in people dying. When the FY 2004 Commerce-Justice-State (CJS) appropriations bill was debated in full committee this summer, several amendments dealing with firearms and firearms purchases were offered ``en bloc'' and adopted. One of the amendments in the package called for the immediate destruction of gun sale background check records. I did not support this package of amendments since neither the Justice Department nor Attorney General Ashcroft, the nation's chief law enforcement officer, would--or could--tell me if these provisions would impact the ability of law enforcement to stop criminals, or worse, terrorists. As chairman of the CJS subcommittee, I repeatedly asked for a formal position from the Justice Department about how the proposed amendments would affect law enforcement efforts but never got an answer. As House and Senate negotiators met to discuss the final version of the FY 2004 CJS bill--now folded into the omnibus spending bill--the provision calling for the ``immediate'' destruction of the background records was dropped. Now, at the eleventh hour of wrapping up the FY 2004 appropriations process, the Justice Department is actively supporting a ``compromise'' that would reduce the time background records are held from the current law standard of up to 90 days to 24 hours. This extreme change comes despite the fact that there is still no explanation or detail about what impact such a change would have on protecting mothers and fathers, daughters and sons, from criminals and terrorists. It is irresponsible to tack such a provision into a year-end spending bill without knowing and understanding the full impacts. According to the FBI, in 2002 more than 3,500 guns were sold and then later had to be retrieved because information came in after the sale was allowed to proceed which would have prohibited the sale. I repeat: 3,500 guns on the street which shouldn't have been there. It is chilling to think what would happen if a 24-hour system were in place. Moreover, any proposal for such a drastic change should be fully aired before the Congress and interested parties. It should be noted that the International Association of Chiefs of Police continues to stand by its September 2001 letter to the FBI stating that the 90-day records retention period should not be shortened. Under current law, licensed dealers generally are not to transfer firearms to an individual until the search determines that the transfer will not violate applicable federal or state law. Persons prohibited by federal law from receiving a firearm include convicted felons, fugitives, unlawful drug users, and aliens illegally or unlawfully in the United States. If the background check is not completed within three business days, the dealer is not prohibited from transferring the firearm. Current law regarding retention of gun purchase checks says that information on sales that have been allowed to proceed can be kept for up to 90 days in the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) audit log, after which the records must be destroyed. The audit log contains information related to each background check requested by a licensed firearms dealer, including the NICS response (e.g., proceed or denied) and the history of all activity related to the transaction. According to the NICS regulations, information on allowed firearms sales is used only for purposes related to ensuring the proper operation of the system or conducting audits of the use of the system. I submit for the Record a Washington Post article from November 18 with the headline, ``FBI Curbed in Tracking Gun Buyers,'' which reports on a ``new FBI background-check system that notifies counterterrorism agents when suspects on its terrorist watch list attempt to buy guns, but regulations prohibit those officials from obtaining details if the transaction occurs.'' The article states that 13 alleged terrorists have been allowed to buy guns. A follow-up Post article from November 22 reports that the Justice Department has ordered the FBI to increase scrutiny of suspected terrorists who attempt to buy guns, but gives the FBI only three days to run additional checks on prospective gun buyers listed on the Violent Gang and Terrorist Organizations File.'' We are fighting a war on terrorism--and as chairman of the CJS subcommittee I have offered unwavering support to the Justice Department and the nation's federal law enforcement 4 activities--yet terrorist manuals recovered by law enforcement contain guidance on how easy it is to buy guns in the United States. Even the Justice Department's website contains the al Qaeda training manual which includes the following: ``The confrontation that we are calling for with the apostate regimes does not know Socratic debates . . ., Platonic ideals . . ., nor Aristotelian diplomacy. But it knows the dialogue of bullets, the ideals of assassination, bombing, and destruction, and the diplomacy of the cannon and machine-guns.'' It continues with ``Second Issue: The importance of establishing a tactical plan for the assassination operation that consists of the operational factors themselves (members, weapons, hiding places . . .) and factors of the operation (time, place). In this example, we shall explain in detail the part related to the security plan. The part related to operational tactics will be explained in the lesson on special operational tactics.'' That's how the terrorists train and that scenario is one about which I have long been concerned. In September 1998 I saw the need to address the growing threat of terrorism in the world and authored legislation which created the National Commission on Terrorism chaired by Ambassador Paul Bremer, That was less than a month after two U.S. embassies in East Africa were bombed by terrorists linked to Osama bin Laden. I had raised with our colleagues then the concern that Sudan was harboring bin Laden. Quite frankly I have been frustrated in my attempts to get Congress and administrations past and present to be proactive in combating the terrorist threat. Now comes this firearms regulation change which I believe could play into terrorists' hands. Obtaining weapons is a critical part of their plan. It is abundantly clear that we need to change some of our laws, but not in ways that make it easier for terrorists to buy weapons in the United States. We all remember the terror of 9/11. Our nation and the world changed forever on that day when 3,000 died, including 30 from my congressional district. We all remember the terror that gripped the Washington area a year later when snipers killed 14 and wounded six others, including a young child. Shouldn't we be doing everything we can to assist law enforcement officers in rooting out terrorists, rather than tying their hands?

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, over the past year I have been writing to Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson and Food and Drug Commissioner Mark McClellan urging their action to curb the continuing abuse of the powerful prescription painkiller, OxyContin. In many of those letters I have enclosed newspaper articles about another life destroyed by this drug. Their inaction is perplexing. The death toll continues to rise and thousands of lives continue to be ruined because of the abuse of this drug. When will they do something to stop this tragedy? I want to submit the letters I have been sending to Secretary Thompson and Commissioner McClellan over the past six months. House of Representatives, Committee on Appropriations, Washington, DC, March 28, 2003. Hon. Tommy Thompson, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Independence Ave, SW., Washington, DC. Dear Secretary Thompson: In December 2001, the Commerce- Justice-State and the Judiciary appropriations subcommittee held a hearing on the illegal diversion of the prescription drug OxyContin, a pain-killing Schedule II narcotic manufactured by Purdue Pharma L.P. One of the witnesses, the father of recovering OxyContin addict, told a gripping story of the devastating impact the drug has had on his family and his son, who was in his early 20s. He proudly told the committee how his son had just finished rehab and had kicked his addiction. Sadly, a few months after appearing before the subcommittee, the son died as a result of abusing the drug. When used properly, OxyContin is considered a wonder drug, especially for the terminally ill cancer patients. I know what it is like to see people suffer from cancer. Both my mother and father died of cancer. I can remember my mother constantly asking the nurses for more morphine but being told she couldn't have any more. My mother was in a great deal of pain. OxyContin, if it had been available when she was dying, probably would have made her a lot more comfortable at the end. When used illegally, however, OxyContin destroys families and communities. It also can lead to death. This powerful painkiller has increasingly become a drug of choice for people who choose to abuse it by chewing it or grinding it up. By disabling the time release mechanism in OxyContin, abusers get a heroin-like high. Initially, cases of abuse and illegal diversion occurred primarily in poor, rural communities in Virginia, Kentucky, West Virginia and Ohio. Abuse is no longer limited to Appalachia. The drug has found its way to urban areas and there are now reports of widespread abuse as far away as Arizona. Florida, I am told, has been hit extremely hard. Several pharmacies in my congressional District have been robbed at gun point in recent months for OxyContin. No money was taken; the robbers only demanded the drug. Earlier this month, a prominent defense lawyer in northern Virginia who twice served as a local prosecutor in Prince William County pleased guilty to Federal drug charges linked to a large- scale investigation into the illegal distribution of OxyContin and other painkillers. Communities where the illegal drug has taken hold are being completely destroyed. I am told there is one county in southwest Virginia where no one isn't either using the drug, knows someone using the drug or been the victim of a crime by someone needing the drug. When a professional baseball player recently died after taking the dietary supplement ephedra, your agency immediately issued fact sheets regarding potential serious risks of dietary supplements containing ephedra. You were even quoted as cautioning all Americans about using dietary supplements that contain ephedra. According to fact sheets produced by the FDA, two deaths, four heart attacks nine strokes and five psychiatric cases involving ephedra have been reported. More than 240 people have died from the abuse of OxyContin and countless numbers of families and communities have been torn apart by this drug. Your agency has done a good job educating the public about the dangers of ephedra and other dietary supplements. I urge you to initiate a similar public information campaign about the dangers of abusing OxyContin. I have previously written to your department asking for a review of the marketing of OxyContin and its classification for treatment of moderate to severe pain. The Food and Drug Administration did change the warning label on OxyContin but more needs to be done. The drug should not be marketed to treat moderate pain. I urge you to no longer allow OxyContin to be prescribed for moderate pain. Too many people have died, too many families have suffered and too many communities have been devastated by the improper use of this drug. Sincerely, Frank R. Wolf, Chairman, Subcommittee on Commerce- Justice-State and the Judiciary.