Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I held a hearing on democratic governance in Rwanda. Rwanda is an important African ally. This East African nation has been a valuable contributor to peacekeeping in Africa and is the sixth largest troop and police contributor to United Nations missions. However, reports have increased about the status of human rights and rule of law inside Rwanda and its efforts to silence critics living abroad. This hearing will examine the future of democracy and rule of law in Rwanda in light of persistent criticism of its government's behavior at home and on the international stage.

Rwanda is a constitutional republic dominated by a strong presidency. In 2015, the country held a constitutional referendum in which an estimated 98 percent of registered voters participated. Approximately 98 percent of those who voted endorsed a set of amendments that included provisions that would allow the president to run for up to three additional terms in office, meaning Paul Kagame could be President for more than 20 more years. His election to a third term in August 2017 was achieved with 99 percent of the vote.

A popular politician in the United States or most other countries would be unlikely in most circumstances to win nearly 100 percent of the vote in a free, fair and competitive election. Consequently, it is difficult to believe that even someone as widely admired as President Kagame has been could be that popular. Such suspicion is stoked by reports of vote irregularities and actions by the Rwandan government to restrain opposition activism and enact stringent controls on opposition activism, including legal restrictions on civil liberties and stringent controls on the free flow of information.

An example of why there is skepticism about the nature of free elections in Rwanda is the case of businesswoman Diane Rwigara, who ran as a critic of Kagame. Days after she launched her campaign, nude photos allegedly of her were leaked onto the Internet in an attempt to discredit her. She said she would not be intimidated and continued her campaign. On July 7th, the National Electoral Commission disqualified her and two other candidates on technical grounds, alleging that they had not collected enough valid signatures. Amnesty International said that the election would be held in a ``climate of fear and repression'' and the commission's decision was criticized by the U.S. State Department and the European Union.

Following the election, Rwigara launched an activist group called the People Salvation Movement to challenge the regime on its human rights record, saying that the country's parliament is little more than a rubber-stamp. Within days, her home was raided, and she was arrested for forgery and tax evasion. Although she was released, Rwigara, was rearrested for forgery and offences against state security; her mother and her sister also were subsequently arrested for tax evasion.

This is not the only case of harsh punishment of those who criticize the Kagame government. David Himbara, one of our witnesses today, was a close adviser to President Kagame and has an inside view of how this government deals with those seen as failing the government or those who disagree. He testified on the inner workings of the Kagame government at our May 20, 2015, hearing on Rwanda. Another witness at that May 2015 hearing was Robert Higiro, who told a chilling account of being solicited to commit the murders of two formerly high-ranking military and security officials. That account was backed by authenticated recordings of Rwanda's security chief offering large sums of money for the murders. In fact, after Higiro testified about this offer, he had to move from Belgium to the United States because his life was in danger. Both of our Rwandan witnesses have new information that will be important for our government's policy toward Rwanda.

During a staff delegation to South Africa last year, two of my staff spoke with officials in the Government of South Africa, which was highly offended that the Rwandan government would be involved in the murder of a dissident on New Year's Eve 2013. My staff also spoke with Rwandan refugees in South Africa who reported being afraid of officials at the Rwandan embassy in South Africa, who they said had threatened them for seeking asylum.

Again, Rwanda is not your typical dictatorship in which all people suffer under an unpopular leader who does not provide for social services or security. Many Rwandans apparently genuinely feel the government is acting in their interest, especially in providing for inter-ethnic harmony. It is this anomaly we seek to better understand through today's hearing.

My office has compiled a report on our government's human rights issues with Rwanda, and we are due to discuss these matters with them further. We would be a poor ally if we did not caution the Rwandan government about human rights abuses the international community cites, including governments in Africa. We hope these abuses can be stopped, but until such time as they are, we cannot ignore them and must bring them up in our interactions with the Government of Rwanda whether or not they readily accept the view others have of their behavior. It is in their interest and ours that we do so.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank Chairman Royce for convening this mark-up on a number of substantive pieces of legislation. As our time is limited, I will focus on a few key items.

I am an original cosponsor of H.R. 3445, and I thank Chairman Royce and Ranking Member Engel, as well as my friend and colleague Karen Bass, for trying to strengthen the African Growth and Opportunity Act.

I would like to thank my good friend and fellow member of the New Jersey delegation, Albio Sires, for his bipartisan Global Health Innovation Act of 2017, H.R. 1660, of which I am a cosponsor.

This bill will allow us to exercise greater oversight over USAID programs and to gauge how effectively USAID is developing and utilizing innovations in health programs.

I support H.R. 3320 and commend Chairman Yoho for his work on this timely bill. The Chinese Communist government has been slowly squeezing Taiwan's international space, taking extraordinary measures to exclude Taiwan from multi-lateral institutions like the World Health Organization.

Such exclusions create real international blind spots that pose threats to global health and security. As you all know, SARS spread from Taiwan and China to other parts of the globe.

With the World Health Organization in particular, I intend to push for admission of Taiwan.

I commend Ranking Member, Mr. Engel, along with Chairman Yoho, Mr. Chabot, and Mr. Sherman, for putting together H. Res. 422, on Hong Kong.

The threats to Hong Kong's autonomy and its freedoms are real and progressing. These freedoms and the rule of law are vital economic interests of the United States and the foundation of the city's vitality, creativity, and entrepreneurial sprit.

Beijing has become more assertive in Hong Kong's affairs over the past several years and ramped up efforts to destroy the pro-democracy movement over the summer. Six legislations were disqualified through unprecedented interventions by the National People's Congress into Hong Kong's judiciary. The pan-democratic minority could stop pro-Beijing legislation in the past, but now it cannot. China can push through any measure it wants now with its block of unelected legislators.

And, as you all know, the Hong Kong government has re-sentenced the leaders of the peaceful Umbrella Movement of 2014. Joshua Wong, Nathan Law, and Alex Chow should now be considered Hong Kong's first political prisoners. They will not be the last, as new trails begin soon.

This resolution is needed but should not be our last word. That is why I introduced, along with Congressman Tim Walza (a fellow CECC Commissioner), the Hong Kong Human Rights & Democracy Act--a bill that I introduced in the last Congress and which has been introduced by Senator Marco Rubio and Senator Ben Cardin in the Senate.

I would urge my colleagues to consider this legislation and find ways to protect U.S. interests in a free and autonomous Hong Kong in addition to Ranking Member Engels' resolution which is before us today.

Hizballah is a cancer that has metastasized in Lebanon and threatens to invade nearly every corner of the region if we do not stay vigilant. H.R. 3329, introduced by Chairman Royce, would choke off additional sources of financial support for this malignant growth, particularly by targeting the group's grass roots fundraising enterprise that it expanded to circumvent existing sanctions. Building on the Hizballah International Financing Prevention Act that the House passed unanimously in 2015, this bill would require third-party sanctions on those who substantially support Hizballah fundraising operations.

