Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, today, I had the honor to speak at a briefing on Alzheimer's disease and the important work of the National Institute on Aging (NIA), National Institutes of Health, in providing leadership on research and treatments for patients with Alzheimer's. In addition to the NIA, the Alzheimer's Foundation of America, Alliance for Aging Research, Leaders Engaged on Alzheimer's Disease, USAgainst Alzheimer's, and the National Collaborative on Aging participated in the briefing.

November is National Alzheimer's Disease Awareness Month, and the briefing today provided an important contribution to increasing awareness in Congress. I fondly recall that President Ronald Reagan designated the first National Alzheimer's Disease Awareness week in 1982, 12 years before he announced that he had been diagnosed with the disease.

Alzheimer's disease is now the seventh leading cause of death in the United States. Estimates vary, but it is believed that over 5 million individuals have Alzheimer's and someone new develops the disease every 70 seconds. One in eight persons over 65 and nearly half of those over 85 has Alzheimer's. In my own state of New Jersey, 150,000 residents are suffering from Alzheimer's.

With the aging of the 78 million American baby-boomers, by 2050, 16 million will have the disease if advances are not made to prevent it.

In 2009, 11 million family caregivers provided the equivalent of $144 billion in care. And Alzheimer's costs to Medicare and Medicaid last year were $123 billion.

When I was first elected to Congress in 1980, diagnosis of Alzheimer's was about three million cases, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) invested only $13 million in Alzheimer's research. This year, NIH will invest $469 million in baseline funding for Alzheimer's research. While we have made progress in federal support, we know that much more needs to be done to conquer this terrible disease.

In 1999, I joined Congressman Markey in founding the Congressional Task Force on Alzheimer's to help increase congressional awareness and legislative efforts relative to Alzheimer's. The Task Force which now includes 158 Members of the House of Representatives, hosts briefings and forums for Members of Congress and their staffs and works closely with the Alzheimer's Foundation of America and the Alzheimer's Association, which has a New Jersey affiliate.

We are working here in the House and with our colleagues in the Senate to pass this year The National Alzheimer's Project Act ( or NAPA), legislation designed to better coordinate research and clinical programs dealing with Alzheimer's disease all across the federal bureaucratic spectrum. NAPA currently has 109 cosponsors.

As I mentioned earlier, by 2050, nearly 16 million Americans will have Alzheimer's, yet there is no national plan to deal with this looming crisis. The National Alzheimer's Project Act (NAPA), which has been modified since its introduction in February of this year, establishes in the Office of the Secretary of HHS a National Alzheimer's Project. It also will establish an inter-agency advisory council to advise the Secretary of HHS and address the government's efforts on Alzheimer's research, care, institutional services, and home- and community-based programs.

The Alzheimer's Project will create and maintain an integrated national plan to overcome Alzheimer's; accelerate the development of treatments that would prevent, halt, or reverse the course of Alzheimer's; help to coordinate the health care and treatment of citizens with Alzheimer's; ensure that ethnic and racial populations-- who are at higher risk for Alzheimer's and least likely to receive care--are included in clinical, research, and service efforts; coordinate with international bodies to integrate and inform the fight against Alzheimer's globally; and provide information and coordination of Alzheimer's research and services across all Federal agencies.

I would like to commend the Alzheimer's Foundation and the Alzheimer's Association for their work and support to advance this legislation. As you know, such strong advocacy often makes the difference in pushing legislation over the finish line. While I am extremely disappointed that the Senate HELP Committee cancelled their mark-up yesterday that was to include NAPA, we will work with them to try to ensure that it is marked-up and passed this year.

In addition to introducing and fighting to pass NAPA, Rep. Markey and I have introduced two other major bills focusing on Alzheimer's:

On July 29, 2010, we introduced the HOPE for Alzheimer's: Health Outcomes, Planning and Education Act (H.R. 5926). The bill would provide for Medicare coverage of comprehensive Alzheimer's disease and other dementia diagnoses and services in order to improve care and outcomes for Americans living with the disease. The HOPE Act aims to increase detection and diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias and provide access, information and support for newly diagnosed patients and their families.

The Alzheimer's Breakthrough Act (H.R. 3286 which was introduced in July 2009 and has 136 cosponsors, authorizes the necessary resources to restore momentum in the pursuit of better diagnosis, prevention and treatment. Advances and progress in the various areas of Alzheimer research have the potential to save millions of lives and save hundreds of billions of dollars.

Also, earlier this year we sent a letter, along with House and Senate colleagues, to Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Secretary Sebelius to have Alzheimer's and other dementias included in the Healthy People 2020 initiative. The Healthy People initiative provides 10-year national objectives for promoting health and preventing disease.

I am gratified to work alongside Congressman Markey and the other members of the bipartisan Congressional Task Force on Alzheimer's Disease to address this oncoming public health tsunami--and hopefully to see prevention and a cure before it totally overwhelms our nation's health care resources.

Madam Speaker, today, I want to recognize and honor the life of Dr. Mildred Jefferson, who passed away on October 15, 2010, at the age of 84.

Dr. Jefferson was a trailblazer of her time. She was the first African-American woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School, the first female surgical intern at Boston City Hospital and the first woman admitted to membership in the Boston Surgical Society.

Dr. Jefferson was born in Pittsburg, Texas, on April 6, 1926, to Gurthie Jefferson, a minister, and Millard Jefferson, a schoolteacher. She graduated from Texas College in Tyler and earned a master's degree from Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts before attending Harvard Medical School. In her lifetime she also was the recipient of 28 honorary degrees.

Her life was historic in many ways, yet she will be remembered not only for the lives she saved as a physician but also for the lives she saved as an advocate for the unborn.

From the earliest years of the right to life movement, she dedicated herself to the cause, always beautifully articulating the humanity of unborn children. Poised and passionate, always focused and extremely devoted, she made history and inspired an entire generation of pro-life leaders.

Dr. Jefferson was among the founders of the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) and from 1975-1978 she served three terms as President of NRLC. She also served as director of Massachusetts Citizens for Life and a board member of American Life League. She was also a founding member of the board and a past president of the Value of Life Committee of Massachusetts and was active in Black Americans for Life.

Among all of her accolades and accomplishments, she should be best known for her own eloquent description of why she stood in solidarity with the unborn fighting day in and day out for their first right, the right to life. In her own words,

``I became a physician in order to help save lives. I am at once a physician, a citizen, and a woman, and I am not willing to stand aside and allow the concept of expendable human lives to turn this great land of ours into just another exclusive reservation where only the perfect, the privileged, and the planned have the right to live.''

Dr. Jefferson was always graceful. She embodied compassion. Her life is an example to us of the impact of faithful devotion to the sanctity of human life. Dr. Jefferson knew that you cannot speak of human and civil rights, while precluding virtually all protection to the most persecuted minority in the world today: unborn children.

She reminded us all, ``The right-to-life cause is not the concern of only a special few but it should be the cause of all those who care about fairness and justice, love and compassion and liberty with law.''

Dr. Jefferson is correct when she said,--the cause for the right to life concerns all of us. Someday, when our goal of ending abortion is finally realized, future generations of Americans will look back on us and wonder how and why such a rich and seemingly enlightened society, so blessed and endowed with the capacity to protect and enhance vulnerable human life, could have instead permitted, and even promoted, death to children and exploitation of women by abortion.

It was an honor to work alongside Dr. Jefferson to fight the injustice of abortion, and I know her legacy and memory will live on in the lives of those who knew her and in the lives of the unborn children she helped save.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the names of the children abducted to Japan whose left-behind American parent has contacted me directly.

M.B., abducted to Japan July 21, 1995

E.B., abducted to Japan July 21, 1995

Ezra Lui, abducted to Japan November 13, 1999

Kaira Kelly Litwiller, abducted to Japan June 10, 2003

Takoda Tei Weed, abducted to Japan January 16, 2004

Tiana Kiku Weed, abducted to Japan January 16, 2004

Kento Didier Touboule, abducted to Japan October 15, 2005

Mary Victoria Lake, abducted to Japan August 2005

Kai Hachiya, abducted to Japan December 28, 2006

Masahiro Brown, abducted in Japan since April of 2007

David N. Gessleman, abducted to Japan May 13, 2007

Joshua K. Gessleman, abducted to Japan May 13, 2007

Kaya Summer Xiao-Lian Wong, abducted to Japan August 2007

Wayne Kosaku Sawyer, abducted to Japan December 15, 2008

Yuuki Patrick McCoy (Kojima), abducted in Japan August 17, 2008

Keisuke Christian Collins, abducted to Japan June 16, 2008

Sean Hillman, abducted to Japan July 5, 2008

Kana Sugiyama-Gomez, abducted to Japan April 10, 2008

Joe Yamada, abducted to Japan September 1, 2008

Grace Danielle Starr, abducted to Japan January or February 2009

Brian Senna Starr, abducted to Japan January or February 2009

``Mochi'' Atomu Imoto Morehouse, abducted to Japan June 23, 2010

Mr. Speaker, the United States is currently seeking the return of at least 136 abducted American children.

