Child Soldiers Accountability Act of 2008

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Child Soldiers Accountability Act of 2007. This narrowly-tailored bipartisan legislation would make it a crime and a violation of immigration law to recruit or use child soldiers. Congress must ensure that perpetrators who commit this war crime will not find safe haven in our country.

I would like to thank the other original cosponsors of the Child Soldiers Accountability Act, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Senator Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, and Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas. This bill is a product of the Judiciary Committee's new Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law, which is the first ever congressional committee dealing specifically with human rights. I am the Chairman of this Subcommittee and Senator Coburn is its ranking member.

Up to 250,000 children currently serve as combatants, porters, human mine detectors and sex slaves in state-run armies, paramilitaries and guerilla groups around the world. These child soldiers are denied the childhood that our children and grandchildren have and to which every child has an inalienable right. Moreover, their health and lives are endangered.

Children are recruited and used in combat situations because their emotional and physical immaturity makes it easy to mold them into obedient combatants who will witness and partake in horrific violence, often without comprehending their actions. Child soldiers are frequently recruited in areas of long-standing conflict where there are no longer eligible adults for recruitment. In many cases, they are provided with drugs and alcohol to numb them to the atrocities they are required to commit, as well as to increase their dependency upon the armed group.

Children are more likely to be killed, injured or become ill in combat situations than adults. In combat, child soldiers have been forced to the front lines, sent into minefields ahead of older troops or even used for suicide missions.

The devastating effects of war and abuse on the physical, emotional and social development of children are long lasting. Former child soldiers require extensive care and support from family and others in order to be rehabilitated and reintegrated into society. In the absence of such support, former child soldiers may comprise a generation of adults who will perpetuate conflict and undermine security, creating unforeseen challenges that our children will have to address.

There is a clear legal prohibition on recruiting and using child soldiers. Under customary international law, recruitment or use of child soldiers under the age of 15 is a war crime. Over 110 countries, including the United States, have ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which prohibits the recruitment and use of child soldiers under 18.

While there have been positive developments internationally in the prosecution of child soldier recruitment and use, especially by the Special Court for Sierra Leone, the ability of international tribunals or hybrid courts to try these cases is limited. The average perpetrator still runs very little risk of being prosecuted. National courts can and should play a greater role in prosecuting perpetrators.

Unfortunately, recruiting and using child soldiers does not violate U.S. criminal or immigration law. As a result, the U.S. government is unable to punish individuals found in our country who have recruited or used child soldiers. In contrast, other grave human rights violations, including genocide and torture, are punishable under U.S. criminal and immigration law.

This loophole in the law was identified during a hearing entitled ``Casualties of War: Child Soldiers and the Law,'' held by the Senate Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law. Ismael Beah, a former child soldier and author of the bestselling book A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier, testified at this hearing. Mr. Beah said this gap in the law ``saddens me tremendously'' and that closing this loophole ``would set a clear example that there is no safe haven anywhere for those who recruit and use children in war.'' Mr. Beah also posed a moral challenge to all of us:

When you go home tonight to your children, your cousins,

and your grandchildren and watch them carrying out their

various childhood activities, I want you to remember that at

that same moment, there are countless children elsewhere who

are being killed; injured; exposed to extreme violence; and

forced to serve in armed groups, including girls who are

raped (leading some to have babies of commanders); all of

them between the ages of 8 and 17. As you watch your loved

ones, those children you adore most, ask yourselves whether

you would want these kinds of suffering for them. If you

don't, then you must stop this from happening to other

children around the world whose lives and humanity are as

important and of the same value as all children everywhere.

The Child Soldiers Accountability Act will help to ensure that the war criminals who recruit or use children as soldiers will not find safe haven in our country and allow the U.S. government to hold these individuals accountable for their actions.

First, this bill will make it a crime to recruit or use persons under the age of 15 as soldiers. Second, it will enable the government to deport or deny admission to an individual who recruited or used child soldiers under the age of 15.

This legislation will send a clear message to those who recruit or use child soldiers that there are real consequences to their actions. By holding such individuals criminally responsible, our country will help to deter the recruitment and use of child soldiers.

I urge my colleagues to ask themselves the question Ishmael Beah posed: Would we want our children or grandchildren to endure the pain and suffering that Mr. Beah and other child soldiers face? As Mr. Beah reminded us, the lives of child soldiers are just as important as those of our children and grandchildren. We have a moral obligation to take action to help these young people and to stop the abhorrent practice of recruiting and using child soldiers.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, over 2 million families are going to lose their homes in the next few years. Mr. President, 28,000 of those families are in Illinois.

Why?

Because they are stuck in bad mortgages.

Homeowners across America don't need to hear from me to know that the housing boom has busted. From Wall Street to Main Street, we see the spillover effects on the economy.

I am pleased that in Congress we are now talking about how to tighten lending regulations so we don't repeat this type of market meltdown-- and there is certainly more work to be done on that--but in the meantime, millions of families are stuck in the current mess. They need our help.

It is true that some families knowingly stretched a bit to buy more house than they should have. But many families were sold mortgages they couldn't afford by unscrupulous brokers. Some families were given faulty appraisals, only to find later that their homes weren't worth as much as they thought. Still other families have been hit with a mountain of excessive fees that have pushed them over the edge.