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the President for highlighting the longstanding friendship between the United States and the United Kingdom in his recent speech delivered at Whitehall Palace in London. It is encouraging that this administration is taking a strong stand against tyranny, but I am further encouraged that we are not forced to travel this road alone. The history of the United States and the United Kingdom has been forged on the belief that freedom is the natural right of all men. It is the role of governments to preserve this right, not hinder it. The conflict in Iraq is our joint commitment to promoting democracy in the 21st century. Our countries will not idly stand by while dictators, hunger, disease, war and corruption ravage human beings across the globe. However, the United States and United Kingdom cannot combat these evils alone. I therefore support the three pillars set forth by the President in combating tyranny. International organizations that are equal to the challenges of our world, free nations willing to meet evil by force, and a commitment to the international spread of democracy. I support the President's vision to see peace and stabilization in the Middle East. I am hopeful that the world will one day see a secure Israel and an independent Palestinian state. The people of Israel and Palestine deserve our best efforts in helping them to achieve a future that restores peace and dignity to a land rich with history and culture. I share the President's passion spreading democracy and commit my efforts to help him achieve this end. Below is the President's speech: [Remarks by the President at Whitehall Palace, Royal Banqueting House- Whitehall Palace, London, England] President Bush Discusses Iraq Policy at Whitehall Palace in London The President: Thank you very much. Secretary Straw and Secretary Hoon; Admiral Cobbald and Dr. Chipman; distinguished guests: I want to thank you for your very kind welcome that you've given to me and to Laura. I also thank the groups hosting this event--The Royal United Services Institute, and the International Institute for Strategic Studies. We're honored to be in the United Kingdom, and we bring the good wishes of the American people. It was pointed out to me that the last noted American to visit London stayed in a glass box dangling over the Thames. (Laughter.) A few might have been happy to provide similar arrangements for me. (Laughter.) I thank Her Majesty the Queen for interceding. (Laughter.) We're honored to be staying at her house. Americans traveling to England always observe more similarities to our country than differences. I've been here only a short time, but I've noticed that the tradition of free speech--exercised with enthusiasm--(laughter)--is alive and well here in London. We have that at home, too. They now have that right in Baghdad, as well. (Applause.) The people of Great Britain also might see some familiar traits in Americans. We're sometimes faulted for a naive faith that liberty can change the world. If that's an error it began with reading too much John Locke and Adam Smith. Americans have, on occasion, been called moralists who often speak in terms of right and wrong. That zeal has been inspired by examples on this island, by the tireless compassion of Lord Shaftesbury, the righteous courage of Wilberforce, and the firm determination of the Royal Navy over the decades to fight and end the trade in slaves. It's rightly said that Americans are a religious people. That's, in part, because the ``Good News'' was translated by Tyndale, preached by Wesley, lived out in the example of William Booth. At times, Americans are even said to have a puritan streak--where might that have come from? (Laughter.) Well, we can start with the Puritans. To this fine heritage, Americans have added a few traits of our own: the good influence of our immigrants, the spirit of the frontier. Yet, there remains a bit of England in every American. So much of our national character comes from you, and we're glad for it. The fellowship of generations is the cause of common beliefs. We believe in open societies ordered by moral conviction. We believe in private markets, humanized by compassionate government. We believe in economies that reward effort, communities that protect the weak, and the duty of nations to respect the dignity and the rights of all. And whether one learns these ideals in County Durham or in West Texas, they instill mutual respect and they inspire common purpose. More than an alliance of security and commerce, the British and American peoples have an alliance of values. And, today, this old and tested alliance is very strong. (Applause.) The deepest beliefs of our nations set the direction of our foreign policy. We value our own civil rights, so we stand for the human rights of others. We affirm the God-given dignity of every person, so we are moved to action by poverty and oppression and famine and disease. The United States and Great Britain share a mission in the world beyond the balance of power or the simple pursuit of interest. We seek the advance of freedom and the peace that freedom brings. Together our nations are standing and sacrificing for this high goal in a distant land at this very hour. And America honors the idealism and the bravery of the sons and daughters of Britain. The last President to stay at Buckingham Palace was an idealist, without question. At a dinner hosted by King George V, in 1918, Woodrow Wilson made a pledge; with typical American understatement, he vowed that right and justice would become the predominant and controlling force in the world. President Wilson had come to Europe with his 14 Points for Peace. Many complimented him on his vision; yet some were dubious. Take, for example, the Prime Minister of France. He complained that God, himself, had only 10 commandments. (Laughter.) Sounds familiar. (Laughter.) At Wilson's high point of idealism, however, Europe was one short generation from Munich and Auschwitz and the Blitz. Looking back, we see the reasons why. The League of Nations, lacking both credibility and will, collapsed at the first challenge of the dictators. Free nations failed to recognize, much less confront, the aggressive evil in plain sight. And so dictators went about their business, feeding resentments and anti-Semitism, bringing death to innocent people in this city and across the world, and filling the last century with violence and genocide. Through world war and cold war, we learned that idealism, if it is to do any good in this world, requires common purpose and national strength, moral courage and patience in difficult tasks. And now our generation has need of these qualities. On September the 11th, 2001, terrorists left their mark of murder on my country, and took the lives of 67 British citizens. With the passing of months and years, it is the natural human desire to resume a quiet life and to put that day behind us, as if waking from a dark dream. The hope that danger has passed is comforting, is understanding, and it is false. The attacks that followed--on Bali, Jakarta, Casablanca, Bombay, Mombassa, Najaf, Jerusalem, Riyadh, Baghdad, and Istanbul--were not dreams. They're part of the global campaign by terrorist networks to intimidate and demoralize all who oppose them. These terrorists target the innocent, and they kill by the thousands. And they would, if they gain the weapons they seek, kill by the millions and not be finished. The greatest threat of our age is nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons in the hands of terrorists, and the dictators who aid them. The evil is in plain sight. The danger only increases with denial. Great responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies. We will face these threats with open eyes, and we will defeat them. (Applause.) The peace and security of free nations now rests on three pillars: First, international organizations must be equal to the challenges facing our world, from lifting up failing states to opposing proliferation. Like 11 Presidents before me, I believe in the international institutions and alliances that America helped to form and helps to lead. The United States and Great Britain have labored hard to help make the United Nations what it is supposed to be--an effective instrument of our collective security. In recent months, we've sought and gained three additional resolutions on Iraq--Resolutions 1441, 1483 and 1511--precisely because the global danger of terror demands a global response. The United Nations has no more compelling advocate than your Prime Minister, who at every turn has championed its ideals and appealed to its authority. He understands, as well, that the credibility of the U.N. depends on a willingness to keep its word and to act when action is required. America and Great Britain have done, and will do, all in their power to prevent the United Nations from solemnly choosing its own irrelevance and inviting the fate of the League of Nations. It's not enough to meet the dangers of the world with resolutions; we must meet those dangers with resolve. In this century, as in the last, nations can accomplish more together than apart. For 54 years, America has stood with our partners in NATO, the most effective multilateral institution in history. We're committed to this great democratic alliance, and we believe it must have the will and the capacity to act beyond Europe where threats emerge. My nation welcomes the growing unity of Europe, and the world needs America and the European Union to work in common purpose for the advance of security and justice. America is cooperating with four other nations to meet the dangers posed by North Korea. America believes the IAEA must be true to its purpose and hold Iran to its obligations. Our first choice, and our constant practice, is to work with other responsible governments. We understand, as well, that the success of multilateralism is not measured by adherence to forms alone, the tidiness of the process, but by the results we achieve to keep our nations secure. The second pillar of peace and security in our world is the willingness of free nations, when the last resort arrives, to retain* (sic) aggression and evil by force. There are principled objections to the use of force in every generation, and I credit the good motives behind these views. Those in authority, however, are not judged only by good motivations. The people have given us the duty to defend them. And that duty sometimes requires the violent restraint of violent men. In some cases, the measured use of force is all that protects us from a chaotic world ruled by force. Most in the peaceful West have no living memory of that kind of world. Yet in some countries, the memories are recent: The victims of ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, those who survived the rapists and the death squads, have few qualms when NATO applied force to help end those crimes. The women of Afghanistan, imprisoned in their homes and beaten in the streets and executed in public spectacles, did not reproach us for routing the Taliban. The inhabitants of Iraq's Baathist hell, with its lavish palaces and its torture chambers, with its massive statues and its mass graves, do not miss their fugitive dictator. They rejoiced at his fall. In all these cases, military action was proceeded by diplomatic initiatives and negotiations and ultimatums, and final chances until the final moment. In Iraq, year after year, the dictator was given the chance to account for his weapons programs, and end the nightmare for his people. Now the resolutions he defied have been enforced. And who will say that Iraq was better off when Saddam Hussein was strutting and killing, or that the world was safer when he held power? Who doubts that Afghanistan is a more just society and less dangerous without Mullah Omar playing host to terrorists from around the world. And Europe, too, is plainly better off with Milosevic answering for his crimes, instead of committing more. It's been said that those who live near a police station find it hard to believe in the triumph of violence, in the same way free peoples might be tempted to take for granted the orderly societies we have come to know. Europe's peaceful unity is one of the great achievements of the last half- century. And because European countries now resolve differences through negotiation and consensus, there's sometimes an assumption that the entire world functions in the same way. But let us never forget how Europe's unity was achieved--by allied armies of liberation and NATO armies of defense. And let us never forget, beyond Europe's borders, in a world where oppression and violence are very real, liberation is still a moral goal, and freedom and security still need defenders. (Applause.) The third pillar of security is our commitment to the global expansion of democracy, and the hope and progress it brings, as the alternative to instability and to hatred and terror. We cannot rely exclusively on military power