Madam Speaker, as chair of the congressional Lyme Disease Caucus and a person who has been closely involved in Lyme disease issues for over twenty years, I want to bring to your attention extremely troubling issues regarding Lyme disease.

Lyme disease is the most common of all vector-borne infections in the U.S., with approximately 290,000 new cases in 2008. With the increase in Lyme cases, problems due to poor diagnostics and ineffective treatments for Lyme disease have become almost overwhelming--affecting larger numbers of people over longer periods of time.

Many patients are angry because progress in addressing Lyme disease has been impeded by entrenched bias and a lack of accountability in the science of tick borne diseases. It is critical that we identify biases and impediments that are constraining the science on Lyme and to open up the dialogue to honest and transparent debate. The scientists who have long been marginalized, the treating physicians who have felt intimidated and threatened, and most importantly the sick patients and their families need our help.

My main purpose here today is to introduce for inclusion in the Congressional Record the following statement ``The Patient Perspectives on the Research Gaps in Tick Borne Diseases,'' written by three of the Nation's largest Lyme disease advocacy organizations, who represent tens of thousands of patients. I believe that this statement provides important perspectives that need to be heard and taken to heart.

Patient Perspectives on the Research Gaps in Tick Borne Diseases

(Submitted by Time for Lyme, the national Lyme Disease Association, and

the California Lyme Disease Association on behalf of our patients

across the United States)

In December 2009, Labor HHS 2010 appropriations language,

signed into law by President Obama, encouraged the National

Institutes of Health (NIH) to ``sponsor a scientific

conference on Lyme and tick-borne diseases . . . the

conference should represent the broad spectrum of scientific

views . . . and should provide a forum for public

participation and input from individuals with Lyme disease.''

The language also requires NIH to identify research gaps to

understand the ``mechanisms of persistent infection.'' The

passage of this language represents a significant opportunity

to summarize and solidify the issues that prevent scientific

progress for a disease recognized here for 35 years, if, and

only if, this process occurs without bias. Progress can be

accomplished if the stewards commit to the elimination of

predisposition by key decision makers.

It is not clear why the NIH elected to subcontract this

issue to the Institute of Medicine (IOM), given that the

existing NIH conference structure contains the best process

to address the appropriations language requirements.

According to the NIH Consensus Development Program, which

explains the two relevant types of conferences offered by

NIH, ``when the available evidence is weak or contradictory,

or when a common practice is not supported by high-quality

evidence, the State-of-the-Science label is chosen.'' This

conference format would appropriately address the research

gaps that exist for Lyme and tick-borne diseases as it

provides a ``snapshot in time'' of the state of knowledge on

the conference rather than a policy statement of the NIH or

the Federal Government.

In Lyme disease, there are two distinct disease paradigms,

each providing science to support its claims. One paradigm

views the disease as ``hard to catch and easy to cure'' and

denies the existence of chronic Lyme disease--persistent

infection with Borrelia burgdorferi, the spirochete that

causes the disease. Under this paradigm, the state of the

science for patients with chronic Lyme disease is closed. Any

treatment is considered too risky because practitioners are

unable to determine the cause or extent of patient symptoms,

or they view the symptoms

as insignificant and write off the patients' complaints as

psychiatric in nature. This leaves seriously ill patients

without any viable therapeutic avenues. It also shuts the

door on future research necessary to get patients to a state

of wellness.

The alternative paradigm says that the science is too

unsettled to be definitive and there can be one or more

causes of persistent symptoms after initial treatment in an

individual who has been infected with the agent of Lyme

disease. These causes include the possibility of persistent

infection, or a post-infectious process, or a combination of

both, with the Lyme bacterium itself driving the autoimmune

process. This paradigm allows doctors the ability to exercise

their clinical judgment and provide therapies that are

helping their patients.

Patients with Lyme disease need a research agenda that

reflects outcomes that matter to patients, namely effective

diagnostic tools and effective treatments that restore them

to health. The reason there are two disease paradigms in Lyme

disease is because central pieces of the puzzle are missing

or are inadequate. The first area of concern involves

testing.

There are no reliable biomarkers of the disease.\1\ Current

diagnostic tests commonly used do not detect the spirochete

that causes Lyme disease, rather, they detect only whether

the patient has developed antibodies to the pathogen.

Antibody production, if it registers on the tests at all,

takes weeks to appear, thus rendering the current tests

ineffective in the earlier and more easily addressed stage.

Additionally, the Lyme antibody has been shown to form a

``complex'' with the bacterium itself--and tests cannot

detect ``complex'' antibodies. Once triggered, antibody

reactions may remain long after an infection has been

treated, also clouding the diagnostic and treatment picture.

The two-tier testing system endorsed by the Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is very specific for

Lyme disease (99%), so it gives few false positives. But the

tests have a uniformly low sensitivity (56%)--missing 88 of

every 200 patients with Lyme disease. By comparison, AIDS

tests have a sensitivity of 99.5%--missing only one of every

200 infected patients.\2\ Sensitive AIDS tests were developed

less than 10 years into the disease, while archaic Lyme tests

remain unreliable 35 years later. There is a critical need

for research exploring newer technologies such as polymerase

chain reaction (PCR), which is used with many other diseases,

and cutting-edge proteomics. Strain variations and co-

infections with other organisms, often transmitted by the

same tick bite, obscure the diagnostic picture further.

A vast number of strains of Borrelia burgdorferi have been

identified. Variation in strain may cause differing symptoms

or severity of symptoms as well as determine the appropriate

antibiotics and duration of treatment needed to clear the

infection.\3\ Different strains may also express different

proteins. Preliminary research shows that proteins need to be

examined to find the ones most often expressed, then using

microarray technology, doctors may be able to diagnose

patients using a chip which contains the proteins.

Research is needed concerning the role of mutation on

persistence. Some research indicates that bacteria can

exchange genetic material, probably contributing to its

ability to invade different systems in the body--some may

have a proclivity for the heart muscle, others for the brain,

and some for muscles and joints. By exchanging genetic

material, bacteria may be able to form a symbiotic

relationship to avoid detection by the immune response or to

further invade the body.

To date, every NIH-funded treatment research study has been

designed using the inaccurate diagnostic test results as part

of the entry criteria. The entry criterion in these studies

excluded the vast majority of Lyme patients and created

sample sizes too small (less than 220 patients to date) to

detect clinically important treatment effects or generalize

to the clinical population. Moreover, Lyme has not attracted

industry funding for treatment approaches, which places the

disease at a considerable research disadvantage. To detect

clinically relevant treatment effects requires much larger

treatment trials with sample populations that reflect those

seen in clinical practice.\4\

One thing that past research has demonstrated is that

patients with Lyme are a heterogeneous population. Hence, the

course of illness and responsiveness to treatment may vary

depending on the duration of onset of the disease to its

diagnosis and treatment, the presence of co-infections,

comorbid factors, other genetic characteristics of the

patients, and the virulence of the strain(s) with which

the patient is infected. Research sample populations must

reflect those seen in clinical practice to yield

clinically relevant results.

As advised by the Appropriations language, research on the

pathophysiology of Lyme disease is necessary. Research

projects need to be designed which determine the course of

the disease from inception, and which utilize treatments that

effectively interfere with the mechanisms that allow the

infection to persist. Little to no government sponsored

science has been dedicated to the effects on persistence of

the different forms of the Lyme bacterium (cyst vs.

flagellar), the role, if any, of biofilms, sequestration of

the organism from the immune system, the exchange and

mutation of genetic material of the spirochete, and the role

that components of the bacterial genome may play in

protecting it from eradication by the immune system or

antibiotics. Understanding the pathology of the organism can

greatly enhance targeted diagnostics and treatment

modalities.