The reports required in this legislation would also go further to ferret out the extent of the group's fundraising network, which it would rightly classify as a transnational criminal organization. Make no mistake: Hizballah is an international crime syndicate, wrapped in an Iranian paramilitary proxy, inside a terrorist organization, masquerading as a political resistance movement.

H.R. 3342 introduced by Mike Gallagher would direct our government to use the tools at its disposal to impose penalties on Hizballah for employing human shields to defend its installations and outposts. Hizballah's use of innocent human lives to protect its nefarious activities is a clear human rights violation and plainly demonstrates that Hizballah is an enemy of Lebanon's freedom-loving people. The bill also encourages the President to direct our Permanent Representative at the United Nations to use her voice and vote to push for a resolution condemning this sickening practice. I can confidently say that the United States could not ask for a stronger or more clear-eyed defender of American interests and the security of our most critical regional ally, Israel, at the UN than Ambassador Haley.

Mr. Speaker, I held a hearing on the future of democracy and governance in Liberia. Of the more than 50 nations of Africa, the United States has the closest connection with the Republic of Liberia. This is not only because Liberia was founded in 1847 by freedmen and former slaves from this country, but also because of the estimated 500,000 Liberians and Liberian descendants who live here. Many Liberians consider the United States the ``mother country'' even though it was never a U.S. colony. Liberian cities such as Monrovia and Buchanan were named for American presidents.

However, most Americans are largely unaware of the long link between the United States and Liberia and likely see Liberia as just another African country. Most Americans are unaware that Liberia has been a major U.S. ally since World War II and into the Cold War, hosting U.S. communications facilities in the 1960s and 1970s and receiving extensive U.S. development assistance, including post-war aid and post- Ebola aid to Liberia. The United States also helped Liberia build its criminal justice sector and supported transitional justice efforts.

The United States has funded just over a quarter of the cost of the United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL), at a cost of $106 million annually as of FY 2016. Liberia is also implementing a $256.7 million, five-year MCC compact, signed in 2015, designed to increase access to reliable, affordable electricity and enhance the country's poor road infrastructure. Bilateral State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) assistance totaled $91 million in

Mr. Speaker, everyone remembers where they were and what they were doing on September 11, 2001--I was in Washington chairing a Veteran's Affairs hearing--when a group of cowards hijacked airliners in order to perpetrate the worst act of terrorism in American history.

No one remembers the shock, horror and numbing sorrow more, however, than the families and close friends of the victims.

Because it was a surprise attack, there was no chance to fight back that day although when New Jersey's Todd Beamer and other passengers learned what happened to the Twin Towers, Todd famously said ``let's roll'' and attacked the terrorists on board the flight that crashed in a Pennsylvania field to preclude another jet from being used as a missile.

Who can forget the courageous first responders running up the stairs of burning buildings--with total disregard for their own safety--saving some at the expense of their own lives.

On the morning of 9/11, I got a mere glimpse--I say again a glimpse-- into the sense of horror suffered by the victim's families when I couldn't reach my own brother Tom--an American Airlines 757 Captain who often piloted Flight 11 from Logan to LA, the flight that crashed into the North Tower.

Stuck in traffic within sight of the burning Pentagon, cell phones were all but gridlocked. At noon, I got through. He and his flight attendant wife Sandy were safe but were in anguish because they knew the pilots and crew on board Flight 11.

For the families of the victims--and I got to know and work with several including Kathy Wisniewski who lost her husband and today works on my staff, the Jersey Girls and Theresa Velardi, the news that day was absolutely devastating.

Both then--and now 16 years later--words are still inadequate to convey our empathy for those who died and for the victim's families.

For many, their faith in God has helped them survive and overcome.

Yet for 16 years, the families have had to endure their loss and a broken heart.

Which reminds me of that haunting song in Les Miserables after one of the main characters loses many of his friends in a battle at a barricade:

There's a grief that can't be spoken

There's a pain goes on and on;

Empty chairs and empty tables . . .

Where my friends will meet no more . . .

Yes, empty chairs and empty tables in New Jersey and elsewhere but those chairs and tables are not empty in heaven.

Yesterday, I attended a 9/11 memorial in Colts Neck, New Jersey. Theresa Velardi, who lost her dad, Paul James Furmato, on September 11, was eloquent in her moving statement, which I include in the Record:

I have not spoken at a memorial like this before, so I hope

you will all bear with me as I try to get through this.

First, I want to thank Lillian for giving me the opportunity

to speak today. I would like to thank everyone who takes care

of this memorial and the township of Colts Neck for providing

me with a place to come to remember and to be with my Dad.

And I also want to thank all of you for coming out today and

always keeping the families and first responders of 9/11 in

your hearts and your prayers.

My father, Paul James Furmato, was an institutional sales

trader and a Vice- President at Cantor Fitzgerald. He was

taken away from me 16 years ago and my entire family dynamic

was changed. I remember waking up morning after morning

watching my mother fight back her tears and try her best to

raise 3 children on her own. I remember waking up every day

after the twin towers crashed wondering, ``does this mean Dad

is really never coming home?'' I remember being a Girl Scout

in Colts Neck and having to skip Father-Daughter dances

because my father was murdered. I remember hoping and

praying, even years later, that my Dad would come walking

through the door one day and that this was all a really

horrible dream.

But it wasn't a dream. And my family would be changed

forever. The entire country would be changed forever. You

don't remember much from when you were 6, but you never

forget the feeling of losing a father. You never forget the

pain, the devastation, or the confusion. And it wasn't just

my family. Families from around the country lost loved ones.

There was true devastation felt all around after the twin

towers fell. The country went into a state of shock.

But shortly thereafter, something incredible happened. We

came together. We united with those around us and worked

towards repairing New York City, repairing broken families,

and repairing the damage in our hearts. In this country, we

support each other. In Monmouth County, we support each

other. And in my hometown Colts Neck, we support each other.

This community picked each other up off the ground. I

remember Cedar Drive Middle School teachers and Conover Road

Elementary School teachers showing up at my house days after

with food and condolences. All types of Colts Neck residents

showed up at my door to lend my mom the support and prayers

she truly needed.

As devastating as 9/11 was for my family and for our entire

community, it reminded all of us to help each other and look

out for one another. It reminded us that no matter how bad

things may get, there is always a better tomorrow. No matter

what age we are or what troubles we face, we can overcome. We

can fight through it and we can work together to rebuild.

My father's life was taken from him at 37 years old. My

mother lost her husband, her soul mate after spending 17

years with him. She was left with heartbreak and three

children at impressionable ages. Yet she continued to wake up

every morning to provide and to care for her children. She

refused to let the hatred of others consume her own heart and

mind. I grew up watching a woman never give up and I knew I

wanted to follow in her footsteps.

