Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, on July 25, 1995, Zepa, one of the six ``safe havens'' that the U.N. declared during the 1992-1995 war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, fell to the Army of Republika Srpska. This happened 2 weeks after U.N. forces abandoned the Srebrenica ``safe haven'' to the same force, which committed genocide by killing 8,000 Bosniak men and boys, and raping an unknown number of Bosniak women.

Madam Speaker, before the war Zepa was a village of great natural beauty. Three thousand people lived there, and 750 children attended its primary school. Today the village is a standing reminder of the evil history of ethnic cleansing: only about 500 returnees live there and most of them are unemployed.

On July 11th of this year hundreds of diplomats and members of the international community joined thousands of Bosnian mourners and elected officials to mark the 13th anniversary of the fall of Srebrenica. Madam Speaker, tomorrow let us mark July 25th with the same solemnity and remember the victims of Zepa. Let us share the painful memories of the horror that befell the village 13 years ago and let

us never forget that only justice and democratic governance will lead to a stable and prosperous Bosnia and Herzegovina.

I want to thank my good friend for yielding, and thank her for her great work on this legislation, as well as Chairman Berman and my good friend, Don Payne, and so many others who have made this day possible in this launching of a new initiative, building on the old.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5501, as amended, will literally mean the difference between life or death to millions, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. As Members know, close to 70 percent of the estimated 33 million people with HIV live in Sub-Saharan Africa. Of the 2.5 million children afflicted with this dreaded disease, 90 percent of them live in Africa as well.

When combined with opportunistic infections like tuberculosis--the number one killer of individuals with HIV--and malaria, which kills at least one million people a year--again, mostly in Africa--the HIV/AIDS pandemic compares among humanity's worst.

Our distinguished late chairman, Henry Hyde, prime sponsor of the original PEPFAR program, frequently compared the sickness to the bubonic plague--the black death--an epidemic that claimed the lives of over 25 million during the mid-1300s.

So with that much at stake, I want to remind my colleagues how important it is that we get this right. And I think, after a lot of hard work, we have managed to come to a consensus, first in the House, and now also in the Senate, and I hope it will be a sustainable consensus.

I want to note that Congress has unequivocally rejected the attempts of abortion-promoting organizations who wanted to hijack the Global AIDS program and link their abortion agenda to the compassionate effort to prevent this illness or to relieve the deleterious effects of HIV/

Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to welcome our guest chaplain, Father John Garrett, the parochial vicar of Our Lady of Sorrows-St. Anthony's Church, located in my hometown of Hamilton, New Jersey.

I have known, respected, and admired Father Garrett all of his life. Even as a young man, I was deeply impressed by his innate goodness, generosity, enthusiasm, motivation, tenacity, and above all, deep faith. It was a privilege for me to nominate Father Garrett, then known as J.C., as my first page, way back in the 1981-1982 school year. That's how far back we go.

Throughout his life, Father Garrett has always applied his enormous talents in ways that benefit others. In addition to living and preaching the gospel, he is also a board certified psychologist. His expertise includes helping those with depression, anxiety, panic disorders, PTSD, personality disorders, and the chronically mentally ill.

Along with his doctorate in psychology, Father Garrett has two master's degrees and has served as director of the graduate program at Columbia College in Missouri.

A man of deep faith, Father Garrett has and continues to make enormous contributions in promoting and securing the mental and spiritual health and well-being of others.

I welcome him back to the House of Representatives and thank him for his extraordinary commitment to serving others and for so effectively and faithfully radiating the love, the mercy, and the compassion of Christ.

Welcome, Father Garrett.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to ask a very serious question: Why is Congress, why are we, subsidizing the abortion industry?

Most Americans, I suspect, probably have no idea whatsoever that our tax dollars have enabled abortionists to establish and to run hundreds and hundreds of abortion mills throughout America. Indeed, America's biggest abortion chain is Planned Parenthood. Each year, approximately 290,000 children are aborted in Planned Parenthood clinics. Each year, Planned Parenthood gets more than $335 million in taxpayer funds, including huge amounts from the Department of Health and Human Services' title X program. Tragically, as their business grows, and they now have some 850 clinics and they have embarked on a building binge, and this chart clearly shows that as the taxpayer funds go up, the number of abortions go up because more venues are then provided to destroy the unborn child.

It may come as a surprise to at least some of my colleagues and the American people that the babies lost and women wounded by abortion are disproportionately African American and Hispanic. A study in 2005 found that 62 percent of Planned Parenthood abortion mills are located in African American communities. And when Hispanics are included, that percentage rises to over 70 percent. Of course, every human life is sacred regardless of race, gender, disability or condition of dependency. Every human life is of infinite value. But the disproportionate number of minorities who are aborted in Planned Parenthood clinics begs the question.