Patients also need studies that explore a range of

treatment options. The ideal antibiotics, route of

administration, and duration of treatment for any stage of

Lyme disease are not established. No single antibiotic or

combination of antibiotics appears to be capable of

completely eradicating the infection in all patients, and

treatment failures or relapses are reported with all current

regimens, although they are less common with early aggressive

treatment.\5\ Treatment failure rates suggest the need to re-

examine the effectiveness of the currently recommended

monotherapy as a treatment approach. Studies need to explore

combination treatments and longer term treatment regimens,

which have been critical to the successful treatment of AIDS

and tuberculosis.

Patients need the type of outcomes research advocated by

the IOM to examine how well treatments are working in actual

clinical practice.\6\ While not all patients with chronic

Lyme disease have returned to a state of wellness, many have,

and we need to find out how and why. This information can

then be applied to other patients and used to establish a

research agenda for treatment that has a likelihood of

success, rather than abandoning patients based on limited

treatment trials.

The IOM process does not allow these research ideas to be

heard in an unbiased and transparent fashion with balanced

divergent viewpoints. While the NIH process precludes bias on

the part of panel members, the IOM does not. Four of the six

members of the IOM panel that have been selected belong to

IDSA, a medical society that has a known bias against chronic

Lyme disease diagnosis and treatment. Rather than providing

curative treatments that restore health, the IDSA would

provide costly and long term palliative treatments,

presumably for life. While the NIH requires participation by

major stakeholders (including patients and treating

physicians), the IOM does not.

The summary of the IOM proceedings will reflect this

pervasive lack of objectivity, undermining its integrity and

credibility. Additionally, much IOM deliberation is done

behind closed doors and an anonymous panel will be permitted

to comment on the written record. Because of such flaws in

the IOM proceedings, the three largest patient interest

groups who were offered a brief opportunity to speak (TFL) at

the IOM October 2010 meeting and an opportunity to provide a

commissioned paper--CALDA, the LDA and TFL--pulled out of the

conference in protest.

From a research perspective, strongly held paradigms can

create a closed loop, and experiments may be designed,

implemented and interpreted to support a particular

viewpoint.\7\ The antidote to bias is to balance scientific

perspectives and to ensure that all scientific viewpoints are

being heard and explored. Given the extraordinary stream of

federal funding granted to researchers who support the closed

paradigm which was created and is supported by the Infectious

Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and their vested interest

in maintaining the status quo, it is not reasonable to expect

this group of researchers to serve as neutral arbiters of

scientific debates over competing scientific paradigms. For

example, Lyme related panels dominated by IDSA have time and

time again excluded opposing viewpoints from participating or

controlled the review process to ensure outcomes that

reinforce the IDSA paradigm. If past is prologue, it is

obvious what the future holds for panels dominated by one

group.

Worse, the small treatment trials that have been conducted

have been given an undue amount of weight by IDSA researchers

and in its guidelines and used to apply a degree of certainty

on the science that far exceeds the limitations of the small

sample sizes of the studies. Further, they claim that the

state of the science is sufficient to determine with

certainty that chronic Lyme disease does not exist, is not

treatable with antibiotics, and that no further research on

this topic is needed. Sample size affects the strength of the

conclusions that may be drawn from them: ``Providing

definitive answers in the face of low event rates and small-

to-moderate treatment effects necessitates sample sizes in

the thousands or tens of thousands. . . . Funding for such

mega-trials is very limited, and is often restricted to

industry sources.'' \8\

For that reason, the Connecticut Attorney General antitrust

investigation into the development process of IDSA Lyme

guidelines found exclusionary practices and suppression of

divergent viewpoints on the part of IDSA panels that crafted

IDSA 2000 and the 2006 Lyme disease guidelines. Although IDSA

settled the investigation with the Attorney General by

agreeing to review its guidelines with a panel without

conflicts of interest, the control of the process was in the

hands of IDSA, which again selected a panel consisting almost

exclusively of IDSA members and excluding treating physicians

who held divergent viewpoints.

It was patients who pressed for the language in the

Appropriations bill that called for a review of the state of

the science of Lyme disease. However, patients need that

process to occur in a transparent manner, without bias, and

with the participation of all stakeholders. Albert Einstein

defined insanity as ``doing the same thing over and over

again and expecting different results.''

This process is a perfect example of that insanity.

Patients want research which will restore their health.

Their voice and the voice of the clinicians must be given the

necessary weight to legitimize the research agenda and the

research process. Truth in science can be achieved through

open debate in an independent process free from bias and

conflicts of interest. The scientific process fails when one

side of a debate controls the arena and sets the rules to

ensure that its viewpoint prevails.

Lorraine Johnson, JD, MBA, Chief Executive Officer,

California Lyme Disease Association.

Patricia V. Smith, President, Lyme Disease Association,

Inc.

Diane Blanchard/Deb Siciliano, Co-Presidents, Time for

Lyme, Inc.

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

(Mr. SMITH of New Jersey asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this important national security measure. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is comprised of three components. First, it authorizes the transfer of certain naval vessels to U.S. friends and allies abroad, including India, Greece and Taiwan.

It also includes language previously adopted by the House that strengthens the U.S. commitment to the security of the Jewish state of Israel by expediting the process for approving foreign military sales to that country and by extending the dates and the amounts of U.S. excess equipment that can be transferred to Israel from regional stockpiles.

Thirdly, it provides a statutory basis for the President to implement defense trade cooperation treaties signed between the government of the United States and the governments of the U.K. and Australia respectively. These treaties represent a fundamental shift in the way the United States conducts defense trade with its closest allies.

Rather than reviewing export licenses, the treaties will establish a structure in which trade in defense articles, technology, and services can take place more freely between approved communities in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia where such trade is in support of combined military and counterterrorism operations, joint research and development, production and support programs, and mutually agreed upon projects where the end user is the U.K., the Australian Government, or U.S. Government end users.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, first of all let me thank Chairman Berman and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, our Ranking Member, for their leadership in helping to shepherd this legislation to the floor today, and I want to thank my good friend and colleague Mr. Moran for his sponsorship. I am very proud to join him as the original cosponsor of this very important and very timely resolution.

You know, Mr. Speaker, last year we learned and really the country learned a great deal about this growing problem of international child abduction with the case of David Goldman, whose son was abducted for 5 years at the time, to Brazil. Thankfully, after a full court press, he was not only reunited, but he is now safe, father and son, in New Jersey.

But what we learned, the lessons learned from that, was that far too little has been done to help the other 2,800 American children who have been abducted to foreign countries, often in defiance of court orders that had said you cannot leave.

This resolution that we are considering today, H. Res. 1326, is an urgent

appeal to the government of Japan to end its complicity and/or its indifference to international child abduction.

Frankly, Mr. Speaker, American patience has finally run out. At present, at least 136 American children are being held in Japan against the wishes of their American parent, and in many cases, in violation of valid U.S. court orders. According to the Department of Defense, in 2009 alone--and we just got this by way of a report--10 American children were abducted to Japan from members of the U.S. Armed Forces. That's in 2009 alone. It is simply unacceptable and unconscionable that today Japan still has no mechanism to equitably issue and enforce a return or visitation order for children. It is intolerable that the lawless and damaging act of child abduction goes unpunished in a civilized nation. When an American parent who has taken every legal precaution to ensure their child is not abducted realizes that his or her child has disappeared, their heart breaks and a lifetime of waiting and pleading for action by both the U.S. and the Japanese Government begins.

Patrick Braden is one such father. Mr. Braden took every possible legal precaution to protect his daughter from abduction and to maintain his presence in her life as her father. However, in 2006, Mr. Braden's infant daughter, Melissa, was abducted from her home by her mother, in violation of a Los Angeles Superior Court order giving both parents access to the child and prohibiting international travel with the child by either parent. Mr. Braden has been unjustly cut off from his daughter by the covert illegal actions of the mom and daily worries that his daughter is being abused by a grandparent who has a history of such abuse.

Likewise, Sergeant Michael Elias hopes and waits and pleads with two governments, the U.S. Government and the Japanese Government, because we haven't done enough to work out some way of reuniting his family. While stationed in Japan, he met the woman who would become his wife. She came to the United States and they were married in New Jersey in 2005. Jade was born in 2006 and Michael in 2007. Sadly, his wife started an affair while Michael was on active duty in Iraq.

Their marriage came to an end in 2008, with a judge granting both parents custody and requiring the surrender of the children's American and Japanese passports because their mother had threatened to abduct the children. Tragically, the Japanese consulate reissued Japanese passports for the children in violation of the valid U.S. court orders restricting travel and in violation of U.S. federal criminal parental kidnapping statutes. Sergeant Elias has not seen his children since 2008. And the Japanese Government has done nothing to assist in their return or in the return of Patrick Braden's daughter.