I am 22 years old. I'm a college graduate from Fordham

University with a double degree in Philosophy and Political

Science. I run an office as the Executive Director at the

Monmouth County Republican Committee. I am working towards my

J.D. at Seton Hall Law School on the weekends. I live on my

own and I try my very best to balance everything going on in

my life. I strive every single day to make my Father proud in

Heaven. When life becomes overwhelming or stressful or it all

just feels like too much, I come here and I sit right on that

bench with Paul James Furmato's name on it. I sit here with

my Father beside me. Just this past week, my world felt like

it was caving in. But I came here and I sat with my Dad. I

prayed I was making him proud in Heaven and I promised him

yet again that I will continue to work hard every single day

to be the best daughter I can be no matter what life throws

my way.

At times, life gets difficult. I have seen that and

experienced that first hand. We see heartbreak and disasters

like the storms passing through Texas and Florida just this

past week. The only thing we can do when life hits us hard is

overcome. We have to reflect on tragedies like 9/11 and allow

them to help us grow.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank him and Eliot Engel for sponsoring this important bill.

This bill brings together a critical arsenal of stiff and timely sanctions against Iran, Russia, and North Korea.

The administration was absolutely right in early February to put Iran on notice regarding its continued testing of ballistic missiles. This bill underscores that warning by imposing expanded sanctions against Iran's missile program, demonstrating that the United States will not sit idly by as Iran augments its ability to militarily blackmail the United States, Israel, and our allies.

It also, as the world's largest sponsor of terrorism, imposes terror sanctions on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. It very importantly, as well, authorizes the imposition of sanctions on individuals responsible for Iran's human rights abuses.

The State Department suggests there are as many as 800 political prisoners in Iran alone. It also reminds us and draws attention to Iran's despicable practice of arresting American citizens to use them as bargaining chips.

On Russia, Mr. Speaker, the Putin government's invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea; indiscriminate bombing in Syria; and threatening behavior toward our NATO allies, above all, in the Baltics makes it--important in respects--the worst actor in the global stage today. Putin's government has passed from threats to aggressive actions against our friends, allies, and innocent people abroad.

Let's not forget that in 2008--and I was there in Tbilisi as it was happening--the Russians invaded Georgia and annexed South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

As to North Korea, a gulag masquerading as a country, we must cut off all economic lifelines to Kim Jong-un, and punish Pyongyang's clients and its enablers. A regime that murdered Otto Warmbier and then, of course, is working on more missiles and the means to deliver them needs to be taken seriously. This legislation does that with very stiff sanctions.

I thank, again, Chairman Royce, Eliot Engel, Majority Leader McCarthy, and Steny Hoyer as the principal sponsors of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H.R. 3364, the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, introduced by my good friend, Chairman Ed Royce. I'm proud to be a co-sponsor. This bill brings together a critical arsenal of stiff and timely sanctions trained at some of the gravest national security threats our country faces today.

The Trump Administration was absolutely right in early February to put Iran ``on notice'' regarding its continued testing of ballistic missiles. This bill underscores that warning by imposing expanded sanctions against Iran's missile program--demonstrating that the United States will not sit idly by as Iran augments its ability to blackmail Israel and other allies.

The stakes could hardly be higher. Iran possesses the largest ballistic missile program in the region and its medium-range ballistic missiles are already able to strike Israel and our allies and installations in the Gulf from deep within Iranian territory. Iran's growing space launch program--a thinly veiled testing scheme for intercontinental ballistic missiles--is cause for greater alarm still.

Iran is also the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism. By requiring the imposition of terror sanctions on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, H.R. 3364 treats the IRGC as what it truly is: Iran's principal means of exporting terrorism around the world, particularly to Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and Bahrain.

The U.S. cannot tolerate this brinksmanship and blackmail. Iran dreams of nothing less than regional hegemony and Israel's annihilation. There is no room for compromise with such an adversary. Now is the time to act: Iran is entrenching its influence in Syria and Iraq and insuring these gains with the credibility of its missile threat and militant proxies. We must pass this bill to bring maximum pressure to bear against a mounting threat.

Importantly, this bill also authorizes the imposition of sanctions on individuals responsible for Iran's horrifying human rights abuses. In May, the State Department reported to Congress that: ``The Iranian regime's repression of its own people includes reports of over 800 political prisoners, composed of peaceful civic activists, journalists, women's rights activists, religious and ethnic minorities, and opposition political figures.''

This bill would also draw increased attention to Iran's despicable practice of arresting American citizens to use them as bargaining chips. On Friday, the Trump Administration rightfully called Iran out for using these detentions as ``a tool of state policy'' and threatened ``new and serious'' consequences if this practice continues. We must not forget the lives and families of Robert Levinson, Siamak and Baquer Namazi, Xiyue Wang, and others that have been torn apart by Iran's cynical schemes.

Mr. Speaker, regarding Russia, the Putin government's invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea, indiscriminate bombing in Syria, and threatening behavior toward our NATO allies, above all in the Baltics, makes it among the worst actors on the global stage today. Putin's government has passed from threats to aggressive action against our friends, allies and innocent civilians abroad. And it did so long ago, when it invaded Georgia in 2008.

I was there, in Tbilisi, several weeks after that invasion began, to work to secure the exit of two young children, constituents of mine, trapped behind Russian lines in South Ossetia. I will never forget the quiet courage of the Georgian people in Tbilisi--not entirely surprised by Putin's invasion--they were too wise for that--uncertain whether the Russian army would proceed to Tbilisi, and determined to soldier on in defense of their country.

And then in 2014 the Russian government annexed Crimea and invaded eastern Ukraine--each of these incursions was marked by massive human rights violations, violence toward anyone suspected of being unsympathetic to the Russian imperialist cause, and created massive humanitarian crises of displaced persons, which the Russian government did nothing to relieve.

These acts of aggression underscore the seriousness with which we must take the Russian government's testing of our limits and our will, by buzzing our ships and planes, harassing our diplomats, and intimidating our allies--as it does for example with the Zapad exercises set to take place in September near the Polish, Lithuanian, Latvian, and Estonian borders.

We know from experience that the best way to maintain the peace and keep our country secure is to respond strongly to Russian expansionism and intimidation attempts--this sanctions bill does just that.

The large number of political assassinations that have scarred Russian public life since Putin arrived on the scene--the most notorious but not the only attack on the rights of Russian citizens for which the Putin government is responsible. These brutal crimes only underscore the need to respond strongly to Putin's attempts to intimidate us and our allies.

Congress has responded strongly to Putin's aggressions and crimes before, for example with the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law and Accountability Act and the Global Magnitsky legislation, of which I was the House chief sponsor, taking the lessons of the earlier act and applied them globally, while in its name further memorializing the heroic sacrifice of Sergei Magnitsky. The Magnitsky legislation was so strongly detested by the Putin government that in early 2013, having cosponsored the original Magnitsky legislation, the Russian government refused to issue me a visa to visit Russia to work on international child adoption issues. A State Department official commented to me at the time that as far he knew, I was the first Congressman denied a visa since the Brezhnev era.

