Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, Terry Schiavo smiles, tries to talk to her family and friends, and moves her arms and legs on command. But at the direction of her husband, and against the will of the rest of the family, her feeding tube was removed last Wednesday.

This is what Terri is experiencing right now in this, the 7th day of her court-ordered dehydration and starvation: Extreme thirst, nausea and stomach cramping, dry skin, dizziness, extreme headaches, cramping in her arms and legs because she is losing electrolytes, sodium and potassium in her blood. Her mouth is very dry. Her saliva is thick.

And as the abuse continues, soon her lips and her mouth will crack, she will bleed, and her heart rate will increase, her blood pressure will drop, and she will probably experience stroke. She will finally go into shock as her whole body begins to shut down.

No one, Mr. Speaker, deserves to be treated with such incredible cruelty. Terri's life is valuable and she should not be sentenced to death because she has a disability or someone feels she is a burden.

Hopefully, the Florida Legislature will act in time and the Governor will intervene.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence) for his leadership in realizing that we need to accelerate our efforts to inform, to enlighten, and hopefully to motivate America to stand up on behalf of life, to let women know that there are alternatives. We spoke the other day, actually the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence) and I and a few others, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks), and we cosponsored a forum on women who had had abortions. As a matter of fact it was called Women Deserve Better, and we were able to hear from four very brave women, including Jennifer O'Neil and Melba Moore and others, who told their stories of having had abortions and the horrific consequences to their emotions, to their bodies, to their psychological health as a direct result of that abortion.

And the abortion lobby would like to have us believe that this is something that is benign, and it is anything but. It is an ugly, very destructive act that is committed upon her unborn child, and women are the co-victims of every abortion. We know that the baby is either chemically poisoned, or he or she is dismembered as a result of the abortion; but we also know that the woman carries with her a terrible price that goes on year in and year out, and regrettably the abortion lobby enables that and somehow suggests that she ought to be happy with that decision.

And what we are trying to say is that there is reconciliation. The Women Deserve Better campaign is trying to reach out to those women who are suffering in carrying the burden of that abortion and to say that there is hope, there is reconciliation, and there is life after an abortion; but they need to come to terms with it. And I would encourage all those women who are perhaps listening to be in contact with the Women Deserve Better organization or to talk to some others who have direct experience, have experienced an abortion themselves and can bring, like I said, some reconciliation to them because, again, there needs to be that, I think, individually and collectively in America if we are to go forward.

Let me also point out, as my good friend and colleague I am sure pointed out, today is truly a historic day having seen the Senate pass by a very wide margin a ban on the gruesome act known as partial-birth abortion where a baby is partially delivered only to have his or her head punctured with scissors in the back of the head and the brains of that tiny innocent baby snuffed out, vacuumed out to complete this horrific procedure known as partial-birth abortion.

Partial-birth abortion, I would respectfully submit, is but the tip of an ugly and unseemly iceberg. Just below the surface, the surface appeal of choice, is a reality almost too horrific and cruel to contemplate, let alone face. Yet we persist in our allusions and denial as a country ever enabled by clever marketing, bias news reporting, and the cheap sophistry of choice. Let us be clear, and I do not think we can say this often enough, abortion is child abuse and it exploits women. Women deserve better than having their babies stabbed or cut or decapitated or poisoned. Women deserve nonviolent, life-affirming positive alternatives to abortion.

Thirty years after Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the companion decision, the national debate on partial-birth abortion has finally pierced the multiple layers of euphemisms and collective denial to reveal child battering in the extreme. The cover-up is over, and the dirty secret concerning abortion methods is finally getting the scrutiny that will usher in reform and protective statutes. I would say to my colleagues that there is nothing compassionate, there is absolutely nothing benign about stabbing babies in the head with scissors so that their brains can be sucked out. That is child abuse. And yet over on the Senate side today and previously here in the House, we had Members for whom I have an enormous amount of respect defending the indefensible. We reach out to them and say, look at what you are saying. If they did this, if they were a young mother and they had a little baby girl, a young child who took her doll and took a pair of scissors and stuck those scissors into the back of the head of that baby, they would get counseling. They would say no, my daughter should not be play-acting that kind of activity. And yet there are Members of this Chamber who embrace, enable, facilitate, and defend that indefensible act on a tiny living baby girl or baby boy.

As the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence) knows and as my colleagues know, the loss of human life to abortion in this country has been staggering; 44.4 million babies have been killed by abortions since Roe v. Wade. And, yes, there were tens of thousands killed even prior to it in those States where abortion had been legalized like New York, like Hawaii, like Oregon, but 44.4 million kids. That is one out of every three of this generation missing. I say to my colleagues, the next time they are in a classroom, look around at the desks, count one, two, then the missing child; one, two, the missing child. This generation, perhaps more than any other in our own history, perhaps any other's history, is missing children who by ``choice'' have been destroyed by an abortionist.

Let me just conclude. On the WorldNetDaily site, there was an article on October 17, and I will just read part of it: ``Attendees of a national conference for abortion providers watched and listened with rapt attention as the inventor of the partial-birth abortion procedure narrated a video of the grizzly procedure, and then they burst into applause when the act was over and the unborn child was destroyed. The disturbing and eye-opening event featuring abortion doctor Martin Haskell, addressing members of the National Abortion Federation, was actually captured on audiotape, calmly and dispassionately describing each step of the process up to and including the insertion of the scissors into the base of the baby's head, followed by the sound of the suction machine sucking out the baby's brain. Dr. Haskell walks his audience through the procedure that opponents hope will finally be banned,'' that is us, ``during this congressional session. At the end of the

procedure,'' the article goes on to say, ``after the late-term fully developed unborn child's life has been violently and painfully terminated, the audience breaks into applause.''