Regardless of the reason, a family pushed into foreclosure is a disaster for the homeowner and the surrounding community, and it is a bad deal for the banks as well.

That is why I am introducing the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act, which will help around 600,000 families who have nowhere else to turn to save their homes.

I support the constructive efforts of all of my Democratic colleagues in both the Senate and the House to deal with this crisis, and with this bill I add one more targeted solution to that list.

Bankruptcy should be the last resort, to be sure, but this change in how family homes are treated in bankruptcy will help hundreds of thousands of families who would otherwise be out on the street.

Today, a bankruptcy judge in Chapter 13 can change the structure of any secured debt, except for a mortgage on a principal residence. When this exception was added to the law in 1978, mortgages were largely 30- year fixed rate loans that required 20 percent down and were originated by a local banker who personally knew the homeowner. In 1978, it was rare for the mortgage to be the source of financial difficulty that sent a family into bankruptcy.

The mortgage market has changed since then, to put it mildly. Now, unregulated out-of-town mortgage brokers can sell exotic ``no-doc,'' ``interest-only,'' ``2-28,'' or other mortgages to families, with few questions asked. The mortgages are then securitized by big banks and sold into the secondary market to investors who have no knowledge of the homeowner's financial situation. Risk is dispersed, but so is responsibility.

In 1978, when a family realized it might begin having trouble making the house payments, it could go down to the local bank and work out a new plan to keep up. Today, families struggle to even get a straight answer on the phone.

As the New York Times documented on Sunday, one homeowner made around 670 phone calls to her loan servicer over a 3-month period in an attempt to work out a modified mortgage that she could pay and that would still be profitable to the bank. She spoke to 14 different people and received nine different answers on how she should proceed. Community activists confirm that this type of struggle is not unusual. For millions of families who are nearing foreclosure, this just isn't good enough.

We need another solution for families that aren't being helped by their bank.

If mortgages on vacation homes and family farms can be modified in bankruptcy, why can't mortgages on primary homes?

My bill would allow bankruptcy judges to work out payment plans with homeowners and banks and would also protect families from excessive fees.

The bill would help families who are at risk of losing their homes. But it also protects property values for every other family on that block. In fact, this change in the way mortgages are handled in bankruptcy would save an estimated $72.5 billion in existing property values for the neighborhood, since each foreclosure on a neighborhood block reduces the property value for every other family on that block.

As for the banks? Foreclosures cost banks around $50,000 to process, so every home saved from foreclosure represents a good deal for them too. My bill would allow judges to modify mortgages only in ways that would still be profitable for the banks and their investors.

Everybody wins, right? Well, the banks are still opposing this bill, so I would like to take a moment to directly address some of the primary complaints that I have heard. There are too many families in need--and this bill makes too much sense--for the bill to be shot down.

While everyone seems to agree on the problem--millions of families are going to lose their homes when the variable rate loans that were originated in 2005 and beyond begin to reset, and fall--some argue that we shouldn't do anything to help these families keep their homes in bankruptcy. I have heard three main complaints, none of which stand up to scrutiny.

The first complaint is that banks are already helping homeowners with their mortgage problems, and so this change is unnecessary.

In fact, the banks aren't doing nearly enough. A recent study by Moody's Investors Service Inc. found that the 16 largest subprime servicers, which manage a combined $950 billion of loans, modified just 1 percent of the loans that were made in 2005 and that reset in January, April, and July. Shouldn't we try to help some of the other 99 percent of homeowners who are at risk of

foreclosure but who could make payments on a different mortgage that is still profitable for the banks?

The second argument is that Congress shouldn't modify the bankruptcy code again so soon after the 2005 amendments were implemented.

However, the changes made to the bankruptcy code in 2005 had nothing to do with mortgages on primary residences. My bill would change elements of the code that date from 1978.

Would the banks argue that the tax code shouldn't be changed in 2007 because a completely unrelated area of the tax code was modified in 2005? Not if they don't want to get laughed out of the Finance Committee room, they wouldn't.

Finally, I have heard that allowing mortgages on principal residences to be modified in bankruptcy would introduce ``uncertainty'' in the market and would cause the market for loans for low-income families to dry up.

But mortgage lending is a hypercompetitive market. There is no evidence to suggest that a full-scale exodus will occur because of a change to the bankruptcy law. Banks are still willing to lend for vacation homes and family farms and those mortgages can be modified in bankruptcy, so this argument has no basis in fact.

As a spokesman from JP Morgan Chase said in the American Banker: ``It is always in the best interest of the servicer, the borrower, and the investors if we can modify a loan, because foreclosure means there's no chance the investor is going to recoup their money.'' It should make no difference if a modification is agreed to outside of the context of bankruptcy or within it, if the modification itself is identical.

I would like to conclude by noting that only families that desperately need this help will file for bankruptcy, and only reasonable mortgages will result. My bill has been carefully constructed to avoid unintended consequences in several ways:

First, families that are helped by these changes to the law have to live within the strict IRS spending guidelines for Chapter 13 filers. Families that don't desperately need the help will be very unlikely to try to take advantage of this provision.