So, in addition to enacting this new legislation, I want to join Vladimir Kara-Murza's call that the Magnitsky legislation continue to be implemented energetically and fully. Kara-Murza is a Russian democracy activist who twice was nearly killed by sophisticated poisons while visiting Russia--he testified for me at the Helsinki Commission after the first poisoning attempt, in October 2015. Many of the Putin government's murders are motivated by economic crimes and implementation of the Magnitsky legislation should also include U.S. government advocacy on behalf of U.S. investors defrauded by Russian expropriations--the Yukos oil company is the most notorious case of this.

As to North Korea--a gulag masquerading as a country--we must cut off all economic lifelines to Kim Jong un and punish Pyongyang's clients and its enablers. A regime that murders Otto Warmbier does not deserve respect and should be considered an imminent threat to the US and its allies because of its nuclear proliferation.

We cannot negotiate our way out of these strategic problems. Carrots have not worked, we need bigger sticks.

We know sanctions are working. Thae Yong Ho (Thay Young Ho)--North Korea's former

deputy ambassador to Britain and the highest ranking defector in twenty years--said that international sanctions are beginning to squeeze the regime. He also said that the spread of information from the outside world is having a real impact. So it shouldn't be a surprise that South Korea has reported that high-level defections are surging.

This legislation provides crucial tools and I support them wholeheartedly--as I supported them in May of this year.

The Trump Administration will find that it can use the tools we offer today to much greater use than did the last White House. With hundreds of thousands of North Korean laborers abroad--sending as much as $2 billion a year back to the regime in hard currency--we should look at targeting this expatriate labor and the governments and corporations that employ them.

Loopholes in our sanctions on North Korea's shipping and financial sectors must be closed. And when we discover that foreign banks have helped Kim Jong un skirt sanctions--as those in China have repeatedly done--we must give those banks and businesses a stark choice: do business with Kim Jong un or the U.S.

Cut off Kim Jong un's economic lifelines, punish those who keep his murderous regime afloat, and signal to China and its client state in North Korea that the era of ``strategic patience'' is finally over.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to strongly support this critical measure at a perilous moment for our country and the rest of the planet.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I held a hearing to assess the impact of the Global Food Security Act and judge how it is being implemented. We examined it with an eye toward reauthorization later this Congress.

By way of background, as many of you know, the Global Food Security Act was a standout piece of bipartisan legislation that was passed in the last Congress. I was the author of the House version of the bill, which had the support of Ms. Bass and Mr. Meadows from our subcommittee.

While GFSA was only signed into law in 2016, it codified a policy that had a far longer history. Like the landmark PEPFAR program, it also bridges multiple administrations.

By way of history, it was President Bush, who beginning in 2002, started to elevate the importance of food security in U.S. foreign policy, especially in Africa, via the Initiative to End Hunger in Africa (IEHA), which was funded through development assistance and implemented through USAID. At the same time, the Millennium Challenge Corporation began making substantial investments in agriculture-led economic growth programs, particularly in Africa.

It was from this foundation that President Obama instituted the Feed the Future Initiative, launched at the G8 Meeting in L'Aquila, Italy, in 2009. By that time, food insecurity as a national security issue had come to the fore. The years 2007 through 2008 saw a rise in food prices across the world, and the ensuing political turmoil this caused led to the rise, for example, of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Today, we see President Trump and his administration continuing to implement the GFSA. We are also at a point where we can begin to assess the success of implementation, underscoring an important point for us legislators; it is never sufficient simply to pass legislation, but Congress has a constitutionally-mandated duty to make sure that the executive branch faithfully executes the laws that it passes.

Among the things we heard about are results from our efforts. Have we been successful, for example, in reducing stunting, one of the key purposes of the Act and an outcome that is measureable?

We also heard about the country selection process. How are countries that we decide to partner with chosen? What criteria do we use, and is the criteria measurable and objective?

Also, how faithfully is the GFSA's mandate to work with small-holder farmers being implemented?

As we look toward reauthorization, we need to ask ourselves what is working, what isn't working, and what can we do better to maximize the effect of our investment.

Consider, for example, our nutrition programs aimed at mothers and children during the first 1,000 days of life window, from conception to the second birthday. We know that this period is absolutely critical for achieving healthy outcomes in children that stays with them throughout their lives, helping boost their natural immunities to ward off diseases and giving them a head start in life. We hope to hear from USAID on the successes of our nutrition interventions during the first 1,000 days.

But we need to ask ourselves, are we truly firing on all cylinders? Are we achieving the best possible results in terms of nutrition and stunting reduction, or are we failing to maximize our investments.

USAID, for example, has a neglected tropical diseases program that addresses intestinal worms and parasites that affect close to one billion people. If this work, however, is siloed--if worms are not addressed concomitantly with our nutrition interventions--the question arises: Are we maximizing our nutrition interventions? In other words, are we feeding the future, or simply feeding the worms?

It is relatively inexpensive to conduct deworming interventions among affected populations. The gains, however, can be enormous. One recent study on cost-effectiveness concluded that ``deworming's effect is robustly positive, with a weight gain per dollar spent more than 35 times greater'' than those found in simple school feeding programs.

Thus, we need to ask whether we are taking advantage of synergies in our nutrition efforts, by not only including deworming, but also following up with behavior changing WaSH, or water and sanitation/ health instruction. Sometimes the solution of how to keep reinfestation by worms from happening can be as simple as providing children with a pair of shoes, as worms often enter the body through a foot that comes into contact with infected soil, or making sure vegetables are washed thoroughly and peeled.

The question for USAID is whether we are fully utilizing such synergies. Tomorrow, the question for us here in Congress will be what we can do in our reauthorization legislation to ensure that USAID is given the necessary direction and tools to prioritize such synergies.

Mr. Speaker, Liu Xiaobo's premature death was a jarring shock to everyone who admired this champion of freedom and democracy. We mourn his loss because it is a tragic loss for his wife, family and friends and a catastrophic loss for China and the entire world.

We owe Liu Xiaobo a debt of gratitude because he demonstrated that the noble ideas of democracy and due process, liberty and the rule of law are not foreign ideas in China.

These are universal principles that beat strongly in the hearts of people everywhere from New Jersey to the Ninevah plains of Iraq, from Poland to Peru, and from Burma to Beijing.

We owe Liu Xiaobo a debt of gratitude because he reminded us that the desire for democracy and human rights is shared by everyone because each person is endowed by the Creator with inalienable rights.

The Chinese Communist Party has tried to curtail his ideas, they call them dangerous and subversive, and they seek to silence, censor, and repress them. Yet, they live on in the hearts of untold millions of Chinese people.

With Liu Xiaobo's death, we are also reminded of the words of Dr. Martin Luther King who said ``injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'' We should all agree that what was done to Liu Xiaobo and his wife Liu Xia was a grave injustice.