Two weeks ago, Dr. Alveda King, niece of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, said here in Washington, ``Defending human life is part of the civil rights struggle.'' She said, ``We are uniting civil rights and moral rights to fulfill the dream of what my uncle called the beloved community.'' She goes on to say that ``America needs to know that black leaders do support life. We start where life begins, with the babies, and we will march until abortion, racism, and all of society's ills bow to the truth that we are all one race.''

Dr. King, who has had two abortions herself, now boldly speaks out for both victims of abortion, the unborn child and his or her mother. She has said, ``The government should not be subsidizing racism, but that is exactly what it's doing through Planned Parenthood.''

Mr. Speaker, it is time, it is long past time, for us to take a serious, and for some a second, look at Planned Parenthood, its origins, and the fact that since 1973, the year the U.S. Supreme Court issued its infamous Roe v. Wade decision and legalized abortion, that approximately 4.5 million babies, disproportionately African American and Hispanic, have died in Planned Parenthood clinics.

It is time to look past the slogans and the rhetoric and the cheap sophistry, the euphemisms that are used to mask and to cloak this deed that kills a child. Abortion is big business and it is destroying the next generation of Americans, and you and I, Mr. Speaker, are subsidizing it.

Tragically, the seemingly benign Planned Parenthood, which works overtime to market its image and its brand, is in the grisly business of dismembering the fragile bodies of unborn children with chemicals, sharp knives, and hideous suction machines that are 25 to 30 times more powerful than a vacuum cleaner used at home. Planned Parenthood ought to be known as Child Abuse, Incorporated for the large number of children, 4.5 million, that it has already killed and continues to kill all while being subsidized by American taxpayers. This is not a business of healing or nurturing or caring. This is a business of destroying the most vulnerable and weakest members of our society.

For Planned Parenthood, business is good. Violence against children pays handsomely. In 2006, it actually increased the number of abortions it performed by nearly 25,000, while abortions nationwide were in decline, for a total of 289,750, a new pathetic record of kids killed even for Planned Parenthood. For so-called medical abortions, Planned Parenthood quotes prices from $350 to $650. For surgical abortions, they earn $350 to $900 apiece. These fees for so-called ``services rendered'' boosts the bottom line of this big business.

To put the annual number of child deaths in perspective, I ask my colleagues and the American people to picture this: 71,000 fans filled the University of Phoenix stadium to watch the Super Bowl this past February. It was a great game, my team won, the Giants. But the number of unborn babies whose lives were taken from them before they could take their first breath by this one corporation in one year could have filled that enormous stadium more than four times over. Planned Parenthood is now responsible for committing more than one out of every five abortions performed in the United States of America.

If the number of abortions performed alone doesn't convince you of Planned Parenthood's agenda, just compare it with other services it provides to pregnant women. Planned Parenthood, they have got the word ``parenthood'' in their slogan, in their name, but they provided a mere 11,000 clients with prenatal care. You walk into what is called a Planned Parenthood clinic, and you would expect to walk out with a baby, but prenatal care is not something they put an emphasis on. That is a ratio of one parent to every 26 women who lose their children to abortion. After it was revealed that Planned Parenthood had referred a meager 1,414 clients to adoption services in 2004, Planned Parenthood stopped reporting this miniscule adoption referral number. So, again, those children who go to abortion clinics with their mothers, in utero that is, don't walk out as potential adoptees.

To me, Mr. Speaker, this record doesn't seem to be that of an organization dedicated to preserving women's choices. I might add that these tiny lives are being extinguished. There are thousands of American families waiting to adopt, and we all know that. There are upwards of 2 million families who would love to adopt, but unfortunately, the babies are aborted.

Finally, if that is not enough, this so-called ``pro-choice'' organization does everything within its power and massive budget to prevent women from knowing all of their options and from being certain that their choices are truly informed.

Let's not forget that Planned Parenthood lobbies this Chamber and the Senate and, certainly, in each legislature throughout the country, and they litigate and litigate and bring court cases

over and over again in all of the States, against virtually every child protection initiative at both the State and Federal levels, including that of parental notification, spousal notification, women's right-to- know laws, informed consent laws--which actually bring down the numbers when women get the booklet and are informed about the growth and about the development of their child as well as about deleterious effects to their health--waiting periods, partial-birth abortion, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, statutory rape reporting laws, and of course, abortion funding bans.

Can we trust Planned Parenthood? They say their vision is to be the Nation's most trusted provider of sexual and reproductive health care. This is from an organization that targets minorities, that performs millions of abortions and barely even attempts to help women carry the babies to term. Reproductive health should include, not exclude, babies.

Mr. Speaker, the truth about Planned Parenthood's long, systematic destruction of vulnerable human life, at long last, must be brought to light. The cover-up must end.

I would like to yield to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) for 5 minutes.

I thank my good friend for his very eloquent statement, and I thank him for his leadership. This is the human rights issue of our time, and it's about time people recognized it as a human rights issue.