That is sick, I say to my colleagues. These are the providers of abortion. These are the ones that our friends on the other side of this issue will defend passionately. They broke into applause as that baby met his death. That is what partial-birth abortion is all about. It is a horrific, grisly procedure. We are all about life, life affirmation. Thank God we have a President who respects the dignity and the value of each and every life and will sign this legislation into law, unlike his predecessor, Bill Clinton, who on two occasions vetoed this legislation.

And I want to thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence), my friend, for having these times on the floor so that we can begin the process of educating America. Much work needs to be done, and for those people who watch C-SPAN, know this: we care about life, the unborn, the newly born, all of those who are weak and disenfranchised. Many of us are the leaders on human rights, religious freedom, Trafficking Victims Protection Act, and a whole host of other important legislation designed to protect the innocent from the strong, the weak, and the vulnerable from those who would do them harm. That is what it is all about. Government is for the weakest and the most at risk. The unborn in our society are the weakest and the most at risk. Again I thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence), and I yield back to my good friend and colleague.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 6 o'clock and 50 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until Friday, October 24, 2003, at 10 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of H. Res. 356. I thank and commend Mr. Hyde for introducing this resolution commemorating and honoring the memory of victims of an abominable act perpetrated against the people of Ukraine in 1932-33. Seventy years ago, millions of men, women and children were murdered by starvation so that one man, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, could consolidate control over Ukraine. The Ukrainian people resisted the Soviet policy of forced collectivization. The innocent died a horrific death at the hands of a tyrannical dictatorship which had crushed their freedom.

In an attempt to break the spirit of an independent-minded Ukrainian peasantry, and ultimately to secure collectivization, Stalin ordered the expropriation of all foodstuffs in the hands of the rural population. The grain was shipped to other areas of the Soviet Union or sold on the international market. Peasants who refused to turn over grain to the state were deported or executed. Without food or grain, mass starvation ensued. This manmade famine was the consequence of deliberate policies which aimed to destroy the political, cultural and human rights of the Ukrainian people.

In short, food was used as a weapon in what can only be described as an organized act of terrorism designed to suppress a people's love of their land and the basic liberty to live as they choose.

Mr. Speaker, I recall back in the 1980s seeing the unforgettable movie, Harvest of Despair, which depicted the horrors of the Famine, as well as the fine work of the congressionally-created Ukraine Famine Commission, which issued its seminal report in 1988. Their work helped expose the truth about this horrific event. I am pleased that the resolution notes that there were those in the West, including The New York Times correspondent Walter Duranty, who knowingly and deliberately falsified their reports to cover up the Famine because they wanted to curry favor with one of the most evil regimes in the history of mankind.

The fact that this denial of the Famine took place then, and even much later by many scholars in the West is a shameful chapter in our own history.

Mr. Speaker, this is an important resolution which will help give recognition to one of the most horrific events in the last century in the hopes that mass-murders of this kind truly become unthinkable.

Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing H.R. 3260 in bi-partisan collaboration with my colleague, the gentleman from Illinois and Ranking Member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Lane Evans. This bill would augment certain health care business practices and programs of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to achieve greater efficiencies and economies of scale. Other enhancements included in this bill would benefit the Department of Defense (DOD) and VA's nonprofit research corporations. The bill would also extend certain reporting dates and authorities of VA in the provision of health care services to our Nation's veterans. Finally, our bill would authorize the naming of the Prescott, Arizona Veterans Affairs Medical Center for the late Bob Stump, my predecessor as Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, this bill would authorize a five-year extension to VA's authority to provide non-institutional extended care services and required nursing home care to certain veterans. The mounting importance of providing long-term care alternatives to our aging veterans is supported by the projected increase in veterans who are 85 years of age or older from some 644,000 today to 1.3 million within the next decade.

In 1999, Congress enacted the Veterans Millennium Health Care and Benefits Act (Public Law 106-117), requiring VA to operate and maintain certain long-term care programs in nursing home care. This Act also contained initiatives in geriatric evaluation, domiciliary care, adult day health care, respite, palliative and hospice programs. All of these programs are intended to address the growing needs of aging and disabled veterans by both institutional and non-institutional means. The authorities for these programs in the Veterans Millennium Health Care and Benefits Act will expire on December 31, 2003. This legislation would extend these authorities until December 31, 2008.

H.R. 3260 would also allow veterans who are former prisoners of war to receive outpatient dental care from VA, without requiring them to have been in captivity for at least 90 days, as under current law. This bill also would eliminate the requirement under current law that ex- POWs must now pay pharmacy co-payments. These are tangible and justified enhancements showing the gratitude of the nation for the sacrifices of former prisoners of war.

Mr. Speaker, this bill would also streamline the process and notification requirements when VA intends to enter into an enhanced-use lease agreement for better use of underutilized VA property. Initially authorized in 1991, this unique asset management authority allows VA to enter into partnerships with private industry to yield the ``highest and best'' use of VA property for veterans, taxpayers, and the government.

The enhanced-use lease program was created by Congress to allow VA activities to generate revenue, maximize value, minimize costs, and maintain competitiveness by developing health care and long-term care facilities, parking, energy plants, transitional and independent senior housing, assisted living, research and development facilities, child and adult day care and office space (government and commercial) projects in partnerships with private and public entities. Since its inception, the enhanced-use lease program has generated cost savings, private investment, new long-term sources of revenues as well as jobs and expanded tax revenues.

Mr. Speaker, this program represents cost effective, good government. This bill would extend the benefits of the enhanced-use lease program to the Veterans Benefits and National Cemetery Administrations as well as the health care system. Current law limits the program to real estate assets of the Veterans Health Administration. This bill would allow the proceeds to be retained by the Veterans Health Administration, the Veterans Benefits Administration or the National Cemetery Administration, whichever administration initiated and developed the enhanced-use lease project.