to assure our long-term security. Lasting peace is gained as justice and democracy advance. In democratic and successful societies, men and women do not swear allegiance to malcontents and murderers; they turn their hearts and labor to building better lives. And democratic governments do not shelter terrorist camps or attack their peaceful neighbors; they honor the aspirations and dignity of their own people. In our conflict with terror and tyranny, we have an unmatched advantage, a power that cannot be resisted, and that is the appeal of freedom to all mankind. As global powers, both our nations serve the cause of freedom in many ways, in many places. By promoting development, and fighting famine and AIDS and other diseases, we're fulfilling our moral duties, as well as encouraging stability and building a firmer basis for democratic institutions. By working for justice in Burma, in the Sudan and in Zimbabwe, we give hope to suffering people and improve the chances for stability and progress. By extending the reach of trade we foster prosperity and the habits of liberty. And by advancing freedom in the greater Middle East, we help end a cycle of dictatorship and radicalism that brings millions of people to misery and brings danger to our own people. The stakes in that region could not be higher. If the Middle East remains a place where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a place of stagnation and anger and violence for export. And as we saw in the ruins of two towers, no distance on the map will protect our lives and way of life. If the greater Middle East joins the democratic revolution that has reached much of the world, the lives of millions in that region will be bettered, and a trend of conflict and fear will be ended at its source. The movement of history will not come about quickly. Because of our own democratic development--the fact that it was gradual and, at times, turbulent--we must be patient with others. And the Middle East countries have some distance to travel. Arab scholars speak of a freedom deficit that has separated whole nations from the progress of our time. The essentials of social and material progress--limited government, equal justice under law, religious and economic liberty, political participation, free press, and respect for the rights of women--have been scarce across the region. Yet that has begun to change. In an arc of reform from Morocco to Jordan to Qatar, we are seeing elections and new protections for women and the stirring of political pluralism. Many governments are realizing that theocracy and dictatorship do not lead to national greatness; they end in national ruin. They are finding, as others will find, that national progress and dignity are achieved when governments are just and people are free. The democratic progress we've seen in the Middle East was not imposed from abroad, and neither will the greater progress we hope to see. Freedom, by definition, must be chosen, and defended by those who choose it. Our part, as free nations, is to ally ourselves with reform, wherever it occurs. Perhaps-the most helpful change we can make is to change in our own thinking. In the West, there's been a certain skepticism about the capacity or even the desire of Middle Eastern peoples for self-government. We're told that Islam is somehow inconsistent with a democratic culture. Yet more than half of the world's Muslims are today contributing citizens in democratic societies. It is suggested that the poor, in their daily struggles, care little for self-government. Yet the poor, especially, need the power of democracy to defend themselves against corrupt elites. Peoples of the Middle East share a high civilization, a religion of personal responsibility, and a need for freedom as deep as our own. It is not realism to suppose that one- fifth of humanity is unsuited to liberty; it is pessimism and condescension, and we should have none of it. (Applause.) We must shake off decades of failed policy in the Middle East. Your nation and mine, in the past, have been willing to make a bargain, to tolerate oppression for the sake of stability. Longstanding ties often led us to overlook the faults of local elites. Yet this bargain did not bring stability or make us safe. It merely bought time, while problems festered and ideologies of violence took hold. As recent history has shown, we cannot turn a blind eye to oppression just because the oppression is not in our own backyard. No longer should we think tyranny is benign because it is temporarily convenient. Tyranny is never benign to its victims, and our great democracies should oppose tyranny wherever it is found. (Applause.) Now we're pursuing a different course, a forward strategy of freedom in the Middle East. We will consistently challenge the enemies of reform and confront the allies of terror. We will expect a higher standard from our friends in the region, and we will meet our responsibilities in Afghanistan and in Iraq by finishing the work of democracy we have begun. There were good-faith disagreements in your country and mine over the course and timing of military action in Iraq. Whatever has come before, we now have only two options: to keep our word, or to break our word. The failure of democracy in Iraq would throw its people back into misery and turn that country over to terrorists who wish to destroy us. Yet democracy will succeed in Iraq, because our will is firm, our word is good, and the Iraqi people will not surrender their freedom. (Applause.) Since the liberation of Iraq, we have seen changes that could hardly have been imagined a year ago. A new Iraqi police force protects the people, instead of bullying them. More than 150 Iraqi newspapers are now in circulation, printing what they choose, not what they're ordered. Schools are open with textbooks free of propaganda. Hospitals are functioning and are well- supplied. Iraq has a new currency, the first battalion of a new army, representative local governments, and a Governing Council with an aggressive timetable for national sovereignty. This is substantial progress. And much of it has proceeded faster than similar efforts in Germany and Japan after World War II. Yet the violence we are seeing in Iraq today is serious. And it comes from Baathist holdouts and Jihadists from other countries, and terrorists drawn to the prospect of innocent bloodshed. It is the nature of terrorism and the cruelty of a few to try to bring grief in the loss to many. The armed forces of both our countries have taken losses, felt deeply by our citizens. Some families now live with a burden of great sorrow. We cannot take the pain away. But these families can know they are not alone. We pray for their strength; we pray for their comfort; and we will never forget the courage of the ones they loved. The terrorists have a purpose, a strategy to their cruelty. They view the rise of democracy in Iraq as a powerful threat to their ambitions. In this, they are correct. They believe their acts of terror against our coalition, against international aid workers and against innocent Iraqis, will make us recoil and retreat. In this, they are mistaken. (Applause.) We did not charge hundreds of miles into the heart of Iraq and pay a bitter cost of casualties, and liberate 25 million people, only to retreat before a band of thugs and assassins. (Applause.) We will help the Iraqi people establish a peaceful and democratic country in the heart of the Middle East. And by doing so, we will defend our people from danger. The forward strategy of freedom must also apply to the Arab-Israeli conflict. It's a difficult period in a part of the world that has known many. Yet, our commitment remains firm. We seek justice and dignity. We seek a viable, independent state for the Palestinian people, who have been betrayed by others for too long. (Applause.) We seek security and recognition for the state of Israel, which has lived in the shadow of random death for too long. (Applause.) These are worthy goals in themselves, and by reaching them we will also remove an occasion and excuse for hatred and violence in the broader Middle East. Achieving peace in the Holy Land is not just a matter of the shape of a border. As we work on the details of peace, we must look to the heart of the matter, which is the need for a viable Palestinian democracy. Peace will not be achieved by Palestinian rulers who intimidate opposition, who tolerate and profit from corruption and maintain their ties to terrorist groups. These are the methods of the old elites, who time and again had put their own self-interest above the interest of the people they claim to serve. The long- suffering Palestinian people deserve better. They deserve true leaders, capable of creating and governing a Palestinian state. Even after the setbacks and frustrations of recent months, goodwill and hard effort can bring about a Palestinian state and a secure Israel. Those who would lead a new Palestine should adopt peaceful means to achieve the rights of their people and create the reformed institutions of a stable democracy. Israel should freeze settlement construction, dismantle unauthorized outposts, end the daily humiliation of the Palestinian people, and not prejudice final negotiations with the placements of walls and fences. Arab states should end incitement in their own media, cut off public and private funding for terrorism, and establish normal relations with Israel. Leaders in Europe should withdraw all favor and support from any Palestinian ruler who fails his people and betrays their cause. And Europe's leaders--and all leaders--should strongly oppose anti-Semitism, which poisons public debates over the future of the Middle East. (Applause.) Ladies and gentlemen, we have great objectives before us that make our Atlantic alliance as vital as it has ever been. We will encourage the strength and effectiveness of international institutions. We will use force when necessary in the defense of freedom. And we will raise up an ideal of democracy in every part of the world. On these three pillars we will build the peace and security of all free nations in a time of danger. So much good has come from our alliance of conviction and might. So much now depends on the strength of this alliance as we go forward. America has always found strong partners in London, leaders of good judgment and blunt counsel and backbone when times are tough. And I have found all those qualities in your current Prime Minister, who has my respect and my deepest thanks. (Applause.) The ties between our nations, however, are deeper than the relationship between leaders. These ties endure because they are formed by the experience and responsibilities and adversity we have shared. And in the memory of our peoples, there will always be one experience, one central event when the seal was fixed on the friendship between Britain and the United States: The arrival in Great Britain of more than 1.5 million American soldiers and airmen in the 1940s was a turning point in the Second World War. For many Britons, it was a first close look at Americans, other than in the movies. Some of you here today may still remember the ``friendly invasion.'' Our lads, they took some getting used to. There was even a saying about what many of them were up to--in addition to be ``overpaid and over here.'' (Laughter.) At a reunion in North London some years ago, an American pilot who had settled in England after his military service, said, ``Well, I'm still over here, and probably overpaid. So two out of three isn't bad.'' (Laughter.) In that time of war, the English people did get used to the Americans. They welcomed soldiers and fliers into their villages and homes, and took to calling them, ``our boys.'' About 70,000 of those boys did their part to affirm our special relationship. They returned home with English brides. Americans gained a certain image of Britain, as well. We saw an island threatened on every side, a leader who did not waver, and a country of the firmest character. And that has not changed. The British people are the sort of partners you want when serious work needs doing. The men and women of this Kingdom are kind and steadfast and generous and brave. And America is fortunate to call this country our closest friend in the world. May God bless you all. (Applause.)