And the list goes on. Chris Savoie's children, Isaac and Rebecca Savoie, were abducted in 2009 to Japan by their mother, in violation of a Tennessee State order of joint custody and in violation of Tennessee statutes. As a result of the mother's selfish actions, Mr. Savoie has been awarded sole custody of the children, but Japan will not recognize either the joint custody or the sole custody award. Although Chris is the children's father, the Japanese Government will not enforce any access or communication with his children.

Mr. Speaker, for 50 years we have seen all talk and no action on the part of the Japanese Government. Japan has never issued and enforced a legal decision to return a single American child. The circumstances of each particular abduction seem not to matter. Once in Japan, the abducting parent is untouchable and the children are bereft of their American parent for the rest of their childhood. France, Canada, Italy, New Zealand, Spain, and the United Kingdom have all repeatedly asked Japan to work with them on returning their abducted children. Japan's inaction on the issue is a thorn in the side of their relations with the entire international community.

Japan's current inaction violates its duties under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 23, completely and unjustly ignoring the equal rights of one parent. H. Res. 1326 calls upon Japan to immediately and urgently establish a process for the resolution of abduction and wrongful retention of American children. Japan must find the will to establish today a process that would justly and equitably end the cruel separation currently endured by parents and children alike.

H. Res. 1326 also calls on Japan to join the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The Convention sets out the international norms for resolution of abduction and wrongful retention cases and would create a framework to quickly resolve future cases--and would act as a deterrent to parents who now feel that they can abduct their child to Japan and never be caught. In light of the misuse of Japanese consulates in the Elias case, H. Res. 1326 also calls on Japan to ensure that its consulates are not accessories to parental kidnapping. Japan must put into place a system that stops the issuing or reissuing of passports without the explicit and verifiable consent of the American parent.

Finally, Japan must recognize the terrible damage to children and families caused by international child abduction. Children who have suffered an abduction are at risk of serious emotional and psychological problems and have been found to experience anxiety, eating problems, nightmares, mood swings, sleep disturbances, aggressive behavior, resentment, guilt, and fearfulness, and as adults may struggle with identity issues, their own personal relationships, and parenting.

I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 1326, calling on Japan to end the child abuse of international child abduction.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, after all of the publicity surrounding David Goldman, several people, including Patrick Braden, walked into my office and said that they had been totally frustrated not just by the Japanese Government but, to some extent, by our own.

We need the tools at the State Department, at the Office of Children's Issues, to more effectively promote the interests of American parents and of American abducted children. I've introduced legislation, and my good friend Jim Moran is one of the cosponsors. It is legislation which would comprehensively give the Administration real tools to make this a government-to-government fight rather than a David versus Goliath fight, where it is one individual fighting a court system and a government in a faraway land.

Paul Toland walked into my office, who is Jim Moran's constituent--he walked into his office as well--and we have both been trying to help him. Here is a man who served honorably as a commander in the United States Navy; and for over 6 years, close to 7 years, he has not seen his daughter. As my good friend and colleague pointed out, the grandmother has custody. Just like David Goldman, his wife had passed away, the man whose son was abducted to Brazil, and somebody else had custody of his child. Paul Toland's case is similar.

Patrick Braden invited me down to the Japanese Embassy. I have to tell you, as a father of four, I was moved to tears when a group of left-behind parents and people concerned about left-behind parents and abducted children gathered in front of the Japanese Embassy.

So what did Patrick do?

In a very dignified and very respectful way, he requested that he at least get to see his child. It was her birthday that day. There was a birthday cake to Melissa, who was halfway around the world. We all sang Happy Birthday, and he blew out the candles. He was missing her again for another year. It goes on and on.

This has to be resolved, Mr. Speaker. We need our President, our Secretary of State and the Congress to get behind these left-behind parents and to get behind bringing back our abducted children. If there is a custody issue, resolve it in the courts of habitual residence.

That's where those custody issues need to be fought out, not in a land like Japan where abduction is treated with kid gloves and actually embraced. I said previously, ``with indifference.'' Sometimes I wonder if it's indifference

in the way the Japanese Government deals with this. They are a safe harbor for child abductors, and that brings dishonor to the government, in my opinion.

I yield to the gentleman.

I yield myself the balance of my time to conclude.

I want to thank my friend for his leadership on this. This is a bipartisan issue. This is a human rights issue of American parents and of American children. We rightfully speak out on human rights abuses in China and Darfur and all over the world wherever and whenever they occur. This is a human rights abuse that's occurring against our own families, and our government--and this goes through successive administrations, Republican and Democrat--does not do enough.

You know, I don't know how many you have ever seen that Seinfeld episode with the Penske file which gets moved around from left to right and George doesn't do anything of, really, substance with it. We have very good people at the State Department who have these files in hand that would love to do more but they lack the tools. They lack the ability authorized by this Congress and by law to take it to the next level.

This is a government-to-government fight. Had it not been for the Congress rallying around David Goldman, Sean Goldman would still be in Brazil today because there would have been another appeal in the court and another appeal. They run out the clock and then the child is an adult. That's what is happening to all 2,800 American abducted children. The abductors are playing a game, a very dangerous game; and in Japan, as Mr. Moran and I know so well, nobody comes back.

Our government has to get serious. This resolution puts all of us on record and says we mean business. This is only the first step.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the author of the resolution, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), a member of the committee.

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

I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1631, calling for the protection of religious sites and artifacts from and in Turkish-occupied areas of northern Cyprus and calling on the Turkish Government to respect the religious freedom of all the people living in the territory it occupies. I thank my very good friend Mr. Bilirakis for introducing this outstanding resolution and for his faithfulness and effectiveness in exposing human rights violations in Cyprus.

Madam Speaker, this resolution reminds us of the ongoing barbarism of the Turkish Government's military occupation of the northern part of the Republic of Cyprus, a sovereign State. The Turkish Government frequently prevents Greek Cypriots from holding divine liturgy, and it has pillaged their sacred churches and holy sites. The Turkish Government currently uses no less than 28 Orthodox churches as army barracks, has converted 80 churches into mosques, and permits others to be used as nightclubs, sheep stalls, and dancing schools. Under Turkish occupation, 500 churches, monasteries, cemeteries, and other religious sites have been desecrated, destroyed, or looted.

Madam Speaker, this resolution performs a great service in documenting in painstaking detail the trade in sacred objects looted from these churches, which is extensive, international, and totally illicit. It also points out the legal obligation of the Turkish Government to prevent this trade, to restore looted objects as well as churches, and to respect the human rights of those who live under its occupation.

Madam Speaker, I am profoundly disappointed that over the years, including since the passage of the International Religious Freedom Act, that our government has far too often failed to speak out and to speak out vigorously in defense of the religious freedom of Orthodox Christians. This is really shameful. The Turkish Government's persecution of Orthodoxy, whether in Cyprus or Istanbul, the home of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, in Syriac Orthodox monasteries, or of the Armenian Orthodoxy, seems to aim at extinguishing Christian Orthodoxy within its borders.

As the Secretary General's report on the United Nations operations in Cyprus stated as far back as 1996, the restrictions on basic freedoms of Christians in Turkish-occupied areas of Cyprus have the effect ``of ensuring that with the passage of time, the communities (that is, Greek Cypriots and Maronites) would cease to exist.'' So I am glad that this resolution specifically urges the President, the Secretary of State, and the State Department Office of International Religious Freedom to report and take vigorous action on the traffic of Cypriot Orthodox heritage. The executive branch should take this seriously. Hopefully with the backing of the Congress, they will.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of H. Res. 1588, of which I am the original cosponsor.

Madam Speaker, we are all too familiar with the famous quote by the American philosopher George Santayana, who said, ``Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.'' The truth of this saying is tragically realized in the case of war and genocide.

General Romeo Dallaire, the commander of the former United Nations mission in Rwanda, tried unsuccessfully in 1994 to warn the United Nations that huge massacres were imminent in that country. Even he miscalculated the magnitude of the threat. Within a few months, Rwanda was engulfed in genocide, leading to the deaths of nearly 800,000 people.

Larry Eagleburger, a former ambassador to Yugoslavia who served as Deputy Secretary of State and then Secretary of State, never suspected that the hostilities in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina would escalate to the slaughter of more than 8,000 people that took place in Srebrenica in 1995.