This bill would allow the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to extend authority to the Secretary of Defense, beginning in fiscal year 2004, to purchase medical equipment, services and supplies through VA's revolving supply fund. This simple provision would serve to further expand federal purchasing power and enhance economies of scale.

Mr. Speaker, at the request of the Department, this bill would change statutory reporting dates on several reports VA is required to make to Congress. The bill would also provide certain Federal liability coverage to a very specific and small group of employees who work in the nonprofit research corporations authorized in title 38. Congress established these nonprofit corporations to manage non-appropriated research activities, primarily those funded through grants from the National Institutes of Health, philanthropic grants and a variety of clinical and pharmaceutical trials. Congress expanded the role of VA nonprofit corporations in 1999 to include a variety of educational endeavors for VA clinical care staff. Employees of these nonprofit corporations would have liability coverage equivalent to their VA counterparts. The bill would also authorize a five-year extension of the basic authority for these nonprofits through December 31, 2008.

The final provision of this bill is to honor our departed former Chairman, the Honorable Bob Stump. In June of this year, we were saddened by the loss of our former colleague who

served with distinction in Congress for 26 years.

From his enlistment in the Navy during World War II at the age of 16, to his extraordinary leadership as Chairman of the Veterans' Affairs and Armed Services Committees in the House of Representatives, Bob Stump was a true American hero. Chairman Stump used his influence to promote responsible legislation to assist and honor our Nation's veterans, past, present and future.

Under Bob Stump's leadership, Congress increased funding for veterans' health care; expanded access to long term care for aging veterans, including nonhospital alternative care; reformed eligibility standards for access to VA health care; extended the national cemetery system, including Arlington National Cemetery; increased assistance to disabled veterans and their survivors; and strengthened the Montgomery GI Bill that has helped millions of veterans fulfill their educational and career goals.

As his successor as Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I particularly know and appreciate all that he did for our Nation's veterans, service members and their families. A modest man who preferred to shun the spotlight, Bob Stump's lifetime of service to America and our Nation's veterans left this country a better place. I am honored to include in this legislation a provision to name the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Prescott, Arizona as the ``Bob Stump Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center.'' This memorial is a fitting tribute in his beloved home state of Arizona, and will ensure that his legacy will continue to shine brightly for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, the Veterans' Extended Health Care Services and Business Enhancements Act of 2003 is an important measure. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3260 and to work with me and my colleagues on the Committee to advance this legislation this year.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2297) to amend title 38, United States Code, to modify and improve certain benefits for veterans, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2297 as amended, the Veterans Benefit Act of 2003, contains 20 substantive provisions and is a diverse and comprehensive measure with very broad bipartisan support.

This bill will affect veterans and survivors alike.

Among the education provisions, the bill provides for an expansion of the Montgomery GI Bill, the college program, by authorizing educational assistance for on-job training in certain 6-month self-employment training programs. It provides an extension of the delimiting date for survivors' and dependents' education benefits when the eligible individual is involuntarily ordered to full-time National Guard duty. It provides for an extension of the VA's Veterans' Advisory Committee on education through December 31 of 2009 and for the repeal of the VA's obsolete education loan program authorization. This program has not made a loan in the past several years because of other better options in the public and private sector.

The bill would also provide that the remarriage of the surviving spouse of a veteran after attaining the age of 55 would not result in the termination of Dependency and Indemnity Compensation, or the DIC program. It allows a remarried surviving spouse to attain eligibility for burial in a national cemetery based on his or her marriage to a veteran. It makes permanent the State Cemetery Grants Program. It reinstates a VA pilot program to provide vocational training to newly eligible VA nonservice-connected pension recipients.

It increases, Mr. Speaker, the specially adapted automobile grant from $9,000 to $11,000 and increases the specially adapted housing grant from $48,000 to $50,000 for the most severely disabled veterans and from $9,350 to $10,000 for less severely disabled veterans.

The bill also adds cirrhosis of the liver to the list of presumed service-connected disabilities for former prisoners of war.

It eliminates the requirement that a POW be held for 30 days or more to qualify for presumptions of service-connection for certain disabilities: psychosis and any of the anxiety states, organic residuals of frostbite, and post-traumatic osteoarthritis.

It expands benefits eligibility to those children with spina bifida who were born to Vietnam-era veterans who served in an area of Korea near the demilitarized zone between October 1 of 1967 and May 7 of 1975.

Out of concern about spina bifida, Mr. Speaker, I would note parenthetically that the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) and I formed the Congressional Spina Bifida Caucus, which we now co-chair. This caucus is dedicated to improving the health care and overall quality of life for the some 70,000 Americans and their families living with spina bifida, and in a very short time I would again note to my colleagues we have about 20 Members who have joined. And just a little push here in promotion, if they would like to join that spina bifida caucus, we would very much like to have them as part of it.

Let me continue with the bill.

H.R. 2297, as amended, would also make permanent the VA home loan program for members of the Selected Reserve. It reinstates the Department of Veterans Affairs' vendee loan program and provides the full amount of compensation and Dependency and Indemnity Compensation for eligible members of the New Philippine Scouts, who served just after World War II, who are legal residents of the United States. It also provides the full amount of DIC for service in the organized military forces of the Commonwealth of the Philippines, including organized guerrilla units, to individuals who are legal residents of the United States. It extends eligibility for burial in a national cemetery to New Philippine Scouts, as well as eligibility for burial benefits to those who lawfully reside in the United States. It extends the authority of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to maintain a regional office in Manila, Philippines, through December 31 also of 2009.

It mandates that the Department of Labor place staff in veterans' assistance offices at oversees military installations 90 days after the date of enactment, and it expands the list of serious Federal criminal offenses a conviction of which would result in a bar to all VA benefits.

As I mentioned, Mr. Speaker, the bill addresses the needs for former prisoners of war. Current law requires former POWs to have been confined for at least 30 days before they qualify for a presumption of service-connection for certain disabilities. Prisoners of war in more recent conflicts, however, have been interred for shorter periods of time. All the POWs from Operation Iraqi Freedom were confined for less than 30 days, for example.