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I was honored recently to be asked to participate in a memorial service for my constituent, Lance Cpl. David Owens, Jr., USMC, who was killed in action in Baghdad on April 12 of this year. The presentation of a memorial plaque was held in Winchester, Virginia, on October 24 during halftime ceremonies on the football field at James Wood High School, Corporal Owens' alma mater. I would like to share with my colleagues the remarks given that evening in memory of this brave young man who served his nation proudly and who died defending our freedoms. Remarks by Frederick County Superintendent of Schools, Dr. William C. Dean Good evening, The war in Iraq claimed the life of a James Wood High School graduate of the class of 2000. On Saturday, April 12, 2003, 20-year-old Marine Lance Corporal David Owens was killed in action in Baghdad. It is with great pleasure that I introduce you to the parents of Corporal Owens, Mr. and Mrs. David Owens. In creating this memorial, it is our hope this service tonight will remind Mr. and Mrs. Owens of one of the many places where David made an impact at James Wood High School. And, I also extend an invitation to them to return here often. James Wood High School is a place David enjoyed, and we enjoyed and valued David's presence here. He is missed by his classmates, his teachers and those who knew him. Ladies and gentlemen, I am honored to present David and Debbie Owens. Thank you for allowing us to honor your son this evening. Remarks by James Wood High School Principal, Joseph Salyer David E. Owens, Jr. a graduate of JWHS, entered as a freshman in 1997. During the span of this high school career many would describe David as an individual with strong character, high integrity and a sincere love for his school. David was not merely a student who focused his attention on attending classes. He also took an active part in the life and traditions of JWHS. He was a dedicated athlete who participated in the school's football and wrestling programs. During his senior year, he excelled by placing 4th in the Commonwealth District wrestling tournament. This earned him a spot representing the school in the regional wrestling competition. He also was the recipient of the 2000 Winchester Wrestling Officials Association Sportsmanship Award. In addition, David was committed to serving in his local Future Farmers of America (FFA) chapter. He participated in a wide range of forestry-related events, sponsored by the FFA, because of his love for natural resources. It is because of David's sincere devotion, that we the staff, faculty and student body of the James Wood community will forever be indebted to his legacy as a James Wood student and to the life he gave for his country. Remarks by Congressman Frank R. Wolf, 10th District, Virginia It is important to remember those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country. Marine Lance Cpl. David Owens Jr., age 20, served his country with pride and honor. His loss has touched many in this community. It is fitting that this plaque have a permanent place at James Wood High School as a remembrance of David's sacrifice for his country. I know this has been a difficult time for his parents. As the father of five children, my heart goes out to them. They, too, have made the ultimate sacrifice. I ask that everyone here tonight remember all the service men and women who have lost their lives defending our freedom. We owe them and their families a huge debt of gratitude. I also ask that everyone pray for the men and women in uniform who are in harm's way in Iraq, in Afghanistan and other parts of the world where we have a military presence. They need and deserve our support. I want to read the words of the hymn ``Eternal Father,'' also known as the ``Navy Hymn,'' which is often sung at the funeral of service men and women, particularly sailors and Marines. It was the favorite hymn of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a former secretary of the Navy, and was sung at his funeral in Hyde Park, New York, in 1945. It also was played by the Navy band in 1963 as President John F. Kennedy's body was carried up the steps of the U.S. Capitol to lie in state. Eternal Father, strong to save Whose arm hath bound the restless wave, Who bidd'st the mighty ocean deep Its own appointed limits keep; Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee. For those in peril on the sea! Eternal Father, grant, we pray, To all Marines, both night and day, The courage, honor, strength and skill Their land to serve, they law fulfill; Be thou the sheild forevermore From every peril to the Corps. May we all remember Lance Cpl. David Owens, Jr. and keep his family in our thoughts and prayers. Remarks by Frederick County Board of Supervisors Chairman, Richard Shickle Tonight we are here to honor Marine Lance Cpl. David Owens, Jr. He made the ultimate sacrifice. He gave all that he had for his Country. He gave his life for each and every one of us. But he is not the only one that gave something to this great country and to each and every one of us. David Edward Owens, Sr. and Deborah Owens, mother and father, gave us their son Marine Lance Cpl. David Owens, Jr. As a father of four I cannot imagine the pride and the pain that these two people must feel each and every day. The questions ``Why him?'' and ``Why us?'' must haunt them every minute of every day. Mr. and Mrs. Owens, all that we can say is ``Thank you'' from the bottom of our hearts. Please allow the citizens of Frederick County to become part of your family. Remarks by Frederick County School Board Chairman, Stuart Wolk Tonight I stand before you humbled. Humbled by a life short lived but more accomplished in those few years than I can imagine accomplishing in my lifetime. A few short years ago, David Owens engaged in battle on the ground we are now standing on. He fought valiantly for his team then and upon leaving James Wood, continued to fight valiantly. Only this time, the stakes were bigger and his new team for which he was fighting was our country. He made the ultimate sacrifice for his team and we mourn his loss tonight, as we have since receiving the tragic news. There is no greater love for country, for humanity than to give one's life for the freedom we all cherish. Let us never take those freedoms for granted and let us always remember the supreme sacrifice made by our hero: Lance Cpl. David Owens, Jr. I cannot begin to fathom the loss that Mr. and Mrs. Owens have experienced but I wish to thank them for their son and the manner in which he always conducted himself. As a member of the Frederick County School Board, as a citizen of Frederick County and of this great country, I feel fortunate to stand here in his memory and in his honor. Thank you.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, the President gave an amazing speech yesterday in England, and everyone should read it. Consistent with that speech, I would now ask the administration to appoint a special envoy to the Middle East to focus like a laser beam on bringing peace to the Middle East. Envoys for peace have succeeded in the past. Senator Mitchell succeeded in Ireland. Senator Danforth has helped push the peace in Sudan. Three people that come to mind immediately for the Middle East are the President's father, George H.W. Bush or Secretary James A. Baker III or former Secretary George Shultz. Each would bring a unique ability to sharply focus, using the administration's road map for peace, on bringing peace to the Middle East.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) for his leadership and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for his leadership on this issue. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize, as I said the other day, every time these issues come up, it is the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos). I mean, everyone else ought to be participating in this too; but I want them to know, and Chairman Hyde too, how much I appreciate it. But think about it, every time a bill comes up dealing with persecution and oppression, it is always those three gentlemen. Why can we not get 432 other people to come on over and join these three patriots? Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and thank the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. This fall we celebrate the 5th year of the commission and thank them for their tireless efforts to bring awareness to religious freedom violations across the globe. Those around the world suffering persecution for the religious beliefs have truly benefited from the commitment of the commission. The commission produces an annual report. Each report helps to bring visibility to oppressive governments that violate the basic freedoms of their citizens. The protection of human rights and the plight of those suffering for their faith must not, should not ever fall on deaf ears. Someone must fight for them. Nameless victims in China, including Tibet, which is not part of China, although the Chinese may think it is, China, Tibet, Vietnam, Sudan, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Vietnam, and many other places where faith is under attack are waiting for a message of hope, waiting to hear that we in the United States care. When the United States speaks out, the Congress, the government, we can make a difference. We cannot stand idly by and watch innocent people suffer. We must not let terrible atrocities go unchallenged. We have a moral obligation to speak out. The United States Commission on International Freedom is shining a bright light in some of the darkest corners of the world. I commend them, encourage their continued work on behalf of the oppressed and persecuted people around the globe. Mr. Speaker, Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: ``Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.'' I rise today to recognize and thank the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. This fall we celebrate the fifth year of the commission and thank them for their tireless effort to bring awareness to religious freedom violations across the globe. The commission was created by Congress in 1998 to shine a light on and generate a heightened awareness of the ongoing atrocities associated with persecution of individuals around the world for their religious beliefs. As a results of their investigations, hearings, and reports, the commission has provided Congress and the administration with timely and accurate information on religious freedom abuses and sound policy recommendations to the president, the secretary of state, and Congress. Those around the world suffering persecution for their religious