Sadly, we have too many indications about what could happen if the two referenda scheduled to take place in Sudan in January do not take place fairly and peacefully. The 20-year war between the north and the south of Sudan that ended in 1995 took the lives of over 2 million people and displaced a further 4 million.

Peace in Darfur is inextricably linked to peace throughout the rest of Sudan. And the genocide there in 2003 unleashed the slaughter of over 300,000 women, men, and children. Almost 3 million have been displaced and are still consigned to the misery of camps for internally displaced persons.

Like many of my colleagues, I have visited Sudan. I have been to Mukjar and Kalma camp, and I have actually had a face-to-face meeting with General Bashir, the dictator in Khartoum, pushing for peace, pushing for an end to this slaughter. Unfortunately, he was obsessed only with trying to convince me that the sanctions against his government needed to be lifted. The fact that the sanctions were based on the senseless killing and displacement sponsored by his government was dismissed by him as of no consequence.

This signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement in 2005 marked a potential turning point for the Sudanese people. It calls for elections leading to a referendum in January of 2011 to determine whether the south will remain united to the north or secede as an independent state. The region of Abyei is also to hold a referendum to determine whether it will remain in the north or possibly secede with the south should the south choose that course. Specific conditions were to be met in anticipation of these major events, to ensure that they would be conducted credibly and peacefully.

Madam Speaker, these interim 5 years have yielded signs of hope that the country could settle into a stable, lasting peace. The United States has devoted substantial resources, nearly $9 billion in humanitarian, development, and peacekeeping assistance since 1994 to support the CPA's implementation. But numerous incidents have also exposed the extreme lack of trustworthiness of the Khartoum government and the urgent need for the government of southern Sudan to increase its capacity and accountability.

The Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health, on which I serve as ranking member, and the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission have held several hearings over the last 14 months. The testimony we have heard at those hearings sounded a major alarm about the ominous storm clouds gathering over Sudan. In fact, the issues raised at the two hearings in July of 2009 and the proposed solutions to those issues were so compelling that I and several other Members forwarded the expert testimony to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Scott Gration, our Special Envoy, asking them to take this incredibly compelling information into account as the administration engaged in peace efforts in Sudan.

Unfortunately, the administration took little or know account of that advice. Furthermore, it seemed to ignore its own strategy that was publicized in October of last year. Key members of the National Security Council deputies committee, which was supposed to meet quarterly, met only once in January with no noticeable outcome. The administration claimed it was taking the advice of numerous experts to establish specific benchmarks to be met by the respective parties according to a set time frame. The achievement of those benchmarks, created to ensure the timely implementation of the CPA, would be tied to incentives and disincentives to motivate their achievement. There is no evidence that these benchmarks were ever created, much less enforced with discernible consequences.

Madam Speaker, the President and the State Department have taken some action during the past few weeks, apparently recognizing that the time remaining until the North-South referendum is extremely short. One most hope that the adage ``better late than never'' will apply in this case. The challenges to be addressed in the next few weeks, particularly the demarcation of the North-South border and the post-referendum agreement on wealth sharing and citizenship can be met if the United States plays a leadership role in gathering the influence and cooperation of the African Union and other international players. Herculean measures must also be undertaken to ensure that the January 9 referendum is conducted in a manner that ensures the credibility of the outcome as well as the peaceful acceptance of that outcome by the parties.

With H. Res. 1588, I join my colleagues in pressing upon the administration the urgent need to assist the Sudanese people in their long-sought-after quest for peace. The effort will be great, but the price of another even more catastrophic war would be even greater. No one, particularly the Sudanese people, can afford to pay that price.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I yield such time as he may consume to the author of the resolution, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

First, I want to thank Mr. Pitts for offering this important resolution to remember the aid workers who died in Afghanistan. These aid workers were killed because of their humanitarian efforts, because they were trying to provide the Afghan people with important services so they could live in freedom, opportunity, and prosperity.

For undertaking these noble efforts, the aid workers lost their lives at the hands of murderous extremists who

seek an Afghanistan in the dark ages, an Afghanistan where people are debilitated by poverty and illiteracy, where democratic elections are unthinkable, where women and girls are murdered simply for trying to go to school, where freedom is a forbidden idea. Such an Afghanistan would again be a safe haven for violent extremist groups like the Taliban and al Qaeda who seek to destroy our Nation and our allies and to plunge civilization itself into darkness. So, Madam Speaker, we continue to strive to prevent such a threatening scenario from becoming a dangerous reality.

In that respect, we owe a great deal of gratitude to the many Americans who have done their part and sacrificed so very much, particularly our men and women in uniform, to build a safe, secure, and free Afghanistan. And we owe gratitude to the courageous humanitarian aid workers who risk their lives as well to save lives and to alleviate the suffering of the Afghan people.

In particular, we owe our thanks to the American aid workers who gave their lives almost 2 months ago--Cheryl Beckett; Brian Carderelli; Thomas Grams; Glen Lapp, who was Congressman Pitts' constituent and friend; Tom Little; and Dan Terry. We mourn their loss, and we send our condolences to their families.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I want to commend Congressman Mack, the ranking member of the Western Hemisphere Committee, for offering this resolution.

H. Res. 1662 commends the bravery of the 33 trapped miners in Chile who have endured nearly 2 months of unimaginable mental and physical strain following the August 5 collapse of the San Jose copper-gold mine which trapped them one-half mile below ground.

It was believed that these men did not survive the original collapse, but 17 days after the disaster the miners were miraculously discovered to be alive and in fair condition. Quick-thinking and decisive action led the men to take refuge in a shelter where they have been surviving for the last 7 weeks.

The Chilean Government has been working tirelessly to secure the safety of the miners as quickly as possible and to secure their release. In addition, scientists and doctors from NASA, as well as private U.S. engineers and companies, have been instrumental throughout the rescue process and continue to aid in the drilling efforts.

Various supply holes have reached the group to provide them with food, water, health supplies, air, and games to keep the 33 individuals safe and stable.

I rise today in support of House Resolution 1662, which commends the bravery of the 33 trapped miners in Chile who have endured nearly 2 months of unimaginable mental and physical strain following the August 5th collapse of the San Jose copper-gold mine which trapped them half a mile below ground.

It was believed that the men did not survive the original collapse, but 17 days after the disaster the miners were miraculously discovered to be alive and in fair condition.

Quick thinking and decisive action led the men to take refuge in a shelter where they have been surviving for the last seven weeks.

The Chilean government has been working tirelessly to secure the safety of the miners as quickly as possible.

In addition, scientists and doctors from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, as well as private U.S. engineers and companies, have been instrumental throughout the rescue process and continue to aid in the drilling efforts.

Various supply holes have reached the group to provide them with food, water, health supplies, air, and games to keep the 33 individuals safe and stable.

Because of the exhausting emotional and physical impact of the situation, psychologists have made it a priority to keep them occupied, and believe it is an integral part of the rescue, and reintegration process when they are finally pulled out.

Happily, recent advancements in the drilling efforts have improved rescue forecasts originally set for November.

I would like to commend President Pinera and the Chilean government for their tireless rescue efforts and again recognize the invaluable contributions of the U.S. agencies and private entities that have been a part of this humanitarian endeavor.

I also would like to extend my heartfelt sentiments to the trapped miners and their families.

Please know that we have you in our hearts and prayers.

I thank my good friend for yielding.

To Chairman Pallone, thank you.

Mr. Speaker, today the House will vote to reauthorize the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act, which is the law that I, along with Artur Davis, sponsored back in 2005.

That law created a new nationwide umbilical cord blood stem cell program, designed to collect, derive, type, and freeze cord blood units for transplantation into patients to mitigate and to even cure serious disease. Pursuant to the law, it also provided stem cells for research. The new cord blood program was combined in our 2005 law with an expanded bone marrow initiative, which was crafted over several years by our distinguished colleague Bill Young.

Since the program was enacted in 2005, 12 cord blood banks have received contracts with the Health Resources and Services Administration. Earlier this year, HRSA reported that there were some 27,493 cord blood units collected and that another 13,000-plus units will be collected with the funds that have already been awarded.

The reauthorization before us authorizes $23 million to be appropriated for fiscal year 2011 through fiscal year 2014 and $20 million for fiscal year 2015 for the national cord blood inventory, and it also authorizes $30 million to be appropriated for fiscal years 2011 through 2014 and $33 million for fiscal year 2015 for the bone marrow transplant program.

It also enhances the studies, demonstration programs and outreach projects related to cord blood donation and collection to include exploring innovative technologies, novel approaches, and expanding the number of collection sites.