Liu Xiaobo's imprisonment in 2009 became a death sentence. The blame for this should lie squarely on the Chinese government and for his death they alone should be held accountable.

Liu Xiaobo was the first Nobel Peace Prize winner to die in state custody since Carl von Ossietzky died after being held in a Nazi concentration camp.

The Chinese government complained that it was ``stabbed in the back'' by those expecting it to deal quickly with its client state in North Korea. How shameful it is to play the victim card while a victim of their own repression lay dying.

No nation should be judged entirely by crimes of the past, but this crime--the death and silencing of Liu Xiaobo--should follow the Chinese Communist Party like an unwashable, permanent stain.

We must never forget Liu Xiaobo's enduring contributions--whether during the Tiananmen Massacre where he helped save the lives of many students or with Charter 08--the treatise urging political and legal reforms in China based on constitutional principles.

We must not forget Liu Xiaobo; we must advance and preserve his legacy, and repeatedly confront the Chinese Communist Party with his ideas and memory.

In this time of need we must signal the Congress's unanimous support for Liu Xiaobo's family, his wife Liu Xia, and all those bravely standing up for human rights and liberty in China.

I was invited by Liu Xiaobo's family to attend the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize ceremony. It was a moving ceremony; the now famous empty chair spoke volumes about the Chinese Communist Party's abiding fear that human rights and democracy will undermine its power.

I will always remember the words of Liu Xiaobo's speech that day about the importance of pressing for human rights: ``Freedom of expression is the foundation of human rights, the source of humanity, and the mother of truth. To strangle freedom of speech is to trample on human rights, stifle humanity, and suppress truth.''

And he also expressed his hopes for China's future: ``. . . I firmly believe that China's political progress will not stop, and I, filled with optimism, look forward to the advent of a future free China. For there is no force that can put an end to the human quest for freedom, and China will in the end become a nation ruled by law, where human rights reign supreme.''

Liu Xiaobo will, sadly, never see a free China. Chinese authorities have gone to great lengths to stifle his ideas and those who followed him. In recent years, the government of President Xi Jinping has engaged in an extraordinary assault on the rule of law, human rights, ethnic minority groups, and civil society.

As China's economic and military might grows, more and more countries will be afraid to raise subjects that the Chinese Communist Party wants to make taboo.

The U.S. stands alone--inadequate as its efforts are at times--in its willingness to keep on raising human rights issues that need to be raised. The U.S. cannot lightly shrug off the mantle of being democracy's defender, no matter how heavy that mantle may become.

It is tempting to be pessimistic about China's future and the future of U.S.-China relations. But I am not pessimistic. Constant repression has not dimmed the desires of the Chinese people for freedom and reform. I attribute this fact, in part, to Liu Xiaobo's ideas and example.

Nevertheless, the U.S. cannot be morally neutral or silent in the face of the Chinese government's repression of fundamental freedoms. Human rights are not a secondary interest, but one critically linked to U.S. economic and security interests.

The U.S. must not shy away from meeting with China's other Nobel Laureate, the Dalai Lama, or other dissidents. We must use Congressionally authorized sanctions to hold Chinese officials accountable for torture and gross abuses. We must connect Internet and press freedoms as both economic and human rights priorities. And we must demand, repeatedly and clearly, that the unconditional release of political prisoners is in the interest of better U.S.-China relations.

I believe that someday China will be free. Someday, the people of China will be able to enjoy all of their God-given rights. And a nation of free Chinese men and women will honor and celebrate Liu Xiaobo as a hero. He will be honored along with all others like him who have sacrificed so much, and so long, for freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman Ed Royce for yielding. I thank him for his leadership on trafficking, for this bill in particular, for the markup, and for all of the assistance he provided. I also thank Eliot Engel, our ranking member. I thank them from the bottom of my heart.

I want to thank Karen Bass, the lead Democrat on the bill, for her exceptional leadership and her collaboration on this legislation.

I want to thank Speaker Ryan and Majority Leader McCarthy. I have to say--and I have been working on human trafficking since about 1995, chaired probably more than 30 hearings and written four laws--I have never seen such a deep commitment to fighting trafficking and protecting victims

than our leadership. It is unparalleled and it is inspired.

Kevin McCarthy helped ensure timely consideration. There are eight committees of referral. Sometimes that is a death knell for any bill. It is so hard to secure agreements and vote them out. Well, each of those chairmen and their staffs worked diligently and in good faith. At the end of the day, the leadership was there. They had our back on the legislation.

I want to thank Chairman Royce, again, for his extraordinary leadership as well.

Mr. Speaker, ever since the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 became law in 2000, combating human trafficking has been a major priority in the United States and, indeed, globally.

Over the last 17 years, police and civil society organizations--many of them faith based--have identified and rescued more than 250,000 victims worldwide. Some put that number at close to 300,000. Prosecution of traffickers in the U.S. has increased by more than 500 percent, but, frankly, our task is far from accomplished.

The International Labor Organization suggests that nearly 21 million people in the world today are enslaved, most of them women and children. That is unconscionable. Every human life is of infinite value. We have a duty to protect the weakest and most vulnerable from harm.

The Frederick Douglass Trafficking Victims Prevention and Protection Reauthorization Act of 2017 is comprehensive. It is bipartisan, and it is designed to strengthen, expand, and create new initiatives to protect victims, prosecute traffickers, and prevent this cruelty and exploitation from happening in the first place.

Title I of the bill focuses on combating trafficking in the United States. Title II focuses on the world. Title III authorizes appropriations of more than half a billion dollars over 4 years, including reauthorization of the TVPA of 2000.

The legislation, Mr. Speaker, is named in honor of the incomparable Frederick Douglass on the eve of his 200th birthday. Born a slave in 1818, he escaped when he was 20 and heroically dedicated his entire life to abolishing slavery and, after emancipation, to ending the Jim Crow laws in order to achieve full equality for African-American citizens. A gifted orator, author, editor, statesman, and Republican, he died in 1895.

Human trafficking, Mr. Speaker, is modern-day slavery that needs a Herculean effort to eradicate.

Among its numerous provisions and one that is of special interest to the Frederick Douglass Family Initiative--and we worked very closely with them on this--it authorizes HHS grant money to ``establish, expand, and support programs'' to provide age appropriate information to students all across America to avoid becoming victims of sex and labor trafficking as well as to educate school staff to recognize and respond to signs of trafficking.

It adopts a number of best practices, like for example making sure that when government employees book rooms, that we utilize hotels where they have initiated efforts and sponsored training to eradicate child sex trafficking. We do the same thing with airlines. The flight attendants--Delta is a classic example--once trained, can spot trafficking in progress, inform the pilot, and when that plane lands or jet lands, ensure that if there is a situation, there is an arrest of the traffickers and a rescue of the woman or children who are being trafficked.

We will now try, to the best of our ability, to hold the airlines to account. There needs to be reporting. It is already the law that they should provide this training. Now we want to ensure that training actually happens.