beliefs have truly benefitted from the commitment of the commission. The commission produces an annual report. Each report helps to bring visibility to oppressive governments that violate the basic freedoms of their citizens. As an example, look at what is occurring in some of these countries: China--According to the Cardinal Kung Foundation, there are at least 22 Roman Catholic bishops in Chinese prisons, labor camps or under house arrest. Numerous Protestant House Church leaders and worshipers in China have been imprisoned or detained. Large numbers of Muslims in China are in prison because of their faith. Young Muslim Uighur boys and girls are not even allowed to enter a mosque until they are 18 years old. Hundreds more bishops, priests, and lay people are already in prison. Torture and death are common. Tibet--Buddhist monks and nuns are in prison and hundreds of monasteries and nunneries have been destroyed. Yet loyalty to the Dalai Lama remains strong. Despite this brutal crackdown by the government of China, the Tibetan people remain strong and cling to their heritage and unique identity. Sudan--Millions have died in the 20-year civil war and the majority have been Christians who starved to death. Egypt--The Coptic Christians continue to experience harassment and persecution. Pakistan--The government has failed to protect the rights of religious minorities. Christians are persecuted and blasphemy laws are strong. Iran--Bahais are persecuted and imprisoned because of their faith. India--Violence is ongoing against Christians, churches are burned or destroyed, nuns raped. Indonesia--Christian churches and Muslim mosques are attacked and burned. Saudi Arabia--State Department annual report on human rights documents that freedom of religion does not exist and that non-Muslim groups are not allowed to worship in public, and risk being detained, imprisoned, tortured, or deported. Conversion form Islam to another religion is punishable by death. Vietnam--Buddhist, Protestants, Catholics and minority groups suffer intense persecution at the hands of brutal communist rulers. It goes on and on. The protection of human rights and the plight of those suffering for their faith must not fall on deaf ears. Someone must fight for them. Nameless victims in China, Vietnam, Sudan, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Vietnam and the many other places where faith is under attack are waiting for a message of hope, waiting to hear that we care. When the United States speaks out, the United States makes a difference. We cannot stand idly by and watch innocent people suffer. We must not let terrible atrocities go unchallenged. We have a moral obligation to speak out. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom is shining a bright light in some of the darkest corners of the world. They have made a difference over the last 5 years and continue to have an impact on the lives of the suffering people of the world. I commend them and encourage their continued work on behalf of the oppressed and persecuted people around the globe. As the President recently stated in his speech for the National Endowment for Democracy ``The bedrock of successful societies is the right to religious liberty.''

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, over the last two weeks I have submitted testimony from various groups that I have been meeting with regarding China's continual abuse of human rights. Whether it be restrictions on religious freedom; the persecution and arrest of Catholics and Protestants; the use of barbaric labor camps; the continual victimization of members of the Falun Gong; or the abhorrent and coercive One-Child policy, China's government continues to show nothing but contempt for its citizens and the opinions of the rest of the world. These offenses alone should be enough to condemn the government of China. However, on top of these crimes the People's Republic of China poses a great and serious counterintelligence threat to America, the extent of which will, I have no doubt, concern our colleagues greatly. An Unclassified Report from the FBI on the People's Republic of China Intelligence Collection Efforts The People's Republic of China (PRC) poses a significant counterintelligence threat to the United States (U.S.) via its cadre of professional intelligence officers who collect political, military and economic intelligence, and its network of non-professional individuals and organizations that collect science and technology, high-tech and proprietary information completely outside the direction and control of the PRC Intelligence Services. The PRC's professional military intelligence organization, the Military Intelligence Department of the People's Liberation Army (MID/PLA), also known as the Second Department of the PLA (2PLA), relies mainly on intelligence collection through its military attaches. The PRC's military seeks military, science and technology, and some political information through its contacts and agents. In 1987, PRC military attache Hou Desheng was interdicted by FBI Special Agents in Washington, D.C. while receiving and paying for classified U.S. Government information. The PRC's professional civilian intelligence, the Ministry of State Security, targets U.S. political and policy information, runs influence operations against Taiwan and other political targets, attempts to penetrate the U.S. Government, and directs a growing number of covert science and technology collection operations. Collection operations from this civilian segment of the PRC Intelligence Services are difficult to counter because the Chinese typically insist that the physical transfer of documents or items take place in the PRC. PRC civilian intelligence officers in the U.S. direct part of their efforts toward developing as many Americans of Chinese ancestry into what the PRC terms ``patriotic Overseas Chinese.'' An example of the Ministry of State Security's success in penetrating the U.S. Government was the Larry Wu-tai Chin case. Chin, a U.S. Government employee of 30 years, was an actual agent of the Ministry of State Security. While residing in the U.S. and during his employment with the government, Chin provided information to the Ministry of State Security for over 40 years. Chin was arrested for espionage activities in 1985 and was subsequently convicted of those charges in 1986. Chin committed suicide prior to being sentenced. Like most countries operating intelligence services within the U.S., the PRC employs a number of commonly-used collection techniques. Their intelligence services attempt to gain access to sensitive foreign facilities, try to meet individuals with access to classified information, and attempt to photograph military installations and equipment. However, the PRC employs several non-traditional methods and unlike most other countries, the PRC makes extensive use of non-intelligence personnel. Consumers of intelligence such as China's production facilities, laboratories and research institutes often bypass professional intelligence services in favor of direct intelligence collection efforts. Opportunities to accomplish direct collection within the U.S. are facilitated through the very large number of temporary visitors in private companies, academic institutions, and U.S. Government facilities. A significant number of these delegation members are science and technology experts, often characterized by their American hosts as aggressive and extremely knowledgeable in their professional fields. In many cases, Chinese-Americans employed by these entities and institutions are sought out by members of the PRC delegations as persons who might be willing to assist them. In 1997, Peter Lee pleaded guilty to transmitting U.S. national defense information to the PRC. The consumer of Lee's information was a PRC institute, not a traditional PRC intelligence service. In 2002, a PRC national was arrested for attempting to steal proprietary seismic-imaging software from a Silicon Valley company. This was the second unsuccessful attempt by an employee of a PRC based company to obtain this proprietary software within a span of five years. Later in 2002, two PRC nationals were indicted for economic espionage related to their attempted theft of trade secrets from several Silicon Valley companies. These two individuals were subsequently linked to a PRC based high-technology research and development program. As the PRC's varied presence in the U.S. continues to grow, more PRC nationals find themselves in positions of direct or indirect access to items of intelligence interest to China. If they can find the right consumer, PRC nationals involved in intelligence collection may be in a position to profit from their services. These individuals do not operate under the direction or control of either the military or civilian PRC intelligence services. In 1994, two PRC nationals were indicted on computer fraud and fraud by wire in connection with the theft of $950,000 of proprietary computer source code developed by a U.S. firm. The end-user of the code was a Chinese machinery import and export company. Evidence collected in the investigation indicated that the two perpetrators had shopped the computer source code around for the best price. Whether directed by one of its intelligence services, manufacturing sectors or research institutes, the PRC threat to U.S. policy, intelligence, military, national security and proprietary/economic information is growing. In response to this expanding PRC threat, the FBI, in conjunction with the U.S. Intelligence Community, continues to pursue an aggressive and focused counterintelligence program.