Second, every mortgage restructured by a bankruptcy judge will be a better deal for the banks and investors than foreclosure. The minimum value of the mortgage in a restructured deal would be the fair market value of the home, which is the same price the bank would earn if it sold the house after a foreclosure. Plus, the banks will avoid the average of $50,000 in foreclosure fees.

Finally, giving bankruptcy judges the flexibility to restructure mortgages should provide an incentive for banks and investors to do more to restructure mortgages outside of bankruptcy, which is in everyone's best interest.

I repeat that quote from a major bank: ``It is always in the best interest of the servicer, the borrower, and the investors if we can modify a loan, because foreclosure means there's no chance the investor is going to recoup their money.''

I agree. It shouldn't be so hard for customers to modify their loans outside of bankruptcy since it's in everyone's best interest to do so. But allowing families to modify loans within bankruptcy as a last resort so they can keep their homes is the right thing to do.

This bill is supported by the AARP, ACORN, AFL-CIO and SEIU, the Center for Responsible Lending, the Consumer Federation of America, NAACP and La Raza, the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys, the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, and many others.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I look forward to helping families save their homes. Over the next few years, hundreds of thousands of families will desperately need it.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I am going to make a short statement in reference to S. 2135. After that statement, I will ask to lay before the Senate a Message from the House with respect to that.

I would like to say at the outset that this bill, S. 2135, is known as the Child Soldiers Accountability Act.

In January of 2007, at the beginning of this Congress, the Senate Judiciary Committee embarked on an experiment, establishing a new subcommittee, called the Human Rights and the Law Subcommittee. It was the first time in the 219-year history of the Senate that a subcommittee or committee focused specifically on the issue of human rights was formed.

I thank Senator Patrick Leahy, the Chairman of the Judiciary committee, for giving me the opportunity to serve as the first chairman of the Human Rights and the Law Subcommittee.

Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, is the ranking member of the subcommittee. Senator Coburn and I disagree on many issues, but we have formed an unusual partnership in this subcommittee, working across party lines to address some of the most urgent human rights crises in the world.

One of the first hearings we held focused on the scourge of child soldiers.

We learned that up to 250,000 children currently serve as combatants, porters, human mine detectors and sex slaves in state-run armies, paramilitaries and guerilla groups around the world.

Under treaties that we have ratified, there is a clear legal prohibition on recruiting and using child soldiers. But, as we learned at our hearing, recruiting and using child soldiers does not violate U.S. criminal or immigration law.

Senator Coburn and I introduced the Child Soldiers Accountability Act to close this loophole in the law. This legislation will make it illegal under U.S. criminal and immigration law to recruit or use child soldiers.

This bipartisan bill will ensure that those who recruit or use children as soldiers will not find safe haven in our country. It will give the U.S. Government the tools to prosecute or deport the war criminals who commit this horrible human rights abuse.

The Child Soldiers Accountability Act passed the Senate unanimously last December. The Judiciary Committee in the House of Representatives held a hearing on the bill and made some thoughtful revisions. Earlier this week, the House passed the legislation unanimously. Now, the Senate is poised to send it to President Bush for his signature.

I would like to thank all of my colleagues in the Senate for supporting the Child Soldiers Accountability Act, especially, Senator Coburn, the bill's lead Republican cosponsor; Judiciary Committee Chairman Leahy, a cosponsor who helped shepherd the bill through the Committee; and Senators Russ Feingold and Sam Brownback, the bill's other original cosponsors

I would also like to thank Members of the House of Representatives for their support, especially John Conyers and Lamar Smith, the chairman and ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee; Bobby Scott and Louie Gohmert, the chairman and ranking member of the Crime Subcommittee; and Zoe Lofgren and Steve King, the chairman and ranking member of the House Immigration Subcommittee.

At our hearing on child soldiers, we heard moving testimony from a remarkable young man named Ismael Beah. Mr. Beah is a former child soldier and author of the bestselling book ``A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy

Soldier.'' Mr. Beah said the Child Soldiers Accountability Act ``would set a clear example that there is no safe haven anywhere for those who recruit and use children in war.'' Mr. Beah also posed a challenge to all of us:

When you go home tonight to your children, your cousins,

and your grandchildren and watch them carrying out their

various childhood activities, I want you to remember that at

that same moment, there are countless children elsewhere who

are being killed; injured; exposed to extreme violence; and

forced to serve in armed groups, including girls who are

raped. . . . As you watch your loved ones, those children you

adore most, ask yourselves whether you would want these kinds

of suffering for them. If you don't, then you must stop this

from happening to other children around the world whose lives

and humanity are as important and of the same value as all

children everywhere.

We have a moral obligation to respond to Mr. Beah's challenge. I hope the Child Soldiers Accountability Act is one small step towards ending the scourge of child soldiers.

Madam President, this narrowly tailored bipartisan legislation would make it a crime and a violation of immigration law to recruit or use child soldiers. Congress must ensure that perpetrators who use children to wage war are held accountable and do not find safe haven in our country.