Chairman Royce talked about the TIP Report. Just a couple weeks ago, Secretary Tillerson announced the 2017 TIP Report. It is a voluminous and very accurate report about what is happening in 190 countries around the world, including the United States. Those countries that are designated Tier 3, egregious violator, are subject to sanctions.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to commend the Trump administration for finally holding China to account as a Tier 3 violator. A worst offender.

The pending bill makes a number of important reforms to the TIP Report and how it is prepared. My hope is that we will have an even better, more accurate, and more effective effort at holding countries to account.

Again, this legislation applies to the United States for labor and sex trafficking as well as to the world. Again, I do want to thank all those who have been involved in it.

Let me just say we worked on this bill for well over a year with ATEST; Polaris; IJM; World Vision; United; Humanity; ECPAT; United States Conference of Catholic Bishops; Shared Hope International; CATW; Ambassador Swanee Hunt; the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, which provided valuable insight; and others. They were all very much a part of our effort.

I also want to thank critical staff, including Luke Murray and Kelly Dixon, from the Majority Leader's Office, who are outstanding--they get the job done, and they ask all the right questions about substance and process and helped us along--Doug Anderson, counsel of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs; Mary Noonan; my chief of staff, Piero Tozzi; Allison Hollabaugh; Krystal Williams, Karen Bass' staff member; and so many others on the committees that also made such a huge difference in enabling us to get this through all the committees to the floor today.

I urge my colleagues to pass the bill.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I made the following remarks at the hearing held by the Congressional-Executive Commission on China which I co-chair with Senator Marco Rubio regarding China's crackdown on human rights lawyers:

Chinese officials repeatedly tell me I should focus more on the positive aspects of China and not dwell so much on the negative.

That is an extremely difficult task when you read the horrifying and sadistic accounts of torture and enforced disappearances experienced by lawyers and rights advocates.

It is hard to be positive when you contemplate Liu Xiaobo's cancer diagnosis and the fact that China effectively silenced its most brilliant democracy advocate.

The empty chair at Oslo speaks volumes about the Communist Party's abiding fear that freedom will upend the power of the privileged few when they should be seeing liberty as a path to greater peace and prosperity.

At a hearing last month in the Subcommittee on Global Human Rights in the House Foreign Affairs Committee, I heard testimony from the wives of five detained or disappeared human rights lawyers. These courageous women have become effective advocates from their husbands and for all those detained in the ``709'' crackdown.

They described in horrifying detail the physical, mental, and psychological torture experienced by their husbands, including marathon interrogation sessions, sleep deprivation, beatings, crippling leg torture, and prolonged submersion in water.

Many of their husbands also were forced to take alarming quantities of drugs including tranquilizers, barbiturates, antipsychotic drugs, and other unknown substances daily.

What they described was shocking, offensive, immoral, and inhumane. It is also possible that Chinese officials believe the international community will not hold them accountable.

After the hearing, I wrote to the heads of the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the World Health Organization, as well as to Secretary of State Tillerson and Ambassador Nikki Haley.

I have asked for condemnation of the practice of torture and medical experimentation on

prisoners of conscience. I have also asked for investigations so that serious questions will be asked of the Chinese government.

Finally, I have asked for accountability. I have urged Secretary Tillerson to start investigations under the Global Magnitsky Act, a bill that I lead on the House side last year, so that any Chinese government officials complicit in torture should never be allowed to benefit from entry to the U.S. or access to our financial system.

The issues of torture and ``residential surveillance in a designated location''--effectively enforced disappearances--will be priorities of mine and of this Commission moving forward. I believe these are issues where diverse and multi-level coalitions can be built to raise issues with the Chinese government.

I would also like to do more to prioritize the protection of human rights lawyers and their families.

At the hearing last month I heard the phrase ``The War on Law'' used to describe the systematic effort to eviscerate the network of human rights lawyers.

That phrase struck me because, though the number of human rights lawyers in China is small, what they stand for was nothing less than the rule of law for everyone--particularly those persecuted or aggrieved by the Communist Party.

They stand for the right of everyone in China--religious believers, ethnic minority, petitioners, labor activists, or victim of corruption or a barbaric population control policies--to have a fair hearing, due process, and a justice that is not politicized.

The Communist Party sees this as a dangerous idea. It means that they should be accountable to the people--to hundreds of millions of people in fact seeking redress for persecution and Party corruption.

Xi Jinping is feted in Davos for his commitments to openness and the rule of law, but it is rule of law for the few and privileged and rule by law for the rest.

The failure to implement the rule of law, to favor a type of lawlessness in the pursuit of keeping the Communist Party in power, has serious and lasting implications for U.S.-China relations.

We must recognize, after the failure of two and a half decades of the engagement policies, that China's domestic repression drives its external aggression, its mercantilist trade policies, and its unimaginable decisions to keep propping up a murderous North Korean regime.

I know the Chinese government wants me to focus on positive things. I think one positive development here is that the spouses (and families) of rights advocates and lawyers have given Beijing a rightly deserved headache. They have refused to be silent about their spouse's detentions or disappearances and have used the Internet and media to get out their message.

This trend is something new, something different, something we need to honor because they are under great pressure to be silent--through intimidation, harassment, and detention.

I want to say to our witness Chongyu (CHONG-YOU) that we appreciate your testimony here today and the fact that you are speaking out on behalf of your father. We want you to know that this Commission is an advocate for you, your family, and your father.

If you or your family face reprisals because of your testimony here today, the Congress will take it as a personal affront to the work of this body.

I know your petition has gathered 94,000 signatures, please make sure that my name is 94,001.

The one thing that gives me hope is that the people of China long for liberty, justice and opportunity.

The need for principled and consistent American leadership is more important than ever, as China's growing economic power, and persistent diplomatic efforts, have succeeded in dampening global criticism of its escalating repression and failures to adhere to universal standards.

The U.S. must be a beacon of liberty and a champion of individual rights and freedoms. The U.S. must also continue to be a voice for those silenced, jailed, or repressed in China.

We cannot . . . will not . . . forget those in China bravely seeking liberty and justice and the unalienable rights we all share. Like China's human rights lawyers--and like Liu Xiaobo--those who bravely seek peaceful change in China.

It is their stand for liberty, human rights, and the rule of law that remain the best hope for a peaceful and prosperous future for the U.S. and China.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, Mr. Speaker, and urge the House to pass this resolution. We need to signal the Congress's unanimous support for Liu Xiaobo, and his wife Liu Xia, in this time of need.

The news of Liu Xiaobo diagnosis with terminal liver cancer was a jarring shock to everyone who admires this champion of freedom and democracy.

Unfortunately, I have heard talk that the world has forgotten Liu Xiaobo. The Chinese state media says he is irrelevant.

We must never forget this Vaclav Havel of China because his efforts to bring human rights and political reforms are so critical to the future of of U.S.-China relations.