Because physical and psychological trauma can indeed occur within minutes of capture, let alone days or weeks, H.R. 2297, as amended, would provide a presumption of service-connection disability without regard to length of confinement for certain psychiatric disabilities as well as cold-weather-related injuries and traumatic osteoarthritis.

The bill would also, as I said, add a number of other aspects, and I hopefully have outlined those adequately to the committee.

Let me just say, finally, Mr. Speaker, I really want to congratulate the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Brown), the subcommittee chair of our Subcommittee on Benefits, and the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud), his ranking member, for their outstanding work on this legislation, for doing the hard work, holding the hearings, working out all the different disparate provisions, and then working to bring it together in a bipartisan way so that we can present to this body a bill that we can all be proud of that will tangibly advance the ball when it comes to our veterans. I want to thank them very much for their good hard work and also the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), my good friend and colleague, on whom we have partnered for years now as chairman and ranking member, working on bills to benefit our veterans both on the health care area and benefits area. I want to thank him as well.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Brown), our distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Benefits, and again I want to thank him for his good work on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) who is the vice chairman of the committee and has been, and as the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Brown) pointed out, seven times he has now tried to get the Gold Star Wives' compensation not lost if they were to remarry, and this time we have it in the bill. Last year when we sent it over to the Senate, we lost it, but this time I think the seventh time is the charm, and I thank him for his leadership.

Mr. Speaker, before yielding back, I do want to thank and commend the hard work of committee staff, Devon Seibert, Paige McManus, Darryl Kehrer, Patrick Ryan, Kingston Smith, Jim Holley, Mary Ellen McCarthy, Geoffrey Collver, Leah Booth and so many others who have made this legislation and all the bills that we work cooperatively on with my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), to bring to the floor what we think are quality, well-vetted, very thoughtful pieces of legislation that make the difference in the lives of veterans and their families.

This is another example of that kind of cooperation. This is the way this

body should work, and it is so good to see us again working hand-in- glove in this partnership. Again, I want to thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Brown) and the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud) for their good work as chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee. I urge all Members to support this bill.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, partial birth abortion is but the tip of an ugly and an unseemly iceberg.

Just below the surface, the surface appeal of choice is a reality almost too horrific and cruel to contemplate, let alone face. Yet we persist in our illusions and denial, ever enabled by clever marketing, biased news reporting, and the cheap sophistry of choice.

Let us be clear. Abortion is child abuse, and it exploits women.

Women deserve better than having their babies stabbed, cut, decapitated, or poisoned. Women deserve nonviolent, life-affirming, positive alternatives to abortion.

Thirty years after Roe, the national debate about partial birth abortion has finally pierced the multiple layers of euphemisms and collective denial to reveal child battering in the extreme. The cover- up is over, and the dirty secret concerning abortion methods is finally getting the scrutiny that will usher in reform and protective statutes.

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing compassionate nor benign about stabbing babies in the brain with scissors so their brains can be sucked out. In like manner, there is nothing compassionate or benign about other methods of abortion, like injections of chemical poison that burn and blister or dismemberment by suction machines 20 to 30 times more powerful than household vacuum cleaners.

The loss of children's lives since Roe has been staggering, Mr. Speaker: 44.4 million babies dead. Picture this: Two days ago 56,292 fans packed into Yankee Stadium for the play-offs. The number of children killed since Roe would fill Yankee Stadium to capacity each and every day for 788 days. The shear number of children destroyed is numbing.

Then there is the terrible toll that abortion imposes on women. A new organization, Mr. Speaker, Silent No More, organized by women who have had abortions, including actress Jennifer O'Neill, shatters the myth that abortion somehow benefits women. ``We are the face of women exploited,'' they say.

Women need real love, genuine compassion, and their voice will ultimately be heard. Mr. Speaker, the cover-up is over.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, let me just make this very clear. The other side cannot have it both ways. The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) argue that this legislation will not stop a single abortion, while the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) and the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) took to the floor and argued that it would ban all abortions after 12 weeks. They cannot have it both ways.

Let us be very clear. Let us have intellectual honesty in this debate. We are trying to proscribe a horrific procedure wherein a baby who is partially born, only to have his or her brain jabbed with a scissors or some other sharp instrument and his or her brains are sucked out, thereby killing that child. This was invented by the abortion industry as a way of precluding what they considered a ``dreaded complication,'' that is, late-term abortions where babies actually survive and go on to be adopted in many cases.

There have been many instances where babies survive an hour, 2 hours or longer. Some survive and are adopted, having survived later-term abortions. Partial birth abortion ensures that there is no survivor. They set out to kill the baby. The abortionist succeeds in his task.

Let me also point out that the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), my good friend, argued that partial-birth abortions are performed on

disabled children. First of all, I resent the fact that somebody would suggest that a disabled child ought to be executed in this fashion. The Americans with Disability Act and all the other disability legislation finally brought us to the point where we recognized disabled people as just as human, just as alive, just as entitled to the best possible life imaginable as everyone else. To say that somehow the disabled ought to have this method reserved for them because, of course, they are disabled, I think, is unconscionable.

Let me also say, Ron FitzSimmons from the Abortion lobby made it very clear Pro-Abortion side ``lied through our teeth'' about for whom this method was intended. It is intended for later-term, second-trimester and third-trimester abortions. They lied through their teeth about who it was these were performed on. And how often they are performed.

Most of the kids who are killed with partial-birth abortion methods are perfectly healthy, perfectly normal, and those kids, like their disabled brothers and sisters, should not be executed in this terrible way or in any other way.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my very good friend and colleague not only for his leadership tonight, but for many years on behalf of the rights of the unborn and their mothers. He has been a stalwart. He has been compassionate, and I thank him for his leadership. And I would like to thank my colleagues who have spoken, the two docs, and the other Members who have spoken tonight so eloquently and passionately in favor of protecting the most innocent and the most at-risk minority in America today and that is the unborn children and the other victims of abortion, who every time that victim is the mother, many of whom who have been cast aside. They have been hurt and hurt very severely as a result of abortion.