It also extends the term of initial and contract extensions from 3 to 5 years, making it easier for banks to engage in long-term relationship building with birthing hospitals.

It will also require the cord blood banks to establish a plan for increasing cord blood unit collections and/or to expand the number of collection sites with which they work and provide a plan for becoming self-sufficient

Mr. Speaker, each year over 4 million babies are born in America. In the past, virtually every placenta and umbilical cord was tossed as medical waste. Today, doctors have turned this medical waste into medical miracles.

Not only has God in His wisdom and goodness created a placenta and umbilical cord to nurture and protect the precious life of an unborn child, but now we know that another gift awaits us immediately after birth. Something very special is left behind--cord blood that is teeming with lifesaving stem cells. Indeed, it remains one of the best kept secrets in America that umbilical cord blood stem cells and adult stem cells in general are curing people of a myriad of terrible conditions and diseases--over 70 diseases in adults as well as in children.

Cord blood transplants are on the cutting edge of science for the treatment of leukemia. In June, researcher Dr. Mary Eapen of the Medical College of Wisconsin said that, in treating leukemia in adult patients, cord blood is so flexible that it even worked when it's not an exact match. ``What we found is when you look at the outcome of leukemia-free survival, which is the likelihood of a patient being alive without disease, it's the same whether you are transplanting using an adult graft which is from an adult donor or a cord blood unit.'' Very promising results are also being found in children with leukemia who undergo cord blood transplants, with 60 percent of patients alive and leukemia-free at 60 months.

In addition to treating blood cancers, clinical trials are underway for the treatment of many other cancers, such as breast and kidney cancer and treating solid tumors. Human clinical trials show promise in treating type 1 diabetes, cerebral palsy, metabolic storage diseases, brain injury and encephalopathy, respiratory distress in newborns, spinal cord injury, and cartilage injuries.

Cord blood stem cells transplants can cure sickle cell anemia, one of the most horrific diseases suffered by and affecting one out of every 500 African Americans in America.

The legislation that is before us, thankfully, has already cleared the Senate and will soon be down to the President's desk for signature. The legislation before us lays out many important goals and benchmarks so that

more patients will be able to receive the treatments that they so desperately need.

Dr. Joanne Kurtzberg with Duke University Medical Center recently stated in a review of the successes of cord blood transplantations: ``Cord blood transplantation is now an established field with enormous potential. In the future, it may emerge as a source of cells for cellular therapies focused on tissue repair and regeneration.''

This is a great bill. It is bipartisan and deserves the support of the entire body.

I want to thank my good friend for yielding, and for his leadership. This is truly a bipartisan issue, and I especially want to thank my good friend and colleague Mike Doyle. We are co-chairs of the Autism Caucus. It shows that bipartisanship still survives. And for a tremendous cause, a good cause like combating autism, it is great to join him in sponsoring this bill. He is the prime sponsor, and I am the principal cosponsor.

I believe it is accurate to say that the provisions of this bill are not only important but essential in providing tangible assistance to those with autism spectrum disorder and their families. Implementation of the TRAIN Act will significantly expand the ranks of qualified service providers, who are equipped with the knowledge and tools of state-of-the-science, evidence-based educational, medical, and social interventions.

Personally, Mr. Speaker, I became involved in autism as far back as 1982 when I first visited Eden Institute in Princeton. Coincidentally, Eden is breaking ground tomorrow on a new, uniquely designed autism school designed by Eden teachers who have utilized three decades of knowledge and best practices in teaching individuals with autism to reach their full potential. Huge gaps in the Federal response to autism came into sharp focus back in 1998 when I was visited by Bobbie and Billie Gallagher, the parents of two daughters with autism from my district who told me of their concern about a perceived explosion in the prevalence of autism in Brick Township. Rosemarie and Geoff Dubrowsky, whose son Daniel was diagnosed with autism as well in 1997, are another couple who told me of the realities of autism, and they were very concerned about this perceived spike.

I would note that at the time, Centers for Disease Control spent a paltry $287,000 per year, straight line, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998. That doesn't even buy a desk, it is so little. Now we are up to $22 million.

After meeting with these families and others, we initiated an investigation led by the CDC, and they confirmed that cases of autism were significantly higher than expected in Brick. But the evidence gathered indicated a larger, potentially nationwide prevalence problem. I then introduced a bill which was accepted by Chairman Mike Bilirakis as Title I of the Children's Health Act mandating increased surveillance. You can't fight something if you don't know the who, what, when, where, and even the why of it.

As established, the legislation created Centers of Excellence, and now we know that nationwide, autism affects 1 in every 110 children, 1 in 70 boys. Sadly, in my own State, it is even higher. Faced with this epidemic, Mike Doyle and I formed the Coalition on Autism Research and Education, which today has 157 members.

The legislation we are considering today, the TRAIN Act, offers an opportunity for us to do something with the 1.5 million individuals living with autism every day. The legislation authorizes grants to existing University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities Education, Research, and Service, or comparable entities, to provide individuals, including parents, vocational, educational, and health professionals, with interdisciplinary training, continuing education, technical assistance, and information for the purpose of improving services to children and adults with autism in their families.

The bill also provides for the establishment of up to four new university centers for developmental disabilities, giving priority to minority institutions or institutions that would serve currently underserved populations.

Another important provision is the selection of a nationwide organization to disseminate nationally evidence-based best practices and other models, materials, and practices developed by the university centers, or from other sources, including development of a Web portal. People need to know the information because there is often a conflict about autism.

I urge Members to support this legislation. It is an excellent bill. It will help those who are afflicted.

Mr. Speaker, last week one of China's most heroic defenders of human rights, Chen Guangcheng, was transported from prison to his family's house. This was good news, but only a step in the right direction. We must not gloss over the fact that Chen, who in 2006 revealed to the world the massive violence and brutality of the one child per couple policy enforcement campaign in Linyi, Shandong province, remains under house arrest, imprisoned in his own home, which is surrounded by surveillance cameras and police. Foreign reporters attempting to enter his village have been beaten and driven away, and Chen is reportedly in need of urgent medical attention, having been regularly beaten in prison, where he lost a great deal of weight.

Just today a Radio Free Asia reporter spoke with Chen and his wife over a cell phone. Chen's wife said, and I quote, ``He has a sort of haunted look. And for the first few days after his release he couldn't speak at all.'' Think about it. This is a very, very tough and articulate man, yet for the first few days after his release he couldn't speak at all. Such was the brutality of Chen's imprisonment.

So it is all the more inspiring to read Chen's words. The Chinese Government may have broken his body in the laogai, but they have absolutely not broken his spirit. Chen got on the phone and called on ``international organizations and people of conscience'' to react to his continued arrest in a united manner. That's the house arrest. And, ``If they can help me today,'' he said, ``their actions will help another person tomorrow.''

A few words about Chen, Mr. Speaker. He is a self-taught lawyer, having been denied the benefits of higher education due to his blindness, and was known in Linyi for advising his neighbors on how to resist the government's injustices. In 2005 and 2006 he took the brave step that changed his life. He began interviewing people and gathering evidence about the massive violence and brutality of the one child per couple policy and its enforcement campaign that shook Linyi in 2005. What he uncovered was shocking: 130,000 forced abortions and sterilizations in Linyi County in that year alone, in addition to mass detentions and beatings.

In order to stop Chen's investigation, officials placed him under house arrest. But he managed to slip away and travel to Beijing, where he met with journalists from Time magazine and conferred with legal scholars about filing a large class action suit against officials responsible for the campaign. Officials soon abducted him back to Shandong, returned him to house arrest, and then convicted him on trumped up charges of property destruction. Chen served the full term of his 4-year, 3-month sentence, despite health problems indicating the appropriateness of medical parole.

Mr. Speaker, the Chinese Government's relentless pursuit of Chen corresponds to the continued violence of the one child per couple policy, which Chen bravely exposed. Sadly, what he documented in 2005 and 2006 is still going on today all over China. This year alone we have reliable reports of large-scale forced abortion and sterilization campaigns in Guangdong, Fujian, Yunnan, Zhejiang, and Jiangxi provinces. The campaign in Guangdong province was widely reported, the story having been broken by The Times of London in April of this year.

In Guangdong's Puning County, officials rounded up women and men, as well as the relatives of any resisters, detained them in cramped conditions, and working 20-hour shifts for 20 days, forcibly sterilized their quota of almost 10,000 people.