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the bill. Before I make some comments, let me say I have great respect for the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra). He is a good person. So we just have differences. I think this is not the way to go. Secondly, I think the administration and the Justice Department, their failure to take a position on this bill is morally reprehensible. When they have a fiduciary relationship in running these prisons and not to say anything, what can I say. Winston Churchill said one of the best tests of whether we are truly a civilized people is the temper, the mood of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals. As somebody who is proud to be a conservative, and a compassionate conservative, and somebody who has worked in prisons--before I got elected I was involved in a program at Lorton Prison called Man to Man where we would go down and counsel people--knowing what this bill could do, I think this bill should be defeated. You cannot put a man in prison for years and expect him to be rehabilitated without work. The Bible says, ``Remember the prisoner as though in prison with them.'' This bill would make it difficult to operate a prison. Inmates without work who are idle are prisoners that are going to later come back and commit a crime. This bill also has major budget impacts. To those on my side of the aisle who talk about balancing the budget, the cost of this bill over 5 years will be $500 million. Rehabilitation. Inmates who participate in prison work are less likely to repeat and less prone to violence. Also, at election time everyone wants to be with the Fraternal Order of Police. It is sort of amusing. My dad was a policeman in the city of Philadelphia, very active in the Fraternal Order of Police. Politicians always like to get the FOP's endorsement. The FOP says, ``The FPI is the most important correctional rehabilitation program of the Bureau of Prisons. Not only does it provide Federal inmates with marketable skills,'' then it goes on to say it opposes this bill. Lastly, Chuck Colson who runs Prison Fellowship, who I admire, who frankly has forgotten more about prisons than anybody in this institution on either side knows, sent a letter about this bill where he said the following: ``We regret that we must oppose your prison work legislation. We applaud you for working to reform Federal Prison Industries, and your bill makes many good and important reforms. In fact, we did not oppose bringing your bill to the floor because we think this important issue needs to be debated. However,'' and they underline, ``your bill does not set up an alternative system.'' That is the key. There is no alternative system ``for replacing the jobs that will be lost when your reforms are implemented. That would be tragic, and it is for this reason that we must oppose your bill.'' He goes on to say, ``Prison work programs are an essential part of changing prisoners' lives.'' We cannot put a man or woman in prison for all of these years and then expect them to come out with a changed life. They end by saying, ``We advocate work programs because they are beneficial to society.'' How we treat them in prison will determine what type of neighbors they will be. Mr. Chairman, I will submit these letters for inclusion in the Record. If this bill is not amended, I believe, and I may be wrong, that this bill, as surely as the night follows the day, will make it very difficult to operate prisons and will result in men not having the rehabilitation and the dignity, which I predict will lead to more crime in these United States. This bill raises the issue of job loss, but the enemy is China, and yet this bill does not deal with China. The enemy here is China. The jobs are leaving and going to China. The furniture business took a gun and fired it at the FPI when China is really to blame. The letters previously referred to follow: Grand Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police, Washington, DC, November 4, 2003. Hon. J. Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the House, House of Representatives, Washington,

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I listened to the gentleman from Mississippi. I was walking back to my office. He really made a lot of good points. I was going to make them, and I had 4 minutes. Let me just say, he is right. You are shooting at American prisoners who are trying to be rehabilitated, when China has taken more jobs from this country. But somebody said China is not the enemy. China has about 11 Catholic bishops in jail today according to the Cardinal Kung Foundation, if anybody read, I did a Special Order on it--11 Catholic bishops. They have 250 evangelical house church leaders in jail today. They have plundered Tibet. Tibet is a wreck. I have been to Lhasa. Lhasa is a dirty Chinese city. Lhasa is no longer the Tibetan capital. The Muslims. China is pounding the Muslims in the northwest portion of the country. Spying. The gentleman from Mississippi is right. The FBI comes before my appropriations subcommittee. They gave me a classified briefing. I can tell you that the Chinese are spying against us more so than the Russians were doing it. Yet what does this body do with regard to China? Zero. Zip. Not a thing. The gentleman is right. I was opposed to granting normal trade to China. I am a free-trader. A lot of you rushed down here to give MFN to the Chinese. They are spying against us; they sold weapons to Saddam Hussein. Remember watching that show one day? The shopping center hit in Kuwait was from a Chinese missile, sold by China to Iraq. I know some members are frustrated because you are losing some jobs, and I want to do something to help keep jobs here. Yet you do not deal with those who are persecuting fundamentalists, who are persecuting Christians, persecuting Catholics and Protestants. I never hear anybody here speak about it. I never hear this House speak about that issue. Tibet. Many came to see the Dalai Lama, but nobody talks about the persecution of the Buddhists. Muslims. Many of you represent large Muslim areas. Why do you not speak out when China is persecuting the Muslim faith? Spying against us. Why do you not speak out? The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) is right, China is spying against us. China is taking high-tech jobs from us. We lost 600,000 jobs. Maybe some changes ought to be made in the FPI. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) is a good guy, and it pains me to be on the opposite side. Hopefully, something can be done. There is an amendment that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) has about repatriation, but we are fundamentally not dealing with a major issue here. The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) was right. Generally he makes a lot of sense, a lot of times. I know I am using this opportunity on a bill dealing with FPI, but we are ignoring--this side and that side--are ignoring the persecution of people of faith in China. Do you know if you need a new kidney, for $50,000 you can get it in China? Do you want to see it? Come by my office. They are shooting people in the back of the neck. They put the bayonet up high so the body goes rigid, they shoot them, they throw the body in a canvas bag, they put it in an ambulance, and in a half hour they are doing a transplant. When does this Congress ever speak out? When does the Congress speak out on that issue? The Congress does not. There are more slave labor camps in China today than there were in Russia when Solzhenitzyn wrote the book ``Gulag Archipelago.'' Does this Congress ever speak out about it? About the FPI, I know members are frustrated, and want to do something. You want to deal with this issue. But we're talking about a handful of jobs that are helping to train people so when they get out of prison they have some rehabilitation and some dignity. The gentleman from Mississippi is exactly right.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, what is America if not a Nation that stands up for basic decency and human rights? What is America if it is not a people that speaks out for those who cannot speak out for themselves? And what will America become if we fail to speak out against dictators and despots who oppress and brutalize their own people? China has for too long been at liberty to detain and torture and intimidate and oppress good men and women for their religious beliefs. As the world's greatest democracy and the symbol of hope for millions, America has a duty and an obligation to speak out for the oppressed people of the world. We fail in our duty if we do nothing. It was the British philosopher and statesman Edmund Burke who said that Representatives owe you not just their industry but also their judgment. As Representatives and beholders of American ideals, we should speak out on the issue of the persecution of those of faith in China. The litany of abuses committed by the Government of China toward its own people is long and senseless. I recently held a meeting with a number of groups who have spent years in documenting the numerous abuses committed by the Chinese Government upon the Chinese people. In the coming days, I will be highlighting the plight of different groups of long-suffering Chinese people so that colleagues can better understand the depth of this problem in China. The material I will be submitting today was prepared by the International Religious Freedom Commission, and I hope Members will read it. As I close, 10 Catholic bishops are in China today under house arrest, and this government, our government, our Congress and the administration, does not act. The Protestant Church is being abused and beaten in China and we have refused to speak out. The Chinese have plundered Tibet, and yet the West is quiet. Muslims are being persecuted in the northwest portion of China, and yet the West speaks out not at all. The Falun Gong are being persecuted almost on a daily basis. I think this is an opportunity to hear, in their own words, what all of these groups have to tell us in the Congress and us in the United States and us in the West about what is taking place, so that we know we should speak out on their behalf, particularly next year when the Geneva resolution with regard to condemning China on human rights comes up. Depending on the religious organization in question, the Chinese government provided various justifications to defend its policy of repression. Its action to restrict religious belief and practice, however, go far beyond what is necessary to protect legitimate state interests. Since 2001, the Communist government has engaged in a persistent campaign of banning some religious groups while insisting on registration for others. Many groups, particularly Christian house churches, have refused, understandably fearful that providing membership rosters would lead to regular surveillance by party and government agencies. The government's policy of designating religious or spiritual organizations as ``cults'' has led to tragic outcomes for millions of religious believers. All too often victims are sentenced to ``re- education through labor camps,'' administered by the notorious Ministry of Public Security, which appears to perpetrate human rights abuses with absolute impunity. Persons adhering to ``unacceptable'' faiths have been given prison sentences of up to three years without a right to a hearing, without counsel and without judicial determination of their cases. There are at least 30 million Protestant Christians in China. Mostly, believers belong to independent house churches. Purely on account of their faith, properties belonging to or used by such groups have been confiscated, closed, or destroyed and