Just a couple of months ago we hosted, a number of us, a group of four women including Jennifer O'Neil, the actress who was in ``Summer of '42.'' She was a former Cover Girl. Melba Moore, an accomplished singer, four women who have had abortions, who have become part of a group called Silent No More. They have spoken out, and I encourage women who might be listening to this or men or who know someone who has had an abortion and is living with that agony to know that there is hope, there is reconciliation. The pro-life movement has always been about speaking truth to power, to Government and to those who would take the life of an unborn child, but also speaking truth and reconciliation to those women who have been victimized by abortion, including partial-birth abortion. Silentnomoreawareness.org can be accessed through the Web or through contacting our various offices. It is an outstanding means of reaching out to these women who are hurting.

During the course of their conversations, one woman who had two abortions talked about how she had so many sleepless nights. She thought that she could never hold a child again in her hand. Jennifer O'Neil had talked about the pressure that had been put upon her time and again by her family members who thought they were doing something benign and good for her, while actually hurting her severely, unwittingly but nevertheless hurting her severely. And she carried that pain for years, and now speaks out passionately to the women of America to come forward and know that there is reconciliation and to warn other women not to march into that abortion clinic and get a partial-birth abortion or any of the other methods that dismember or chemically poison unborn children.

I just would point out to my colleagues that some 62 years ago, from a podium right up there by the Speaker, Franklin Delano Roosevelt gave his famous speech after the attack on Pearl Harbor and called December 7 ``a day that would live in infamy.'' I would point out to my colleagues that as a result of that, as we all know, some 55 million people around the world lost their lives to that global conflict.

Another day of infamy less visible but no less lethal, the imposition of abortion on demand by the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade on January 22, 1973, has unleashed an assault on innocent human life that is absolutely staggering, about 44.4 million dead babies, children, and counting. The loss of so many innocent children by chemical poisoning, by literal dismemberment and suction machines 20 to 30 times more powerful than an average vacuum machine that all of us

have in our homes, ripping apart that child; and now we see this cruel and unthinkable method where a baby, very late-term, as the doc pointed out a moment ago, third trimester, some in their second trimester but late second trimester, very mature babies where a doctor literally punctures their brains, usually with Metzenbaum scissors, to make a hole so that the baby's brains could be sucked out.

That is pathetic child abuse, and thankfully tomorrow the House, with the leadership of so many Members, especially with our President, will be putting into effect when the Senate finally adopts it as well, which they will, signs this ban into law.

Let me just give an idea of the numbers again, because I think sometimes we, in our entertainment-oriented age and the fact that we can go from one distraction to another, forget how many people have been lost. I mentioned 44.4 million. I am a big Yankee fan.

My team lost to his last night. Yankee Stadium was filled to capacity, 56,292 people. The number of lives that have been lost since Roe v. Wade, 44.4 million, and picture this, it would be like filling Yankee Stadium every single day for 788 days full of children who are then slaughtered. The horrific loss of life, that is a staggering loss of life, is beyond almost any of our comprehensions to grasp, and yet that is what has happened in the 30 years since Roe v. Wade.

It has been done in what seems to be the pristine environment of an abortion clinic. We know that is not often case. Many of these so- called doctors are anything but. They are at the lower level of the medical chain, if you will, food chain, and I have known some abortion doctors, some of whom have actually become pro-life, and they talk about the squalor, the killing that goes on every day and the mental impact it even has on them.

So I just want to say to my colleagues that tomorrow we take, I think, a major step forward in trying to stop some of this killing, and I think the logical among us, the logical people out there in America, will begin connecting the dots and saying if it is so horrific to kill a baby with partial-birth abortion, why is suction okay? Why is D & E and all the other methods that are no less gruesome but a little bit more invisible because they do not happen as late in the stage of the pregnancy and they are not as visible as a partial-birth abortion, why are they any less of an act of child abuse? And this is all about child abuse. Again, there are two victims in every abortion, and my hope is that tomorrow we take a step forward in protecting these children from this cruelty.

I thank my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize one of Congress' newest caucuses--The Congressional Spina Bifida Caucus.

This Congressional Member Organization (CMO) was co-founded and is co-chaired by my good friend Representataive Bart Stupak of Michigan and me. The Congressional Spina Bifida Caucus is dedicated to improving the healthcare and overall quality of life for the 70,000 Americans and their families living with spina bifida.

This year has been a successful year for the patients and families who live with spina bifida, especially the members of the non-profit Spina Bifida Association of America who have done indefatigable work promoting an agenda of hope and research. In addition to securing $2 million to establish the National Spina Bifida Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) earlier this year, a major gathering of leading spina bifida researchers was held here in Washington this past May. The successful conference played a major role in helping to chart the future path of spina bifida research.

Yesterday, we marked another milestone--the official launch and first briefing of the Congressional Spina Bifida Caucus. In very short time, more than 20 Representatives supportive of our mission have joined the caucus. As more Members learn of the mission and legislative focus of the caucus, we are confident they too will join. I look forward to hosting additional informative briefings to better educate both Members and staff about spina bifida.

All of these successes would have been impossible if not for the work of the Spina Bifida Association of America and the Spina Bifida Foundation. Under the Leadership of Foundation President Hal Pote, Association President Alex Brodrick, and CEO Cindy Brownstein, the SBAA has made tremendous strides these past few years in helping all Americans--and their families--who live with spina bifida.

I wish the SBAA the best for continued success and I look forward to continuing to lead efforts in Congress on behalf of spina bifida patients and families.