The Child Soldiers Accountability Act passed the Senate unanimously in December 19, 2007. On September 8, 2008, the House passed the bill unanimously with modest revisions. Now the Senate is poised to pass this.

I would like to again thank all of my colleagues in the Senate who have worked with me to enact the Child Soldiers Accountability Act, especially, Senator Tom Coburn, the bill's lead Republican cosponsor and the Ranking Member of the Human Rights and the Law Subcommittee, which I chair; Senator Patrick Leahy, a cosponsor of this bill and Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who has been a leader on this and so many other human rights issues; Senator Russell Feingold, and Senator Sam Brownback, the bill's other original cosponsors; and Senators Christopher Dodd, John Kerry, Blanche Lincoln, Barack Obama, and Robert Menendez, the bill's other sponsors.

I would also like to thank members of the House of Representatives who worked diligently to revise and pass the Child Soldiers Accountability Act with overwhelming bipartisan support, especially Representatives John Conyers and Lamar Smith, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee; Representatives Bobby Scott and Louie Gohmert, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Subcommittee; and Representatives Zoe Lofgren and Steve King the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law Subcommittee.

Of all the unspoken casualties of war, the use of children as soldiers is among the most heartbreaking and horrific. Up to 250,000 children are currently serving as soldiers around the world. State-run armies, paramilitaries and guerrilla groups use these girls and boys-- some as young as 7 or 8 years old--as combatants, porters, sex slaves, spies and human mine detectors. These child soldiers are denied the childhood that our children and grandchildren have and to which every child has an inalienable right.

In Burma, Chad, Somalia, Sudan and Uganda, government forces continue to recruit children, often through intimidation, coercion and violence. Government forces in countries such as Burundi, Colombia and the Democratic Republic of Congo often use children as spies or informants. Government-backed militias in the Darfur region of Sudan, Sri Lanka and Cote d'Ivoire use children in hostilities. Armed groups in Colombia, Cote d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of Congo and northern Uganda have raped girl soldiers and subjected them to other forms of abuse. A senior officer in the Chadian National Army summed up the cold calculus that drives government forces and armed groups to continue this abhorrent practice:

Child soldiers are ideal because they don't complain, they

don't expect to be paid, and if you tell them to kill, they

kill.

Despite all of this, there are signs that the world is beginning to rise to the challenge of stopping the use of children in armed conflict. Since 2004, there has been a decrease in the number of conflicts in which children are directly involved, from 27 in 2004 to 17 by the end of 2007. More than 110 countries, including the United States, have adopted the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict, an international agreement that sets the minimum age for compulsory recruitment of soldiers at 18. International courts have begun prosecuting those who use child soldiers.

While these are important and positive developments, the reality is that war criminals around the world continue to use children to wage war with virtual impunity. The ability of international courts to prosecute those who recruit child soldiers is severely limited. Too many perpetrators still believe they are outside the reach of the law. National courts can and must play a greater role in prosecuting perpetrators.

As a nation founded upon the principle of individual freedom and a historical leader on human rights, the United States has a special obligation to lead the effort to end the use of child soldiers worldwide.

Unfortunately, recruiting and using child soldiers does not violate U.S. criminal or immigration law. As a result, war criminals who have forced children into combat can find safe haven in the U.S. and our government has no power to prosecute them. In contrast, other grave human rights violations, including genocide and torture, are punishable under U.S. criminal and immigration law.

I introduced the Child Soldiers Accountability Act to close this loophole. This bill will make it a crime to recruit or use persons under the age of 15 as soldiers. It will also enable the government to deport or deny admission to an individual who recruited or used child soldiers under the age of 15.

Only a handful of countries have passed legislation creating criminal penalties for the use or recruitment of child soldiers to date. By enacting this legislation, the United States will lead the way towards a future where war criminals who recruit or use child soldiers will not find safe haven anywhere in the world. We will send a clear message to those adults who deliberately recruit or use children to wage war that there are real consequences for their actions.

By holding such individuals criminally responsible, our country will help to deter the recruitment and use of child soldiers. This bill will provide an important new tool to the Domestic Security Section in the Justice Department's Criminal Division, which bears primary responsibility for criminal prosecutions of human rights abusers.

We can help to end impunity for the recruitment and use of child soldiers by deporting or denying admission to foreign perpetrators and working with their home governments to ensure they will be prosecuted upon return. There have been only a few international and national prosecutions for child soldier use or recruitment to date. Under the Child Soldiers Accountability Act, an individual who recruited or used child soldiers need not have been convicted of doing so in order to be denied admission or deported. Requiring a conviction would allow those who use children to wage war to benefit from the prevailing impunity for this crime.

Recognizing that perpetrators often use drugs, threats, violence or other means to pressure child soldiers into committing serious human rights violations, including the recruitment of other children, this legislation seeks to hold adults accountable for their actions and is not intended to make inadmissible or deportable child soldiers who participated in the recruitment of other children. This legislation should not be interpreted as placing new restrictions on or altering the legal status of former child soldiers who are seeking admission to or are already present in the United States.