members have been detained, tortured, and subjected to other forms of government harassment. In June 2003, 12 members of a house church in Guna Village in Yunnan province were arrested after they sought registration with the local government. On June 6, in response to the government's ``invitation'' to complete the registration process, the 12 church leaders were arrested for engaging in ``feudalistic superstition.'' Eight of the 12 were immediately sentenced to three years in ``re-education through labor'' camps, while the other four were indicted and are being held for trial. In late August 2003, local officials arrested 170 house church Christians in Nanyang county, Henan province after local police reportedly raided the meeting place where the worship service was being conducted. The report indicates that the 14 leaders of the group are currently being held in detention, possibly facing serious charges, while the other members were released after having been fined, fingerprinted, and warned against continuing their activities. The Chinese Communist state has, since the 1950s, banned the Roman Catholic Church, replacing it with the state-approved Catholic Patriotic Association. Through this state organization, the Communist government has claimed the exclusive right to appoint Chinese bishops. Most Chinese clerics, however, have refused to accept the legitimacy of government appointees. As a result, many Roman Catholic bishops and priests have been harassed, detained, or imprisoned. According to the Cardinal Kung Foundation, a number of Catholic bishops and priests who refuse to submit to government tutelage remain in prison or in detention and the status of other priests and lay persons remains unknown. As of August 2003, at least 10 Catholic bishops, including Bishop Su Zhimin, whose whereabouts are unknown, are imprisoned, in detention, under house arrest, or under surveillance. In Tibet, Buddhist monks and nuns serve lengthy sentences for voicing their allegiance to the Dalai Lama. In point of fact, the great majority of Tibetan political prisoners are monks and nuns. The longest-serving Tibetan political prisoner, Tagna Jigme Zangpo, was granted a medical parole to come to the United States in summer 2002 when he was in the middle of a 28-year sentence before his ``early'' release. Ngawang Sandrol, a member of the famous Tibetan ``Singing Nuns'' who was released last year, had served over 10 years in the infamous Drapchi Prison before her release. According to the Tibet Information Network, the State Department, and the testimony of former Tibetan nuns like Ngawang Sandrol, many of these prisoners have been severely beaten and subjected to other extreme forms of punishment. Some have died in prison. The Chinese government has denied repeated requests, including from the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, for access to the 12-year- old boy whom the Dalai Lama recognizes as the 11th Panchen Lama. Government officials have stated that he is being ``held for his own safety,'' while at the same time insisting that another boy is the true Panchen Lama. The Chinese government's official ban on the Falun Gong movement, in 1999, has meant heightened government repression for all religious organizations designated by the government as ``cults.'' According to Falun Gong practitioners, as many as 100,000 of their members have been sent to labor camps without trial. They claim that as many as 700 may have died as a result of police brutality either while in prison or after their release. In largely Muslim Xinjiang, religious freedom is severely curtailed by the government, which indiscriminately links Muslim religious expression with ``separatist'' or ``terrorist'' acts. The indiscriminate repression of the Uighur people is best exemplified by the arrest and imprisonment of Rebiya Kadeer, a prominent Uighur businesswoman and activist, who was arrested in 1999 after she met with a visiting U.S. congressional delegation. Close supervision of all mosques in the region by local Communist Party officials is now commonplace. China repeatedly engages in severe--systematic, egregious--violations of religious freedom. If our ideals and what America stands for--both at home and abroad--are to mean anything, then we must not shrink from this issue. We must not allow human considerations to come secondary to the pursuit of trade. We must dare to speak out for those who have no voice.

Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Scott amendment. Mr. Chairman, it could really make all of the difference in the world with regard to this bill. So Members understand what it is, basically these are goods that are no longer made in the United States. For instance, television sets. There are no television sets made in the U.S., or the automatic car locker that we have. Most of them, I have been told, are made in China. This would say only goods that are made outside of the United States would be repatriated back and could be made in prisons. This would create additional jobs and competition with foreign companies, and also create jobs for Americans, such as the truck drivers who bring the supplies to the prison, the people who supply the plastics and the wire, whatever the case may be. This would create jobs, and it would be almost like the reintroduction of these companies and these industries that have long ago left the United States, to bring them back in. This could be a very, very powerful amendment that would help our economy create jobs, rehabilitate prisons, but create jobs by the people who make the supplies and make whatever. There are none. If you go out today and search, you cannot find a television set that is made in the United States. Maybe the prisoners could make television sets not in competition with any American company, which would really make a tremendous difference. I strongly urge the support of the Scott amendment which would really make a big difference in rehabilitation, both with regard to our economy and also helping prisoners and helping create jobs here in the United States.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I want to second what the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) said. Because of Frank McCloskey's life, there are a lot of people alive in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, and Kosovo. He, along with several other Members, did more to sensitize this Congress, which was not very interested at that time in those areas. Neither the Clinton administration nor the Congress, quite frankly, wanted to do anything with regard to what took place. Frank McCloskey went over there and because of his actions did a lot of good and saved a lot of lives. Also, as many people know, even after Congressman McCloskey left this Congress, he continued his work. He did not let this cause go. I want to rise to salute Congressman McCloskey; and on behalf of all of the people that are alive in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Slovenia, Serbia and Kosovo, who may not even know the reason why, I thank Frank on their behalf and want to let his family know he made a tremendous difference not only for their district, not only for our country, but for our entire world.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I am very concerned about the current human rights situation in North Korea and that nation's pursuit of a nuclear weapons program. The leadership of the North Korean government has proven to be volatile and unpredictable with a tight rein on a very closed, repressed society. Thousands of American soldiers are stationed in South Korea to ease the tensions between North and South Korea. The North Korean government is one of the worst abusers of human rights in the world, and 1.5 million North Koreans have already died of starvation. The international community must pressure North Korea to reach an agreement to end its quest for nuclear weapons. A country that suppresses its people and poses a threat to its neighbors cannot be allowed to possess nuclear weapons. I submit for the Record a recent Wall Street Journal article detailing a proposal from Hwang Jang Yop, North Korea's highest-ranking defector. Hwang's proposal for peace and security focuses on regime change and a larger international focus on the human rights situation. [From the Wall Street Journal, Oct. 28, 2003] Unwelcome Truths (By Melanie Kirkpatrick) Seoul--North Korea's highest-ranking defector arrived safely in Washington yesterday despite North Korea's threat to ``shoot his plane out of the sky'' if he dared to visit the U.S. This is the first trip to the U.S. for Hwang Jang Yop, the former head of North Korea's Workers Party and president of Kim Il Sung University who defected to the South in 1997. He brings with him a two-prong proposal for what he calls the peaceful reunification of the Korean Peninsula: regime change and greater international focus on the human-rights abuses of the North. In an interview here on the eve of his departure, Mr. Hwang said: ``I want to emphasize the importance of eliminating the Kim Jong Il regime.'' How to do that? ``The U.S. should put the issue of human rights at the top of its agenda in its dialogue'' with North Korea. Mr. Hwang is an unlikely champion of human rights in North Korea. Now 80 years old, he spent his career in the service of the brutal regime he now denounces. He was the North's ideologue-in-chief--founder and leading proponent of the ``juche'' ideology of self-reliance that Kim Il Sung, father of current leader Kim Jong Il, used to justify his totalitarian rule. The old Stalinist now says both Kims distorted his philosophy, which is really about ``democracy.'' One would think that the one place in the world where the campaign to free the North Korean people would be taken most seriously would be South Korea, where Mr. Hwang lived under virtual house arrest until recently. Think again. Most Koreans are well informed about the brutal realities of life in the North but prefer to look the other way. It's much pleasanter to contemplate reunification fantasies such as the one portrayed in a recent hit movie about a cross- border romance between a South Korean woman and a North Korean soldier. Last week's chilling report on the North Korean gulags made it into some South Korean papers but wasn't front-page news. Students demonstrated against Mr. Hwang's U.S. visit last week, protesting his anti-North Korea message. If the South Korean people seem indifferent to the plight of their brothers and sisters in the North, it's in large part because their political leaders remain silent. President Roh Moo Hyun was a human-rights lawyer before taking office earlier this year but human rights north of the DMZ is way down on his priority list. To his credit, Mr. Roh is allowing Mr. Hwang to visit the U.S.