Mr. Speaker, the murder of Ukrainian investigative journalist Heorhiy Gongadze remains unsolved--three years after he was murdered. On September 16, 2000, Gongadze, editor of ``Ukrainska Pravda'', an Internet news publication critical of high- level corruption in Ukraine, disappeared.

Ukrainian President Kuchma and a number of high-ranking officials have been implicated in his disappearance and the circumstances leading to his murder. Audio recordings exist that contain conversations between Kuchma and other senior government officials discussing the desirability of Gongadze's elimination. Over the last three years, the Ukrainian authorities' handling, or more accurately, mishandling of this case has been characterized by obfuscation and stonewalling.

Last month, a prime suspect in the case, former senior militiaman Ihor Honcharov, who allegedly headed a gang of ex-police accused of several kidnappings and murders, died in police custody under mysterious circumstances. His posthumous letters--which give a detailed account of events surrounding Gongadze's death and which name names-- are now being investigated by the Prosecutor General's office. A few days ago, Prosecutor General Svyatoslav Piskun indicated that some facts in the letters have proved to be true. Reportedly, warrants have been issued for two suspects in the killing.

Mr. Speaker, a credible investigation of this case by Ukrainian authorities is long overdue. At the same time, it is important to stress that not only those who committed the actual crime, but those who ordered it--no matter who they may be--need to be brought to justice.

Unfortunately, the Gongadze case is not an isolated one. The murder, and deaths in suspicious car accidents, of journalists and opposition figures, have become commonplace. Earlier this year, Ukraine's Ombudsman Nina Karpachova asserted that journalism remains among the most dangerous professions in Ukraine, with 36 media employees having been killed over the past ten years, and many more have been beaten, including several within the last few months. This past July, Volodymyr Yefremov, a journalist critical of president Kuchma who worked with the press freedom group Institute of Mass Information (11/41), died in a suspect car accident. Just two weeks ago, Ivan Havdyda, who was head of the Ternopil region branch of the democratic opposition ``Our Ukraine'', was found murdered in Kyiv under questionable circumstances.

Over the last three years, the Helsinki Commission, Members of the House and Senate, Department of State, the OSCE, the Council of Europe and other international institutions repeatedly have raised the Gongadze murder case and urged the Ukrainian authorities to undertake a serious investigation into the this case. The response from Ukrainian officials has done nothing but cast doubt about the Ukrainian Government's commitment to the rule of law. Last year--just to cite one example--Ukrainian authorities blocked FBI experts from examining evidence gathered during the initial investigation, even after promising to accept U.S. technical assistance in the matter.

I also hope that the Ukrainian parliament will take determined action in encouraging governmental accountability for solving the Gongadze and other murders, and bringing those involved to justice.

The lack of a resolution of the Gongadze and other cases of those who have perished under suspicious circumstances has tarnished the credibility of the Ukrainian authorities in dealing with fundamental human rights.

Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the Helsinki Commission and in the strongest possible terms, I once again urge Ukrainian authorities to take seriously the many enduring concerns regarding the circumstances that led to Heorhiy Gongadze's murder and the subsequent investigation.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2595) to restore the operation of the Native American Veteran Housing Loan Program during fiscal year 2003 to the scope of that program as in effect on September 30, 2002.

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

Mr. Speaker, this legislation would restore the operation of the Native American Veteran Housing Loan Program during the current fiscal year to the scope of that program as it was in effect on September 30, 2002.

The Native American Veteran Home Loan Program was established in 1992 as a 5-year pilot program, and Congress has extended it twice, most recently through 2005. This program is intended to assist eligible veterans living on trust or equivalent lands to secure

loans at market rates to purchase, build or to renovate homes. VA has made over 300 home loans under this program. The Department of Veterans Affairs has stopped making loans under the Native American direct loan program because of a limitation contained in the 2003 Appropriations Act, which capped the amount of loans that can be made under this program to $5 million. This limitation was requested by the administration with the assumption that the limit would not be breached. VA advised us as of June 11 in a letter that it has already exceeded that limit.

Mr. Speaker, 47 loans have already been made during the fiscal year, many of them refinancing loans. The VA committee has been advised that construction of a number of homes has been suspended directly attributable to the imposition of this moratorium. Pending applications are also on hold. I see no reason, in effect, why our Native American veterans should lose access to home loans in this way. We should celebrate their success, not put an artificial cap on it, especially at a time when refinancing is a way to save veterans thousands of dollars each and every year. We need to end this moratorium as soon as possible, and that is the purpose of this legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi), a member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

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

I just want to thank the gentleman from Illinois for his leadership on this and for working so cooperatively with us. I also thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi), the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Udall), the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie), the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Case), the gentlewoman from Guam (Mr. Bordallo), the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud), and the gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega) for his cosponsorship of this legislation. I appreciate it very much and urge the body to adopt it.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2433) to amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide veterans who participated in certain Department of Defense chemical and biological warfare testing to be provided health care for illness without requirement for proof of service-connection, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of H.R. 2433, as amended, the Health Care for Veterans of Project 112/Project Shad Act of 2003. Project SHAD stands for ``shipboard hazard and defense.'' It was a program that was conducted in the 1970s. I will get into that in a moment. I do want to thank the chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Simmons), and the subcommittee's ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez), for their work and cooperation in moving this very bipartisan bill forward. I want to thank them for their leadership on it.

This bill would authorize the VA to provide higher priority health care to veterans who participated in Project 112/SHAD. These tests, which involved exposure of servicemembers to simulated chemical and biological agents and in some cases, Mr. Speaker, actual poisons, were conducted by the Department of Defense at their Desert Test Center from 1962 through 1973. In the past year, DOD has released information about all of these secret Cold War-era tests and has worked with the Department of Veterans Affairs and our committee to identify and notify veterans who participated in the tests, some of them unknowingly. This legislation will ensure that those veterans who did participate in those tests are able to receive medical evaluations and treatment if necessary at VA health care facilities on a higher priority basis without being required to establish service connection for these illnesses they believe were caused by those exposures. H.R. 2433 also includes several measures designed to help the VA to maintain a quality workforce in all of its health care facilities.