We must never forget his enduring contributions--whether during the Tiananmen Massacre where he helped save the lives of many students or with Charter 08--the treatise urging political and legal reforms in China based on constitutional principles.

For the past seven years, Members of Congress have repeatedly called on China to release unconditionally Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia.

Today, we similarly ask that the Chinese government end this absurdity and its unjust and lawless treatment of these noble citizens--release them, allow them to freely meet with friends and family, and allow them to seek urgent medical care wherever they desire.

In February 2010, I led a bipartisan group of lawmakers in nominating Liu Xiaobo for the Nobel Peace Prize, at the same time nominating two other persecuted human rights advocates, Chen Guangcheng and Gao Zhisheng, to be joint recipients of that most prestigious award.

The Nobel Committee rightly awarded the Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo for his ``long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China.'' I attended the Oslo ceremony at the invitation of the family-- along with Leader Pelosi.

It was a moving ceremony; the now famous empty chair spoke volumes about the Chinese Communist Party's abiding fear that human rights and democracy will undermine its power.

I will always remember the moving words of Liu Xiaobo's speech that day:

``Freedom of expression is the foundation of human rights, the source of humanity, and the mother of truth. To strangle freedom of speech is to trample on human rights, stifle humanity, and suppress truth.''

Chinese authorities have gone to great lengths to stifle Liu Xiaobo's ability to speak truth to power. In 2009, Liu was given 11 years in prison for ``inciting subversion of state power.''

His wife Liu Xia was also detained in de facto form ``house arrest'' since 2010. Liu Xia also is in urgent need of medical care having been hospitalized for a heart condition. Over the past year, authorities have allowed her to visit her husband only on a very few occasions.

According to Chinese authorities, Liu's conviction was based on Charter 08, a treatise signed by over 300 intellectuals and activists. That document states that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind, and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values.

Sadly, Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia are not alone in facing unjust repression. As of September 2017, the Congressional-Executive Commission on China'' (CECC) Political Prisoner Database, perhaps the most complete database of its kind in the world, contains information on 1,400 cases of known political or religious prisoners.

According to CECC's Annual Report, the government of President Xi Jinping has engaged in an extraordinary assault on the rule of law, human rights, ethnic minority groups, and civil society in recent years.

Under Xi's leadership, the Chinese government has pushed through new laws and drafted legislation that would legitimize political, religious, and ethnic repression, further curtail civil liberties, and expand censorship of the Internet.

It is tempting to be pessimistic about China's future and the future of U.S.-China relations. I am not pessimistic, despite the circumstance we consider here today. Constant repression has not dimmed the desires of the Chinese people for freedom and reform. I attribute this fact, in part, to Liu Xiaobo's ideas and example.

Nevertheless, the U.S. cannot be morally neutral or silent in the face of the Chinese government's repression of fundamental freedoms. We must show leadership and resolve because only the U.S. has the power and prestige to stand up to China's intransigence.

The U.S. must not shy away from meeting with China's other Nobel Laureate the Dalai Lama or other dissidents. We must use Congressionally-authorized sanctions to hold Chinese officials accountable for torture and gross abuses. We must connect Internet and press freedoms as both economic and human rights priorities. And we must demand, repeatedly and clearly, that the unconditional release of political prisoners is in the interest of better U.S.-China relations.

I believe that someday China will be free. Someday, the people of China will be able to enjoy all of their God-given rights. And a nation of free Chinese men and women will honor and celebrate. Liu Xiaobo as a hero. He will be honored along with all others like him who have sacrificed so much, and so long, for freedom.

Mr. Speaker, on June 29, 2017, I was not present for the vote on H.R. 3003. Had I been present, I would

have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 342 (Final Passage of H.R. 3003).

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Affairs be discharged from further consideration of House Concurrent Resolution 67, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my very good friend from California for his graciousness in yielding me this time and for his wonderful work as a Member of Congress on human rights and pro-life issues. I thank him for that leadership.

Mr. Speaker, tonight, I rise and note to my colleagues that the news of Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo's diagnosis of terminal liver cancer was a jarring shock to everyone who admires this champion of freedom and democracy.

Tonight, the House has under consideration an urgent resolution, a truly urgent resolution, H. Con. Res. 67, which I introduced, joined by Ms. Pelosi, and several of the members of the Foreign Affairs Committee, she and I together, some bipartisanship in a place where we have had little of it lately. But here we are joined, and we are joined very strongly on behalf of Liu Xiaobo and his dire, dire situation, and that of his wife.

The legislation urges the Government of the People's Republic of China to unconditionally release Liu Xiaobo, together with his wife, Liu Xia, to allow them to freely meet with friends, family, and counsel, and seek medical treatment wherever they desire.

The operative language of the resolution makes it very clear that it recognizes Liu Xiaobo for his decades of

peaceful struggle for basic human rights and democracy and, again, urges that he be able to seek medical care, including treatment in the United States or wherever else he would like to receive it.

I want to thank Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy. This resolution was introduced yesterday. The majority leader made sure that this legislation came to the floor just a few hours ago to ensure that we went on the record as a Congress showing our solidarity of Liu Xiaobo and his wife and our deep, deep compassion and concern for the plight that he finds himself in.

I want to thank Speaker Ryan, who also expressed strong concern for Liu Xiaobo, and, of course, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer because this required bipartisan support to bring it up on the UC; and also Ed Royce, the chairman of the full Committee on Foreign Affairs, the famous gentleman from California, and, of course, the ranking member, Eliot Engel.

Mr. Speaker, in February of 2010, I led a bipartisan group of lawmakers nominating Liu Xiaobo for the Nobel Peace Prize and, at the same time, nominating two other persecuted Chinese human rights advocates, Chen Guangcheng and Gao Zhisheng, to be joint recipients of this most prestigious award. Others, including the great Vaclav Havel, also pushed for Liu to get this important recognition which we had hoped would help push the human rights agenda in China.

The Nobel Peace Prize Committee agreed and awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo for his ``long and nonviolent struggle for fundamental human rights in China.''

I attended the Oslo ceremony, at the invitation of the family, along with Leader Pelosi. It was a moving ceremony, Mr. Speaker. The now famous empty chair spoke volumes about the Chinese Communist Party's abiding fear that human rights and democracy will undermine its power. There, on the stage, was this chair without the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.

After that, I held several hearings both in the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations and also on the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, which I co-chair with Marco Rubio. And again, we always had a picture of the empty chair where Liu Xiaobo should have been rightly honored and hopefully freed to pursue the righteousness of his human rights work.

He said, in absentia, that day: ``Freedom of expression is the foundation of human rights, the source of humanity, and the mother of truth. To strangle freedom of speech is to trample on human rights, stifle humanity, and suppress truth.''

Chinese authorities have gone to great lengths to stifle Liu Xiaobo's ability to speak truth to power. In 2009, he was given an 11-year prison sentence for ``inciting subversion of state power.''