Former child soldiers should be treated as victims and should not be subjected to punitive measures for offenses they committed while they were children. Effectively rehabilitating and reintegrating child soldiers into society requires extensive care and support from family and others. In the absence of such support, former child soldiers

may become a generation of adults that will perpetuate conflict and undermine security, creating unforeseen challenges that our children will have to address.

Last month, at the Beijing Olympic Games, Lopez Lomong, who was abducted at the age of six to be trained as a child soldier in Sudan, carried the United States flag at the opening ceremony. Mr. Lomong escaped the militia camp where he was held with three other boys and, after ten years at a refugee camp, resettled in the United States with a family in New York and went on to represent the United States at the Olympics. This incredible journey shows us how important it is to provide opportunities to those children who have been recruited or used to serve as combatants.

Recruiting and using child soldiers is morally wrong and must be stopped. Unfortunately, neither moral suasion nor international agreements has brought this abhorrent practice to an end. We must end impunity for this horrific crime by closing the loopholes in our laws and prosecuting those who use or recruit child soldiers as the war criminals they are.

Madam President, I ask the Chair to lay before the Senate a message from the House with respect to S. 2135.

The PRESIDING OFFICER laid before the Senate a message from the House as follows:

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate concur in the House amendment, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the measure be printed in the Record,

Mr. President, I seek recognition to introduce the Homeowners' Mortgage and Equity Savings Act of 2007. In recent years, low interest rates and easily available credit have significantly increased home ownership in this country. The U.S. home ownership rate increased from 64 percent in 1994 to over 69 percent in 2004. The increase has been particularly dramatic among minority groups. During that same period, the home ownership rate among Hispanics and Latinos rose by around 20 percent, to nearly 50 percent. For African Americans, the rate rose by 14 percent, also nearing 50 percent.

However, with interest rates at all-time lows, lenders increasingly offered mortgages to those who previously either would not have qualified for a mortgage or could not have afforded the payments on a mortgage. To do this, lenders offered new types of mortgages designed to keep monthly payments low, at least in the short term. In particular, lenders issued large numbers of adjustable rate mortgages, ``ARMS'', loans that often feature low introductory interest rates that later adjust to significantly higher rates. Lenders also issued no- down-payment or interest-only mortgages, which also often featured low introductory interest rates that later increase significantly.

With the era of easy money and low interest rates over, a crisis looms. Many borrowers with adjustable rate, interest-only or no-down- payment mortgages have been unable to keep up with their monthly mortgage payments that have reset to higher rates. In many cases, resetting interest rates means monthly payments increase by $250 to $300 on a typical $1,200 monthly mortgage. Moreover, many ARMS featured early repayment penalties, making it difficult for homeowners to fix the situation by refinancing and obtaining less risky mortgages.

As a result of resetting interest rates, delinquencies and foreclosures involving ARMs have risen dramatically. Delinquencies and foreclosures have been particularly high among borrowers with weak credit who were issued loans at subprime rates. According to the Mortgage Bankers Association, between the second quarter of 2006 and the second quarter of this year, the percentage of homeowners with subprime ARMs who are seriously delinquent, those who are either more than 90 days past due or in foreclosure, has nearly doubled, from 6.52 to 12.40 percent. The number rose by over 20 percent during the second quarter of this year alone. The Center for Responsible Lending projects that 2.2 million Americans with subprime loans originated between 1998 and 2006 have lost or will lose their home to foreclosure.

While the situation has been most severe for homeowners with subprime loans, the problem now is spreading to those with prime rate loans. In the past year, the percentage of homeowners with prime rate ARMs that were seriously delinquent on their mortgage payments more than doubled from 0.92 to 2.02 percent. According to the Mortgage Bankers Association, in the second quarter of this year, the number of homeowners who got foreclosure notices reached an all time high of 0.65 percent, largely because of increases among homeowners with ARMs, delinquencies and foreclosures for fixed rates mortgages have increased only moderately. The situation will only get worse in coming months as an estimated 2 million homeowners with adjustable rate mortgages see their interest rates reset to much higher rates. According to some sources, a quarter of those homeowners face losing their homes.

In my home State of Pennsylvania, the number of homeowners with subprime ARMs who are seriously delinquent has risen to 13.82 percent, an increase of over 40 percent since this time last year. Among homeowners who qualified for prime rate ARMs, the number who are seriously delinquent has increased to 2.43 percent, an increase of over 50 percent since last year. Especially hard hit is the Allentown- Bethlehem-Easton area, where the foreclosure rate for subprime loans originated in 2006 is 20 percent.

In some cases, borrowers made bad decisions by ignoring the risk and taking on mortgages they knew someday they might not be able to afford. In other cases, it appears that borrowers were steered to riskier mortgages when they qualified for safer options. There is also evidence that lenders failed to fully disclose the risks involved with certain mortgages and instead emphasized low monthly payments. The push to issue subprime and adjustable rate mortgages was aggravated by Wall Street investors chasing high rates of return on the secondary market.