There is a well-documented shortage of trained registered nurses, for example, in the United States; and this shortage affects the VA's ability to deliver care to veterans. Our committee has expressed concern about a VA policy that requires VA-registered nurses to obtain baccalaureate degrees in nursing in order to advance beyond entry nurse-grade levels. The VA's continuation of this policy in the face of high demand and scarcity of nursing personnel discourages qualified nurses from seeking VA employment and makes the VA's ability to retain current nurses more challenging than it needs to be. H.R. 2433 will help keep the VA competitive with the private sector so that when a VA- registered nurse is otherwise eligible for a promotion, the lack of a specific educational degree may not be used to deny that promotion from nurse grade 1 to grade 2.

Mr. Speaker, section 4 of the bill expands the number of health care workers entitled to extra pay for working weekends. Most private hospitals provide extra pay for weekend work. Many VA health care workers already receive extra compensation for working on weekends. Section 4 is an effort to eliminate current disparities between VA employees working side by side to care for sick veterans.

The legislation also gives the approximately 3,000 Veterans' Canteen Service hourly workers the right to be considered for other VA positions on a competitive basis. This right was given to VCS managers in 1979. There is no reason whatsoever to impede good VA workers from seeking career advancement to more demanding, higher-paying positions for which they are qualified.

This is a good bill. I hope that Members will support it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Simmons), the distinguished chairman of our Subcommittee on Health.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), the former chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, who held hearings on Project SHAD.

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

Mr. Speaker, before I yield back, I want to again thank all of my colleagues and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez), especially, for his leadership on this bill. The gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran), who spoke earlier, held the really landmark hearings that helped catapult this issue into the forefront in people's thought.

Let us not forget what we are talking about. The Department of Defense in some 41 tests aboard ships used agents like anthrax, VX, sarin gas. Yes, they used simulants in many cases, but they actually used the real deal. They actually used real contaminants.

We are not sure, even to this day, whether or not the protective suits that were worn by our sailors aboard those ships actually protected them from these very caustic and poisonous agents.

We need to get to the bottom of it. I am convinced, having been at the hearings, having had several conversations with people at the DOD and the VA, that they are really going to go all out to make sure that every veteran who is malaffected or could have been malaffected by this gets the kind of health care and compensation that is necessary if, indeed, they have been contaminated by it.

So this is a very important bill. I hope that the full body will embrace it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say to my colleagues, if you voted in favor of the Flake amendment in the past, I respectfully ask you today to reconsider your vote this year.

While I make no secret of the fact that I have opposed, and will continue to oppose, lifting the travel ban until all political prisoners are released and other modest human rights forums are initiated. Today is clearly not the time to be embracing an easement on travel.

The outrages of last spring, the brutal arrest, conviction and incarceration for up to 28 years of approximately 80 of Cuba's best and brightest and bravest is just the most the visible and the most recent act of hate and cruelty by Fidel Castro. For decades to come, these individuals, these reformers will now join approximately 400 other political prisoners in Cuba's infamous Gulags, which the U.S. State Department has described as ``harsh and life threatening'', where there is torture, physical and psychological. Don't get sick in one of those Gulags because if you do, you will likely not get medical treatment and your condition will be permitted to fester.

Just read the U.S. State Dept's Country Reports of Human Rights Practices for this year and see how horrific those conditions are. The treatment of political prisoners is a scandal.

Look at what the L.A. Times said recently, and I would quote them briefly. This is an editorial in the L.A. Times, ``After years of calling for liberalized relations with Cuba, this editorial page must now urge American policymakers to hit the brakes.'' Hit the brakes my colleagues. Do not liberalize and allow Castro to reep upwards of $5 billion of profit--money that goes directly into Castro's coffers. We need to hit the brakes and at least say, not now.

Reference was made earlier about how the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and I tried to visit Cuba. We were turned down. We wanted to visit prisoners. We wanted to see Dr. Biscet and others and do what the International Committee of the Red Cross cannot do. As we know, the ICRC has been denied, repeatedly, access to prisoners. We tried to do it, and we were turned down. And what did Fidel Castro say in one of his speeches? Because we wanted to go into the prisons and assess the situation firsthand we were ``provocateurs.''

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and I have visited many political prisons around the world, from Perm Camp 35 in the Soviet Union, when it was the Soviet Union, to China, Beijing Prison Number 1, where convicts from Tiananmen Square were being mistreated. I have even gotten into prisons in Indonesia, and met with East Timoree leader Xanana Gusmao, and yet we cannot get into Cuba. Yet, some Members want to lift the travel ban. Lifting the ban now sends a clear message to those who are suffering from Castro's hate and abuse that we do not care.

I know this is not the maker of this amendment's intention, but that is the message nonetheless, and I hope Members will vote no on this amendment. Stand with the oppressed in Cuba, not the oppressor.

Mr. Speaker, twenty-nine years ago--on July 20, 1974--the Republic of Turkey invaded the independent Republic of Cyprus and seized control of more than one third of the island. In 1983, Turkey declared the seized territory to be the ``Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.'' For two decades this entity has received diplomatic recognition only from its creator and protector the Republic of Turkey. United Nations observers are deployed, and the 113-mile barbed wire fence known as the ``Green Line'' continues to divide the island.

The United States has supported efforts by the United Nations to address the continued division. Though not accepted by both sides, the latest plan, the Annan Plan, remains on the table for consideration. Both Greek and Turkish Cypriot leaders have met trying to resolve their differences on this issue.