His wife, Liu Xia, also was detained in de facto form ``house arrest'' since 2010. She is in urgent need of medical care, as well, having been hospitalized for a heart condition. Over the past year, authorities have allowed her to visit her husband only on a very few occasions.

According to Chinese authorities, Liu's conviction was based on Charter 08, a treatise signed by over 300 intellectuals and activists. That document states that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind, and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values.

Sadly, Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia, his wife, are not alone in facing unjust repression. As of September 2017, the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, which collects and maintains probably the most effective and comprehensive political database for any country--and this is on China--contains information on at least 1,400 cases of known political or religious prisoners.

According to the annual report, the government of President Xi Jinping has engaged in an extraordinary assault on the rule of law, human rights, ethnic minority groups, and civil society in recent years.

Under Xi's leadership, the Chinese Government has pushed through new laws and drafted legislation that would legitimize political, religious, and ethnic repression, further curtail civil liberties, and expand censorship of the internet. And the whole issue of the one child, now maybe two child per couple policy, coercion and population control, continues to harm women and children with extreme hurtfulness. It is just beyond the pale of what a government should be doing to its own people.

It is tempting to be pessimistic about China's future and the future of U.S. relations. Frankly, I am not pessimistic, despite the circumstances, because I do believe Liu Xiaobo is the future, and people who have his belief in fundamental human rights.

Mr. Speaker, let me conclude by just saying I believe that someday China will be free; someday the people of China will be able to enjoy all of their God-given rights, and a nation of free Chinese men and women will honor and celebrate Liu Xiaobo as a hero. He will be honored, along with all of the others like him, who have sacrificed so much for so long for freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words in support of Representative Kristi Noem's Women, Peace and Security Act (H.R. 2484). Among other things, it highlights the role women must play in peacemaking.

In the limited time we have, I would just like to highlight the role of one woman who served as a peacemaker, whom I have had the opportunity to get to know--Nuala O'Loan, who served as the Police Ombudsman in Northern Ireland from 2000 to 2007, and someone who has contributed to our understanding in the Congress as she twice testified at hearings held on the Northern Ireland peace process.

Baroness O'Loan--she was made a Dame of the British Empire and a member of the House of Lords in recognition for her role in the cause of peace--had the difficult task of looking into how the police handled the Omagh bombing. That bombing, by a splinter group of the Irish Republican Army, was intended to reignite sectarian tension and stop the movement towards peace that was memorialized in the Good Friday Agreement. The bomb was indiscriminate, however, killing both Protestant and Catholic alike, and helped underscore the need for peace.

In the ensuing years, Baroness O'Loan became known as an even-handed intermediary. Indeed, she was so even-handed that she was criticized by extremists on both sides, and her retirement party was boycotted by hardliners from the Unionist and Republican camps. On the other hand, the average citizen, whether Protestant or Catholic, supported her in her role as Police Ombudsman in roughly equal numbers, something that was borne out by independent polling.

Nuala O'Loan is but one example of a woman serving as peacemaker. There are many more Nualas around the world, and I applaud Congresswoman Noem for encouraging us to recognize the role these women play in helping bring a little light to the darkness.

Mr. Speaker, the Bible, in the Book of Ecclesiastes Chapter 3, Verse 2, tells us that: ``There is a time to plant and a time to harvest.'' That ancient prescription has allowed multitudes to be fed over the millennia, but now ruthless men seeking power have disrupted this cycle, causing man-made famine where none should exist in African countries from South Sudan to Nigeria to Somalia.

Potential famine conditions in Africa and Yemen have been called the worst since World War II, even worse than the catastrophic 2011 famine in East Africa. What makes this round of potential famine even more tragic is how preventable it is. For example, South Sudan contains the most arable land in what was once a united Sudan. Aside from oil reserves, agriculture was seen as the key to South Sudan's future success. Now, areas such as the Equatoria provinces, South Sudan's breadbasket, are engulfed in conflict with citizens fleeing the country in the thousands daily.

There are more than 4.8 million displaced South Sudanese--1.8 million refugees in neighboring countries and at least 2 million internally displaced persons (IDPs). South Sudan is experiencing heightened levels of food insecurity with as high as 27 percent of the population in some areas facing famine. Despite the government's contention that people are merely being frightened by rumors of conflict, South Sudan has quickly surpassed Eritrea to become the world's fastest emptying country.

Another country seeing a major exodus due to conflict is Somalia. There are an estimated 881,000 Somali refugees, and the anticipated scale of population displacement from Somalia due to pervasive conflict and the threat of starvation will increase refugee flows throughout the region and into Europe. In Somalia, nearly 6.2 million people are currently in need of humanitarian assistance, and more than 2.9 million people are facing crisis or emergency levels of acute food insecurity, including nearly a million children under the age of five.

Nigeria is yet another country close to experiencing famine due to conflict. There are 14 million people in northeast Nigeria who are in urgent need of humanitarian assistance, including more than 8 million children, and almost 6 million people are also facing severe food insecurity. Almost 9 million Nigerians are projected to suffer from food insecurity by August 2017, including more than 3 million people living in the northeast state of Borno.

We focus on the part Boko Haram has played in creating chaos and near famine in Nigeria, and quite rightly so. More than 30,000 lives have been lost in violence related to Nigeria's Boko Haram insurgency, but there is a developing threat that could widen the likelihood of food insecurity there. Attacks by Fulani extremists on farmers in Nigeria's Middle Belt are increasing in intensity and could further exacerbate hunger in the region.

The El Nino-La Nina weather cycles have caused drought as well as flooding in parts of Africa in recent years. The possibility of drought currently threatens famine in countries ranging from Angola to Sudan to Mozambique to Madagascar. Nevertheless, it is conflict that poses an even greater threat of famine in countries such as the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Mali and could cause or exacerbate famine should fighting disrupt planting-harvesting cycles and markets where locally produced food can be purchased.

Ranking Member Bass and I just returned from a mission to South Sudan and Uganda. Humanitarian aid officials repeatedly told us that no matter how much aid is provided, it will not be enough to meet the ever-expanding need. Although we need to do more, no amount of assistance will do the job unless the conflict in South Sudan is definitively ended. Currently, there is not enough food to keep pace with the growing flow of refugees from South Sudan, and rations have been cut at times by half.

There has been a cease-fire declared in South Sudan, but many observers believe that is due more to the rainy season preventing large movements of troops and heavy equipment than a genuine determination to end the conflict. This week, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development has convened a conference aimed at bringing the South Sudan conflict to an end. After numerous efforts to reach a lasting cease- fire, one can only hope the realization of the immensity of this crisis will lead the warring parties to actually seek a lasting peace.

The hearing I held today was intended to make the appeal both for continued humanitarian aid from our government and others in the international community, but also for a more robust international effort to end conflict in the countries where people are scattered in the millions and desperate levels of hunger are rampant. We must contend with the vagaries of weather, but we shouldn't have to see people suffer for the ambitions of those without mercy seeking power at any cost.