Many homeowners facing foreclosure will seek relief in bankruptcy. Bankruptcy has traditionally provided a second chance for borrowers by giving them relief from their creditors. Chapter 13 in particular has enabled homeowners facing foreclosure to keep their homes. Chapter 13 gives debtors breathing space by imposing a stay on collection of debts, including mortgages, which prevents lenders from foreclosing for a period of time. During that time, debtors are given an opportunity to get caught up on their mortgage payments. Finally, Chapter 13 makes it more likely that debtors will be able to make their mortgage payments over the long term by giving them a discharge from many of their other debts.

However, the drafters of the bankruptcy code never anticipated the current crisis where so many face possible bankruptcy, not because of consumer debts, but because of their mortgages. When the current bankruptcy code was drafted in the late 1970s, most homeowners had traditional 30-year fixed rate mortgages with substantial down payments. As a result, few homeowners faced bankruptcy because of their mortgage. As such, the drafters did not see a need for bankruptcy judges to have the power to alter the terms of mortgages on primary residences.

Given the fact that so many homeowners now face foreclosure and possible bankruptcy because of their mortgages, I believe Congress should take action. I am therefore introducing a targeted bill which will allow bankruptcy courts to provide relief to homeowners caught up in the current crisis. The bill will provide relief for low-income homeowners who, because of changed circumstances, can no longer afford their mortgages. Easily available credit made homeownership a reality for many lower income Americans. It is these same homeowners who are the ones now caught up in the credit crunch and facing the loss of their homes.

The bill will allow bankruptcy judges to provide relief by restructuring the mortgage terms that have created the biggest problems for homeowners. Most importantly, the bill will allow bankruptcy judges to prevent or delay interest rate increases as well as to roll back interest rates that have already reset. This will make it possible for many more debtors to hold onto their homes in the long run.

The bill also will allow bankruptcy judges to waive early repayment or prepayment penalties. Many lenders impose large penalties on homeowners that repay their mortgages early, penalties that prevent many homeowners from refinancing and switching to a sounder mortgage. These penalties are particularly egregious since they don't reflect any increased risk taken on by the lender. They are merely intended to discourage borrowers from making a better choice for themselves by switching to another loan.

This bill is not a bailout and it is not aimed at those who knew the risk and proceeded anyway. When housing prices were rising, speculators bid up the prices of homes hoping to quickly sell them for an easy profit. With prices falling, many of those speculators find themselves with properties worth less than what they paid. These speculators took the risk that housing prices would fall and now must live with the downside of that risk.

The bill will allow judges to write down the principal value of the loan, but only if both the debtor and creditor agree. Giving judges discretion to write down the principal value of loans could provide a significant windfall to those who gambled that housing prices would never fall, including speculators. That is a gamble lenders and future homeowners should not be forced to finance.

Taking too broad an approach to this problem will only hurt future borrowers. Allowing bankruptcy judges free rein to rewrite mortgage loans will only increase the risk that lenders take on when they issue mortgages. Investors respond to increased risk by insisting on higher rates of return and

mortgage lenders must respond in kind by raising their rates. That will only make it more difficult for those Americans who wish to become homeowners in the future.

In the longer run, the market will correct some of what has gone wrong. The number of risky loans being issued has already declined dramatically, in large part because investors are refusing to provide the liquidity necessary to issue such loans. In addition, as predatory or fraudulent practices come to light, the Congress, and in particular the Banking Committee, should take action to prevent such practices from occurring in the future.

I urge my colleagues to join me in offering relief for those who are caught up in the current crisis and face losing their homes.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 2135) to prohibit the recruitment or use of child soldiers, to designate persons who recruit or use child soldiers as inadmissible aliens, to allow the deportation of persons who recruit or use child soldiers, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, let me note what a tragedy it is that we have to stand on the floor of the House in 2008 to speak about the exploitation of children as soldiers. Up to 250,000 children are exploited each day around the world in state-run armies, paramilitaries and guerilla groups. These child soldiers, boys and girls as young as 8 years old, are forced to serve as combatants and human mine detectors. They are often used to conduct suicide missions, and many are used as sex slaves. In fact, we have seen many of them turn themselves in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Colombia. In many cases they are provided with drugs and alcohol to numb them to the atrocities they are required to commit. In all cases, their childhoods are taken from them, their health and lives are endangered, and their psyches are destroyed.

It is a war crime under customary international law to recruit or use children under 15 years of age as soldiers.

I am reminded of an early amendment when I first came to the United States Congress that I added to an appropriations bill that we should restrain the use of appropriations foreign aid for those countries that would not commit to releasing their child soldiers. It is an ongoing and persistent problem.

It is a violation of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which 110 countries, including the U.S., have ratified, to recruit or use child soldiers under the age of 18. But such actions do not currently violate U.S. criminal or immigration law. We are thus hindered in our ability to prevent those who use or recruit child soldiers from coming to our country, and we are unable to punish those perpetrators who make it here. In contrast, other grave human rights violations, including torture, are punishable under U.S. criminal and immigration law.

The Child Soldier Accountability Act of 2008 would correct this disparity by making it a Federal crime and violation of immigration laws to recruit or use child soldiers under the age of 15.

This bipartisan legislation was sponsored in the Senate by Senators Dick Durbin and Tom Coburn, the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law. They worked together on this bill to ensure that war criminals who would exploit children cannot find safe haven in our country.