Mr. Speaker, Chen Guangcheng documented the fact that Chinese women are immensely traumatized by these campaigns and by the entire one child per couple policy. It's been estimated by the World Health Organization that some 500 women per day commit suicide--not per week, not per month, but per day commit suicide--in China, largely attributable to this horrific and barbaric policy called one child per couple. It is invasive. There is a crude surveillance of women's reproductive cycles, including monitoring their cycle per month. The strict birth limits drive sex selection abortion and the tragedy of what we call gendercide--the missing girls in China, which may be as many as 100 million girls since 1979, when this barbaric policy was first pushed on China by the West and by the United Nations.

It's been estimated that upwards of 40 million men will not be able to find wives by 2020 because they had been forcibly aborted as part of the China policy.

Finally, I appeal to our government, I appeal to our President, please speak out on behalf of Chen Guangcheng for his release so that this terrible nightmare he has had to endure will end.

[Sept. 14, 2010]

Radio Free Asia: Blind Activist Calls For Help

A Chinese lawyer is under constant surveillance following his release

from prison.

Hong Kong.--Authorities in the eastern Chinese province of

Shandong are holding a Chinese legal activist under house

arrest though his jail term ended on Monday, prompting him to

call on concerned citizens to support him in protest.

Chen Guangcheng, 38, had exposed abuses by local family

planning officials, leading to a jail term of four years and

three months for ``damaging public property and obstructing

traffic'' handed down by a Linyi municipal court in August

2006.

Chen served the full term of four years and three months in

spite of repeated requests for medical parole.

``Now that I have come out of jail, the authorities are

putting a lot of effort into keeping me under close

surveillance,'' said Chen, calling on the international

community to protest his treatment by the Chinese government.

``I am hoping that international organizations and people

of conscience will react to this in a united manner,'' he

said.

``If they can help me today, their actions will help

another person tomorrow,'' Chen said, calling on rights

activists and ordinary people to come to his house and

photograph the security personnel with their mobile phones.

``If they take away A's cell phone, then B can take a

photo. If they go for B's cell phone, then C can record it,''

he said.

Layers of security

Chen's wife Yuan Weijing said there are four different

layers of security personnel watching the family home.

``Between the national highway and our home, there are four

layers of surveillance,'' she said. ``Yesterday I wanted to

go out to buy some food but they wouldn't allow it.''

``I told them we have to eat, and that maybe they should

buy food for us, but they said that wouldn't do either.''

``The moment I went outside, about 20 people got to their

feet and started to surround me,'' Yuan said.

She said friends and relatives who tried to bring food to

the family were being refused entrance as well, and only

Chen's 76-year-old mother was being allowed out to buy food

for the entire family.

Yuan, whose repeated requests for medical parole for Chen

were ignored by prison authorities, said she is still very

concerned about her husband's health.

``I am most worried about the continuing diarrhea and the

persistent cough,'' Yuan said. ``For the first few days after

his release he couldn't speak at all.''

She said Chen had lost a lot of weight in jail. ``He has a

lot of grey hair and he has a sort of haunted look,'' she

said.

Chen suffered beatings while in Shandong's Linyi municipal

prison in June 2007 for ``being disobedient'' after launching

an appeal against his conviction to a higher court.

``Give his freedom back''

Chen, a self-taught lawyer, was detained repeatedly,

beaten, and kept under surveillance after he helped local

people take legal action against the Linyi municipal

government in cases of alleged forced abortion.

Beijing-based civil rights lawyer Li Subin said Chen should

have his freedom back now that his jail term has ended.

``Instead, the state-run prison has followed him back home,

where he is still imprisoned under house arrest,'' Li said.

``We have been working towards democracy and the rule of law

for 30 years in this country, and we can still see cruelty

like this today.''

``But if everyone takes this issue seriously, I don't see

how the gangster behavior of the local government and the

banditry of the local judiciary can carry on for too long.''

Meanwhile, Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), a senior member of the

U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs, in a statement

called on the Chinese government to release Chen from house

arrest.

``The prison release of Chen Guangcheng, one of China's

most heroic human rights defenders, is good news but only a

step in the right direction,'' said Smith.

``The fact that Chen remains under house arrest, imprisoned

in his own home, and is reportedly in need of urgent medical

attention, must not be ignored. I appeal to the Chinese

government to let Chen move about freely and ensure that he

has access to the care he needs.''

Chen Guangcheng's work exposed a culture of secrecy and

impunity among Chinese officials about the enforcement of

China's population control policy.

Local officials have admitted to taking draconian measures

when they have difficulty meeting population targets imposed

by Beijing.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the International Megan's Law is the culmination of over 3 years of extensive negotiations and research by multiple parties. Mr. Payne and I are deeply grateful to all who have helped craft this legislation.

I want to thank the majority leader, Steny Hoyer, for scheduling this legislation today and for his commitment to mitigating the crime, the heinous crime, of human trafficking. He and I have worked on that for years. And the International Megan's Law, which is a corollary to the trafficking work, has as its singular goal the protection of children from sex predators.

Special thanks to Chairman Berman and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen for their strong support for International Megan's Law, for helping to shepherd it through the committee, and for their staffs for being so helpful in terms of words and phrases, as well as important concepts in the bill.

I would also like to thank Chairman Payne and Ranking Member Lamar Smith and Bobby Scott for their support and their recommendations that are included in the bill as well.

I would especially like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren), former Attorney General, now Congressman, an expert on Megan's Law, for his enormous contribution because he was at the forefront in his State in implementing the

Megan's Law; and Ted Poe, who is the co-chairman of the Victims' Rights Caucus, for his work and for his compassion for those who are victimized by any number of crimes, including the crimes that we are talking about today.

I also would like to thank Sheri Rickert, Kristin Wells, and Janice Kaguyutan, staffers who have really done yeoman's work on this legislation. I am very, very grateful for that. And the NGOs that have also collaborated with us, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, who have endorsed the bill, the Covenant House, which has done a petition drive, and World Vision, and my distinguished friend from Nevada (Ms. Berkley), I thank her for her leadership as well.

This is a bipartisan bill and, hopefully, it will become law for one reason: to protect children.

Mr. Speaker, our national and various State versions of Megan's Law have revolutionized how we deal with child predators. Maureen and Richard Kanka of my hometown wrote the book on neighborhood notification and protection of children and families through information. We all owe an enormous debt to Maureen and Richard for taking a horrific tragedy, the sexual abuse and murder of their 7-year- old daughter, Megan, back in 1994, and turning it into the noble cause of protecting children throughout the United States.

But now it's imperative that we take the lessons learned on how to protect our children from known child sex predators within our borders and expand those protections globally.

Child predators, Mr. Speaker, thrive on secrecy and lack of any meaningful accountability. The secrecy they thrive on allows them to commit heinous crimes, crimes against children, and to do so with impunity. Megan's Law, with its emphasis on notification and knowing who is doing what and where, not only protects American children, but it also will protect children worldwide.

Just last month, Mr. Speaker, the GAO issued a deeply disturbing report entitled ``Current Situation Results in Thousands of Passports Issued to Registered Sex Offenders.'' The GAO found that at least 4,500 U.S. passports were issued to known registered sex offenders in fiscal year 2008 alone. The GAO emphasized that this number is probably understated due to the limitations of the data that it was able to analyze and to access.

Let me also remind--we all know it--passports last for 10 years, so, again, this number would grow every year.

What is even more disturbing are the details about 30 of those sex offenders, passport recipients the GAO selected for further investigation. One registered sex offender solicited trips to Mexico to find and prey on young boys. The FBI found cameras in a medical bag with a Spanish language flyer advertising lice removal for children, a procedure that requires children to undress. This offender, who is currently serving a prison sentence for possession of child pornography, applied for a passport because he plans to live in Mexico after he serves his sentence to avoid registering as a sex offender.

Another sex offender in the GAO report has multiple convictions for sexual contact with 11-year-olds. The offender had traveled to the Philippines, a known child sex tourism destination, as well as to Germany and France, since receiving his passport. He was recently indicted for possession of child pornography and for attempting to have sex with a two-year-old little girl.

Several of the registered sex offenders used their passports to travel to known child sex tourism destinations, including Mexico, the Philippines and the Caribbean islands. The victims of several of these offenders range from the ages of 7 to 11 years old.

Mr. Speaker, the ILO estimates that there are about 1.8 million children who are victims of commercial sexual exploitation around the world each year. The GAO's report confirms that American sex offenders are a significant part of this outrage.