--something his predecessor, Kim Dae Jung (another human-rights activist who lost his voice when it came to the human- rights horrors in the North) refused to permit for fear of angering Kim Jong Il. The official refusal to speak out about the human-rights abuses of Kim Jong Il's regime was on full display last week during an interview with the South's minister of unification, whom I met on the day the gulag report was released. For North Koreans, Minister Jeong Se Hyun said, ``political freedom is a luxury, like pearls for a pig. The improvement of economic conditions for the North Korean people is the most important issue right now.'' ``Once the economic situation is improved,'' he said, then North Korea can focus on human rights. As for linking any deal with the North to progress on human rights: ``I don't think it would be wise or effective if we try to negotiate the human rights condition or to pursue our policies with human rights as a condition,'' Mr. Jeong said. In other words: Whatever you do, don't annoy Kim Jong Il. South Korea's constitution requires it to welcome any North Korean who wants to come to the South. Yet in the 50 years since the end of the Korean War, the South has accepted fewer than 3,000 refugees. Most have come in the past two years, thanks in large part to the efforts of several private groups dedicated to helping North Koreans find refuge in the South. The rescuers, many of whom are Christian, differ among themselves over how best to help. One faction prefers to work out of the public eye. Another faction pursues high-profile tactics such as helping asylum-seekers flood embassies in China. Its aim is to draw international attention to the plight of the quarter-million or more North Korean refugees hiding in China. There's another aspect too--money. ``I don't mean to sound mercenary,'' says Tim Peters, an American missionary here. ``But in some respects running into a consulate in China is cost effective.'' Smuggling a refugee out through Mongolia or Vietnam costs $1,000 to $3,000 per person, he says. Mr. Peters adds that money also talks in North Korea's gulags. ``It's easier to spring someone from a North Korean prison than from a Chinese prison,'' he says. The high-profile tactics are taking their toll on rescuers' ability to help the North Korean refugees in China. Police security around embassies and consulates is tighter than ever. In the past five or six months, the highly effective Chinese intelligence service appears to have replaced provincial police in tracking down refugees. This is one reason, rescuers believe, for the failure of a plan earlier this year to smuggle out two boatloads of refugees from a northern Chinese port. It is also becoming more treacherous along China's border with North Korea, where two million ethnic Koreans have long helped feed, house and hide those fleeing North Korea. Last month China sent 150,000 soldiers to replace the border guards, a measure viewed in the rescuer community as a crackdown on border crossings. The four or five South Koreans in jail in China for helping refugees have received little help from their government. In contrast, Japan aggressively sought--and got--the release of two of its citizens arrested in China for helping refugees. It's a powerful deterrent for South Koreans who want to help to realize that their government won't come to their aid if they are arrested. In Seoul, a few opposition politicians are finally beginning to turn their attention to human rights in the North. Park Jin, spokesman of the Grand National Party, which holds a majority in the National Assembly, faults the Roh government for ``avoiding the issue.'' His party urges the government to do two things: press China to let the United Nations have access to the refugees and prepare South Korea for a possible flood of refugees. ``We have an obligation to help,'' he says. Another eloquent voice is Kim Suk Woo, former vice minister of unification and now in the powerful post of chief of staff to the speaker of the National Assembly. ``As Koreans, we have a duty to support the refugees. As human beings we have a duty to support them,'' says Mr. Kim. ``This kind of exodus could be a catalyst for the collapse of Kim Jong Il's regime.'' The Roh administration ``is careful not to provoke North Korea,'' he says. He is particularly scornful of Seoul's refusal last April to support a U.N. resolution condemning the North's human-rights abuses. And he criticizes the decision by the government of Kim Dae Jung--continued by the Roh government--to halt the South's air drops of radios into the North. All radios in North Korea must be registered with the authorities and permanently tuned to government stations. A South Korean radio is a listening post on freedom. There's a debate in Seoul over Mr. Hwang's motives in calling attention to the North's human-rights abuses. Some believe him to be sincere; others say he is looking for publicity. But still others suggest the defector could be driven by guilt over what happened after he left Pyongyang. Information doesn't readily make its way out of North Korea. But when it's useful to his purposes, Kim Jong Il makes sure certain news is delivered. And so the word has filtered back to Mr. Hwang in Seoul about the fate of the family he had left behind. His wife committed suicide. So too, the reports say, did one of his daughters. She is said to have jumped off a bridge to her death while being taken to a prison camp. Two other daughters and a son are lost in the gulag. This is the reality of life in North Korea--and the truth that Mr. Hwang will be telling in Washington this week.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2620, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2003. I want to particularly commend the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) for his leadership in Congress and around the world on combatting trafficking but also on all of these issues. Whenever we see the House is ready to take up an issue like trafficking or to help the exploited, whether it be women or children, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) will always be here; the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) will always be there; the gentleman from Illinois' (Mr. Hyde) name will always be on the bill. So I just want to particularly thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) today and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for their efforts with regard to this issue. I also want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) for his work in moving this legislation. All of them, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), have shown great leadership and vision and commitment in human rights on all of these issues. I also want to particularly commend the Office of Trafficking at the State Department. It has done a good job under the leadership of our former colleague, John Miller. John Miller was a great Member of Congress. He represented the Seattle area and used to vote against giving MFN to the barbarians in China because they were persecuting Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Tibetans, the Dalai Lama's people there. Yet John Miller used to get up and always oppose granting MFN and Seattle was ground zero with regard to Boeing. John has done an outstanding job. The State Department produces an annual report that is improved each year on the status of trafficking in every country, and John has played a key, key role. I heard the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) mention it as I was walking in. I want to commend the President of the United States, President George Bush. I was pleasantly surprised, not surprised but pleased, to see the statement that the President made when he addressed the U.N., and he said there is a special evil in the abuse and exploitation of the most innocent and vulnerable. He went on to say we must show new energy in fighting back an old evil, and that is what the bill that the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) are handling today; and he said nearly two centuries after the abolition of the transatlantic slave trade, more than a century after slavery was initially ended in its last stronghold, to trade in human beings for any purpose must not be allowed to thrive in our time. The President was right, and I want to commend and we should commend the President for providing the leadership and putting John Miller where he is and working with the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) to take care of this problem. Also, I would urge at the end we remember in our own city, there are several hundred thousand young women who are sexually trafficked here in the United States. As we tell countries abroad, put pressure on them, we have to make sure we do everything. So modeling what the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) did, we are going to try to have a national conference next year dealing with the issue in our own country so that we can eliminate this, not just reduce it, but eliminate it. So in closing, I urge all Members to support this and want to again thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) because those three each and every time have been down here defending the weak, the vulnerable in our society.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to recognize my constituent Mr. Frank Raflo, of Leesburg, VA, upon his receipt of ``The Hixon Award,'' the highest award presented by Kiwanis International. Frank, referenced fondly by friends and associates as ``Mr. Leesburg,'' has earned the admiration of many for his tireless efforts on behalf of the community. Frank served Leesburg as mayor, county supervisor and chairman of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors. Now in his early eighties he remains active on the Governor's Council of Virginia Towns and writes his weekly column ``Just Being Frank,'' for the Leesburg Today newspaper. In 1957, Frank and some associates founded the Leesburg Kiwanis Club and soon after instituted the Leesburg Halloween Parade, said to be the largest of its kind east of the Mississippi River. No recognition of Frank's contributions to the Leesburg community would be complete without mention of his wife Frances, a source of inspiration and encouragement. I am proud to call attention to the achievements of Frank Raflo as he is honored with this prestigious award. On behalf of the people of Virginia's 10th Congressional District and the Leesburg community, I congratulate Frank for his outstanding contributions to the community.