The bill we vote on today is slightly changed from the bill that was sent to us by the Senate. It now includes changes agreed to in bipartisan and bicameral discussions between Senators Durbin, Coburn, Jon Kyl and Jeff Sessions, as well as numerous House Members, including Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers and Ranking Member Lamar Smith, Crime Subcommittee Chairman Bobby Scott and Ranking Member Louie Gohmert, and Immigration Subcommittee Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren and Ranking Member Steve King.

The United States must hold accountable the war criminals who steal the childhood of innocents by turning them into killers or human fodder. I thus urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to yield such time as he may consume to the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime of the House Judiciary Committee, Bobby Scott of Virginia.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

By listening to my two colleagues from Iowa and from Virginia, you can see the commonality of viewpoints on this persistent and cancerous aspect of our world society, the continuous use of child soldiers.

I offer to my colleagues the words of a child soldier, and I read them as follows:

``My parents refused to give me to the LITE, so about 15 of them came to my house. It was both men and women in uniforms with rifles and guns in holsters. I was fast asleep when they came to get me at one point in the morning. These people dragged me out of the house. My father shouted at them, saying, `What is going on?' Some of the LITE soldiers took my father away towards the woods and beat him. They also pushed my mother onto the ground when she tried to stop them.''

This girl was recruited by the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka at age 16.

Another story from a young child:

``Early on, when my brothers and I were captured, the LRA explained to us that all five brothers couldn't serve in the LRA because we would not perform well. So they tied up my two younger brothers and invited us to watch. Then they beat them with sticks until two of them died. They told us it would give us strength to fight. My youngest brother was 9 years old.''

Martin, recruited by the Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda at age 12.

This legislation of course is long overdue. And I would ask my colleagues to consider that it may be time after time and year after year that we have to continue to pass this legislation, but I would hope that we would be persistent, hope that the President signs this legislation, and, as well, that we can stamp out the cancer of using and victimizing these wonderful children.

I would like to submit these statements into the Record from Human Rights Watch: Child Soldiers, The Voices of Child Soldiers.

the voices of child soldiers

``The section leader ordered us to take cover and open

fire. There were seven of us, and seven or ten of the enemy.

I was too afraid to look, so I put my face in the ground and

shot my gun up at the sky. I was afraid their bullets would

hit my head. I fired two magazines, about forty rounds. I was

afraid that if I didn't fire the section leader would punish

me.''--Khin Maung Than, recruited by Burma's national army at

age eleven.

``My parents refused to give me to the LTTE so about

fifteen of them came to my house--it was both men and women,

in uniforms, with rifles, and guns in holsters. . . . I was

fast asleep when they came to get me at one in the morning. .

. . These people dragged me out of the house. My father

shouted at them, saying, ``What is going on?'' but some of

the LTTE soldiers took my father away towards the woods and

beat him. . . . They also pushed by mother onto the ground

when she tried to stop them.''--girl recruited by the Tamil

Tigers in Sri Lanka at age sixteen.

``I was captured in Lofa County by government forces. The

forces beat me, they held me and kept me in the bush. I was

tied with my arms kept still and was raped there. I was

fourteen years old. . . . After the rape, I was taken to a

military base. . . . I was used in the fighting to carry

medicine. During the fighting I would carry medicine on my

head and was not allowed to talk. I had to stand very still.

I had to do a lot of work for the soldiers, sweeping,

washing, cleaning. During this time, I felt really bad. I was

afraid, I wanted to go home, but was made to stay with the

soldiers.''--Evelyn, recruited in Liberia by government

forces at age fourteen.

``I had a friend, Juanita, who got into trouble for

sleeping around. We had been friends in civilian life and we

shared a tent together. The commander said that it didn't

matter that she was my friend. She had committed an error and

had to be killed. I closed my eyes and fired the gun, but I

didn't hit her. So I shot again. The grave was right nearby.

I had to bury her and put dirt on top of her. The commander

said, ``You did very well. Even though you started to cry,

you did well. You'll have to do this again many more times,

and you'll have to learn not to cry.''--Angela, joined the

FARC-EP in Colombia at age twelve.

``Early on when my brothers and I were captured, the LRA

explained to us that all five brothers couldn't serve in the

LRA because we would not perform well. So they tied up my two

younger brothers and invited us to watch. Then they beat them

with sticks until two of them died. They told us it would

give us strength to fight. My youngest brother was nine years

old.''--Martin, recruited by the Lord's Resistance Army in

Uganda at age twelve.

I ask my colleagues to enthusiastically support this particular legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Child Soldiers Accountability Act of 2007. This narrowly tailored bipartisan legislation would make it a crime and a violation of immigration law to recruit or use child soldiers. Congress must ensure that perpetrators who use children to wage war are held accountable and do not find safe haven in our country.

I would like to thank the other original cosponsors of the Child Soldiers Accountability Act, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Senator Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, and Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas. This bill is a product of the Judiciary Committee's new Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law, which is the first ever congressional committee or subcommittee dealing specifically with human rights. I am the chairman of this Subcommittee and Senator Coburn is its ranking member.