According to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE, each year about 10,000 sex offenders covered by the bill before us travel internationally. We have information and the technology at our disposal to determine what constitutes a high-risk registered sex offender and to ensure that appropriate government officials are noticed in a timely fashion. And, frankly, if the country wants to say, ``you don't get a visa, you don't come,'' or ``if you do come, our law enforcement will keep an eye on you,'' that's what we hope will happen if this becomes law.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5138 would establish the legal framework that is required to accomplish this very achievable goal of noticing. Pursuant to the bill, registered sex offenders would notify our law enforcement 30 days before they travel, allowing experts in the newly created international sex offender travel center, led by ICE, to ascertain whether the individual poses a high risk of sexually exploiting children in the destination country. If the answer is in the affirmative, our law enforcement would be able to notify officials in that country who could either monitor the activities when he enters or prevent him from entering all together.

The legislation would also establish sex offender registries at U.S. diplomatic missions for U.S. child sex offenders who reside in other countries. This foreign registration system would allow U.S. law enforcement to track the location of sex offenders and to better ascertain if and when they re-enter the United States.

Clearly, the goals of this legislation do not stop at protecting children overseas from U.S. predators. Sex offenders from around the world are now able to cross borders and oceans to carry out their nefarious activity under the cloak of anonymity and disappear before a child is willing or able to reveal the terrible crime.

The International Megan's Law would establish the model needed for the Administration to pressure other countries to take action to stop child sex tourism originating within their borders and threatening children in the United States and everywhere else.

I have finally, Mr. Speaker, had so many conversations with people from other countries, foreign dignitaries who have asked me when the United States Congress is going to do something about American sex offenders traveling to their countries to rape their children. The International Megan's Law is the answer to that question, and I hope my colleagues will support it.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe), an esteemed member of both the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Judiciary Committee, and founder and co-chair of the Congressional Victims Rights Caucus.

I thank Judge Poe for his extraordinary statement and his observation that they recommit. That is what this is all about.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren), ranking member on the House Committee on Administration, an original cosponsor of this bill, and former Attorney General of California.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia and one of the original sponsors of this legislation.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I again thank my friends on the majority side for their courtesy and for working so closely with us on this legislation. It truly is a bipartisan bill.

You know, in 2000 I was the prime sponsor of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, and added the three Ps, prevention, prosecution, and protection. And a very comprehensive effort was made. We are now 10 years into implementation of that law. The TIP report that comes out every year comes out pursuant to that law.

One of the things we did in that law was to try to get every other country to pass laws that look a lot like ours, and maybe better and then we will borrow from their ideas. In this legislation as well there is a real admonition to the President and the State Department to try to get other countries to enact Megan's Laws in their own countries--a few have them, most don't--so we can protect our kids from these pedophiles when they come to our shores.

I urge a ``yes'' vote.

National Center for Missing &

Exploited Children,

July 21, 2010.

Hon. Chris Smith,

Washington, DC.

Dear Representative Smith: On behalf of the National Center

for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC), I commend you for

introducing H.R. 5138, the International Megan's Law of 2010.

This important piece of legislation will help protect

children around the world from registered sex offenders who

seek to victimize them.

Sex tourism is an insidious practice whereby offenders

travel to other countries for the purpose of sexually

victimizing a child. According to an estimate from the U.S.

Department of State, 1 million children are exploited by the

global commercial sex trade each year. Currently, there are

very few limitations regulating the international travel of

registered sex offenders. Simply requiring registration

within an offender's country of residence does nothing to

protect children in other countries from victimization. It is

imperative that we do everything we can to provide U.S. and

international law enforcement with information that might

prevent a child from being victimized.

We are grateful for your leadership and your steadfast

commitment to the most vulnerable members of our society.

Sincerely,

Ernie Allen,

President & CEO.

I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank my good friend, the ranking member, for yielding, and thank her for being one of the cosponsors of the resolution, along with Carolyn Maloney and Kay Granger and others in this body. This is a bipartisan resolution that we present on the floor today.

Mr. Speaker, while the World Cup is a joyous and unifying event watched the world over, it comes at a very high cost for many women and children trapped in sexual slavery in South Africa. Going on right now, the World Cup is drawing an estimated 2.7 million local spectators and up to 500,000 visitors to the country. It is an honor and an economic boon for South Africa, but it is also a threat to vulnerable women and children--a threat that the government of South Africa is and must continue to aggressively combat.

Major sporting events, Mr. Speaker, and conventions that attract large numbers of people in the United States or abroad have been proven to result in an increase in the demand for commercial sexual exploitation. Pimps and traffickers jump to respond to the demand by trafficking women and girls for prostitution to events such as the World Cup.

We have seen examples of this in stories coming out of South Africa in the media over the last several months. One taxi driver covered in a story proudly advertised his ``Red Light Tour'' which includes strip bar hopping and guidance to prostituted women less likely to be HIV- positive. He, like so many in the sex industry, is hoping to cash in on sexual tourism accompanying the World Cup. Sindiswa was just 17 years old, and according to Time magazine, didn't make it to the games. Forced into prostitution at 16 after leaving her impoverished village on a bogus promise of a job, she died of AIDS complications in January of this year.

Mr. Speaker, according to the U.S. Department of State, where prostitution is legalized or tolerated there is a greater demand for human trafficking victims and nearly always an increase in the number of women and children trafficked into commercial sexual slavery.

In preparation for the World Cup, the Government of South Africa, to its credit, commissioned a comprehensive study of human trafficking within its borders and discovered that trafficking victims were brought in from all over the world--not just from neighboring countries where poverty and porous borders make women and children particularly vulnerable to exploitation. Law enforcement in Cape Town, for example, where some of the games are played, has been closely monitoring and tracking human trafficking. Over the last few months, Cape Town law enforcement noted a sudden increase in women arriving with falsified immigration documents from Asia, and they

saw a sudden drop in the age of girls working the streets. I applaud Cape Town for its vigilance, as these were signs that criminal syndicates with the means and certainly the capacity were trafficking women and girls to the World Cup.

Mr. Speaker, as you may be aware, I offered the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, and its reauthorizations in 2003 and 2005. Our most recent TIP report, which is mandated by these laws, ranks South Africa as a Tier 2 country--a country that does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking but is making significant efforts to do so.

And so on behalf of my colleagues and I, we offer this resolution, H. Res. 1412, to congratulate South Africa for the steps it has taken--its first two major trafficking convictions and increased law enforcement activity, especially--in this all-important fight against human trafficking. We offer H. Res. 1412 today to underscore the urgent need for further action and trafficking funding prioritization by the Government of South Africa. Of course, that admonishment should go to each and every one of us, including the United States.

While South Africa does not yet have in place a comprehensive anti- trafficking legislation, it does have legislation that offers increased protection to children. It is my sincere hope that all levels of relevant government officials will be aware of their responsibilities under the anti-trafficking provisions of the Sexual Offenses and Children's Acts and the Children's Amendment Act of 2007, and that these will be fully funded and implemented by the Government of South Africa. As we all know as lawmakers, if the law goes unenforced, it is, frankly, not worth the paper it is printed on. That goes for any parliament's or congress' law. They need to implement this--and do so faithfully.

Mr. Speaker, law enforcement must be particularly vigilant in protecting children during the World Cup through an expanded law enforcement presence and raids in areas where exploitation is occurring. Trafficked women and children rescued during the games must be given special rehabilitative care in order to prevent the trauma that they have suffered from defining them and condemning them to a life of further exploitation and abuse. Aggressive prosecution of the traffickers is also a must, as organized crime will always gravitate towards whatever activity is most lucrative and least risky.

Moreover, as this resolution points out, it is our sincere hope that South Africa will follow up with prosecution of any soccer fans or other tourists caught exploiting women and children. The buyers of trafficking victims are responsible for this human misery, for without demand, these women and children would not be slaves.

I believe that the games are just the beginning for South Africa in its fight against human trafficking. We have seen tremendous investment of resources, will, and anti-trafficking momentum from nongovernmental organizations and faith-based organizations in the lead-up to the games. Cape Town Tourism, International Union of Superiors General and the Southern African Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Catholic Church, the Salvation Army, Red Card 2010 Campaign, and the Tshwane Countertrafficking Coalition for 2010 are just a few of those who have stepped up to combat this modern day slavery.

South African citizens have been widely warned about the dangers of human trafficking, and many have volunteered in the fight. Human trafficking is in the public eye now, and it is time for the Government of South Africa to purge it from its cities and anywhere else that it is found. I thank my good friend for yielding and urge Members to support the resolution.