Over the last several years, the Helsinki Commission, which I chair, has held two briefings focusing on Cyprus. We have heard optimism from some witnesses, and skepticism from others. But the common thread throughout the testimonies has been that Cyprus has been divided too long and must come together to move into the future.

In April, the Green Line was opened to private individuals and groups and their automobiles, and Cypriots flocked across by the thousands into areas denied them for over a generation. Although required to return home each day, families have been able to visit their pre-war homes. In an effort to develop trade between the two areas, the Government of Cyprus announced in June that it would permit Turkish Cypriot trucks carrying goods from the north to cross into the south. The trucks are inspected in accordance with European Union regulations and the laws of the Government of Cyprus Transport Department, which will issue permits to the drivers for the transport of goods, and various fees have been reduced or abolished.

Thus, while we observe the anniversary of a bleak day in the history of Cyprus, we do so in the light of optimism. The people of Cyprus have made clear their desire to overcome the legacy of the past and move toward some

sense of normalcy after decades of division. Regrettably, intransigence on the Turkish Cypriot side remains a formidable obstacle to ending the artificial division of Cyprus. We must encourage and support the efforts of open-minded reformers. I am hopeful that negotiations will resume under the auspices of the United Nations Good Offices Mission for Cyprus and that a new generation of Cypriots will have the opportunity to exercise their fundamental freedoms, including freedom of movement, and enjoy economic prosperity in their own land.

Mr. Speaker, today I want to bring to the attention of colleagues two situations concerning internally

displaced persons (IDPs) in the Russian Federation. I recently chaired a Helsinki Commission hearing to assess the plight of IDPs , including those in the Caucasus region.

The first involves IDPs from Chechnya who, according to reliable sources, continue to be pressured by Russian authorities to return to the war-torn capital city of Grozny, despite continuing violence there and a lack of many basic services. According to the State Department's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2002, approximately 140,000 persons remained internally displaced within Chechnya, with 110,000 more displaced in the neighboring republic of Ingushetia. Despite international attention, including a letter initiated last fall by the Helsinki Commission, which I chair, the Russian Government continues to pressure IDPs to return, and in some cases limits the ability of NGOs to provide assistance.

My concern for the safety of Chechen IDPs is well founded, as authorities in the past year closed three IDP camps, two near the village of Znamenskoye in northern Chechnya and the Aki-Yurt camp in Ingushetia, effectively forcing the residents back to Grozny. Reports of violence and human rights violations by both Russian military units and Chechen rebels in Chechnya are disturbing. The ongoing chaos in that war-torn region has kept UNHCR from certifying Chechnya as a safe return destination, which is supported by the fact that many international aid agencies have limited or suspended their operations out of concern for the safety of aid workers.

Despite this lack of security, the United Nations estimates that more than 38,000 IDPs from Ingushetia returned to Chechnya last year, with many complaining of government coercion. While no camp has been closed since December 2002, Doctors Without Borders reports that government officials threaten to cut off assistance in Ingushetia and block future aid in Chechnya for those refusing to leave immediately. The stationing of Russian troops near IDP camps and the limiting of assistance from international agencies to camp residents represent pressure tactics to ``encourage'' the return of IDPs to Chechnya.

Clearly, the Russian Government is not respecting the fundamental right of individuals to seek safe refuge. As a participating State of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Russian Federation has committed to facilitate sustainable solutions to the plight of IDPs and the voluntary return of such individuals in dignity and safety. I urge President Putin to intervene to ensure that Russian policy and practice are consistent with these OSCE commitments and that no IDPs be effectively forced to return to their homes in Chechnya until the conditions have been created for their return. To do otherwise would place the lives of tens of thousands of innocent Russian citizens at risk.

The second situation I want to briefly highlight concerns the plight of Meskhetian Turks in the Krasnodar Krai region of the Russian Federation. Also known as Ahiska Turks or Meskhetians, Meskhetian Turks were forced to relocate twice within the past 50 years, first from Soviet Georgia in November 1944 to the Soviet Socialist Republic of Uzbekistan. In 1989, approximately 90,000 Meskhetian Turks fled ethnic conflicts in Uzbekistan to all parts of the Soviet Union, with the largest concentration today found in Krasnodar Krai. Numbering approximately 13,000, these displaced individuals find themselves in a virtual no man's land, denied citizenship and permanent residency permits, as well as many other fundamental rights.

Due to loopholes in the Russian citizenship law and the improper application of this law by Krasnodar Krai authorities, Meskhetian Turks must register as ``guests'' every 45 days, may not legally register the purchase of a house or car, and their marriages and deaths are not officially recorded. Most are denied education above high school, as well. The Krasnodar regional legislature enacted a series of laws in 2002 in an attempt to pressure the Meskhetian Turks to leave. Corresponding with the expiration of the temporary registration held by most Krasnodar Meskhetian Turks, the laws reportedly cancelled leases on land or denied lease renewals for the 2002 crop season.

Furthermore, chauvinistic local authorities have not intervened to prevent local Cossack paramilitary units from repeatedly victimizing Krasnodar Meskhetian Turks through public harassment, robbery, and vandalism. In late May, a mob of around 50 people attacked Meskhetian Turks and other non-Russian-looking individuals in two villages, injuring 30 people and hospitalizing six.

By not granting citizenship or providing permanent residency status, current Russian policy enables the discriminatory practices subjugating the rights of Meskhetian Turks in Krasnodar Krai to continue. Mr. Speaker, President Putin cited the problems of citizenship and stateless persons in his annual State of the Federation address earlier this year. The Russian President pointed out the complexities and uncertainties faced by stateless persons in Russia. I urge him and Members of the State Duma to rectify the status of Meskhetian Turks and other stateless persons. Meanwhile, the Kremlin should intervene to ensure that Krasnodar Krai officials desist in their discriminatory treatment of the Meskhetian Turks until their status is normalized, as well as guarantee the prosecution of violent criminals.