The use of child soldiers has been reported in 21 ongoing or recent conflicts throughout the world since 2001, including conflicts in Colombia, Uganda, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sri Lanka. The proliferation of small arms, particularly lightweight automatic weapons that can be used by children as easily as by adults, has contributed to the increased use of child soldiers. Child soldiers are often used in conflicts where high desertion rates and insufficient volunteers have generated a shortage of soldiers.

For example, Burma is believed to be one of the countries with the largest number of child soldiers in the world. Burmese military recruiters reportedly buy and sell children in a desperate effort to meet recruitment quotas in a setting where low morale, high desertion rates and insufficient volunteers have created a military personnel crisis. In a report to the U.N. Security Council on children and armed conflict in Burma issued last month, the Secretary General stated that there has been tremendous pressure to accelerate recruitment rates in the Burmese armed forces and that recruitment centers have experienced difficulty meeting their quotas. The U.N. Secretary General's report also found that some children picked up by police in Burma without national identification cards are told they can ``choose'' to be arrested or enlist in the army. According to another report, children constitute a large percentage of privates in some of the new Burmese army battalions and some have been forced to participate in human rights abuses, including burning villages.

One Burmese boy was reportedly forcibly recruited twice by the time he was 16 years old. This boy was allegedly sold to a battalion by a corporal for approximately US$15, a sack of rice and a tin of cooking oil. When this boy's aunt and grandmother sought his release, the captain of the battalion company apparently said he would let the boy go in exchange for five new recruits. The boy reportedly told his aunt that he didn't want five other people to have to face what he had experienced in the army.

There is a clear legal prohibition on recruiting and using child soldiers. Under customary international law, recruitment or use of child soldiers under the age of 15 is a war crime. Over 110 countries, including the United States, have ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which prohibits the recruitment and use of child soldiers under 18.

Over the last few years, significant progress has been made in the prosecution of child soldier recruitment and use by international courts. In 2005, the International Criminal Court issued its first arrest warrants for five Lord's Resistance Army commanders from Uganda for, among other crimes, enlisting

children as soldiers by two of the commanders. In February 2006, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Thomas Lubanga for the war crime of ``conscripting and enlisting children under the age of 15 years and using them to participate actively in hostilities.'' Mr. Lubanga, the first person to be arrested by the International Criminal Court, allegedly recruited children as young as ten years old to fight for the Union of Congolese Patriots in the northeastern region of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

In June 2007, the Special Court for Sierra Leone became the first international court to issue convictions for child soldier recruitment, finding three defendants guilty of crimes that included conscripting or enlisting children under the age of 15. In August 2007, the Special Court for Sierra Leone found another defendant guilty of using child soldiers.

Despite these positive developments, the ability of international tribunals or hybrid courts to try these cases is limited. The average perpetrator still runs very little risk of being prosecuted. National courts can and should play a greater role in prosecuting perpetrators.

Unfortunately, recruiting and using child soldiers does not violate U.S. criminal or immigration law. As a result, the U.S. government is unable to punish individuals found in our country who have recruited or used child soldiers. In contrast, other grave human rights violations, including genocide and torture, are punishable under U.S. criminal and immigration law.

This loophole in the law was identified during ``Casualties of War: Child Soldiers and the Law,'' a hearing held by the Senate Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law. Ishmael Beah, a former child soldier and author of the bestselling book A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier, testified at this hearing. Mr. Beah said this gap in the law ``saddens me tremendously'' and that closing this loophole ``would set a clear example that there is no safe haven anywhere for those who recruit and use children in war.''

The Child Soldiers Accountability Act will help to ensure that the war criminals who recruit or use children as soldiers will not find safe haven in our country and will allow the U.S. Government to hold these individuals accountable for their actions.

First, this bill will make it a crime to recruit or use persons under the age of 15 as soldiers. Second, it will enable the government to deport or deny admission to an individual who recruited or used child soldiers under the age of 15.

This legislation will send a clear message to those adults who deliberately and actively recruit or use children to wage war that there are real consequences to their actions. By holding such individuals criminally responsible, our country will help to deter the recruitment and use of child soldiers.

Recognizing that adults often use drugs, threats, or other means to pressure child soldiers into committing serious human rights violations, including the recruitment of other children, this legislation seeks to hold adults accountable for their actions and is not intended to make inadmissible or deportable former child soldiers who participated in the recruitment of other children.

Former child soldiers require extensive care and support from family and others in order to be rehabilitated and reintegrated into society. As Mr. Beah testified, ``[h]ealing from the war was a long-term process that was difficult but very possible . . . Effective rehabilitation of children is in itself a preventive measure, and this should be the focus, not punitive measures against children that have no beneficial outcome for the child and society.'' This legislation should not be interpreted as placing new restrictions on or altering the legal status of former child soldiers who are seeking admission or are already present in the United States.

I urge my colleagues to ask themselves the question Ishmael Beah posed: Would we want our children or grandchildren to endure the pain and suffering that Mr. Beah and other child soldiers face? As Mr. Beah reminded us, the lives of child soldiers are just as important as those of our children and grandchildren. We have a moral obligation to take action to help these young people and to stop the abhorrent practice of recruiting and using child soldiers.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.