I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).

(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I want to thank my friend for his eloquent statement.

I yield to Michelle Bachmann such time as she may consume, and I understand some of the other Members may want to ask you to yield for a colloquy or for some comments.

At this time, I yield to our friend and colleague, Mr. Sali.

I thank my good friend for his very, very powerful statement.

I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).

I thank my friend for his statement and for his leadership on this important human rights issue.

I yield to my good friend from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

I thank my friend for his statement and for his leadership.

I yield to Mr. Franks, the gentleman from Arizona.

I thank my friend for his eloquent statement and for his very strong and passionate defense of the unborn and their mothers.

I yield to Dr. Broun, the gentleman from Georgia.

Dr. Broun, thank you so much for those very strong comments and for the insights that you bring as a medical doctor.

I yield 30 seconds to my friend and colleague, Michele Bachmann.

Madam Speaker, let me conclude with just a couple of comments.

First of all, I think most people need to realize who Margaret Sanger really was. And I've read her books; I've read her writings. She wrote in a book called ``The Pivot of Civilization'' that ``we are paying for,'' and I quote her, ``and even submitting to the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who should never have been born at all.'' In chapter five, she has a chapter called the ``Cruelty of Charity'' and takes to task those who would provide maternal health care and outreach to those women, poor women especially, in her writings. And I will put them in the Record. She says that ``such benevolence is not merely superficial and near- sighted, it conceals a stupid charity.'' To her, these babies and these mothers should have never been born.

Let me conclude, Madam Speaker, abortion mills don't nurture, they don't heal, they don't cure disease. Abortion is violence against children. Some abortion methods dismember and rip apart, the fragile bodies of children. Other methods chemically poison children. Abortion has turned children's bodies into burned corpses, a direct result of the caustic effect of poisoning. Consider a dismemberment abortion, this is called the D&E abortion. It is used later term, at least from the 20th week or so onward. These children, Madam Speaker, feel pain.

My colleagues will remember that last Congress we brought forward a bill called the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act which would at least inform the woman that a child at this age feels excruciating pain. Sadly, the abortion lobby, including Planned Parenthood, lobbied vigorously against informing women that these children feel such excruciating pain, sometimes as much as four times that which would be felt by a newborn or a child later in his or her life.

We need to, again, Madam Speaker, respect all human life. In the life of an unborn child, birth is just part of a process. It's an event in a child's life; it is not the beginning of life. These children deserve their fundamental human rights.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing legislation that would close a loophole in the Department of Defense's whistleblowers' protection statute (10 U.S.C. Sec. 2409) and expand this safeguard to include the men and women of the DOD contracting business who report abuses to their superiors.

Under current law, an individual is only protected--and therefore eligible for remedies--if he or she reports workplace security concerns to ``a Member of Congress or an authorized official of an agency or the Department of Justice.'' While I understand the importance of encouraging individuals to take their concerns to certain authorities, I believe it is imperative that we include in this authority an employee's superiors.

It seems only natural, that once someone recognizes a problem within their work environment, they report it to their superiors. This is part of a normal progression of attempting to resolve issues and challenging tasks on the job. Few people initially contact their Congressman or the Department of Justice when they first observe an irregularity on the job.

It is also important to note that many former military members migrate to the security contracting industry. Many of these men and women have years of previous service to our nation, have grown to respect their chain of command and understand the benefit it can provide in the workplace. When they have come to the conclusion that additional steps must be taken or when they have identified a significant problem in the work environment, these professionals are trained and encouraged to report their concerns to their superiors to enable them to assess the situation and foster a solution.

Similarly, many in the federal security contracting industry come from a law enforcement background with a comparable command structure and respect for their superiors.

The legislation I introduced today will ensure that those who identify problems within firms subcontracted by DOD are still afforded standard whistleblower protections even if they notify their employer about possible violations before they notify an agent of the federal government. The legislation does not require employees to notify their employer first and it does not preclude them from contacting federal officials, it simply protects employees who point out potential violations to their employer, the federal government or both. If an employee is dismissed prior to his/her notifying the government, but after notifying their employer, they will receive the necessary protections as well.

The current loophole was brought to my attention by a New Jersey resident who worked for a private security firm that guards military installations in my district and throughout the country. This individual witnessed and documented a number of events that raised serious concerns regarding the contractor's ability to ensure the safety and security of the base and the surrounding community.

Base security is not an issue to be taken lightly--anywhere and including in my state of New Jersey. As we all recall, in May of last year, the New Jersey U.S. Attorney's office arrested five men who were planning to attack another New Jersey installation, Fort Dix. After a thorough and aggressive law enforcement effort to thwart this attempted terror attack, the men accused have been detained and are awaiting trial. Still, the vulnerabilities at our military bases exposed by this incident cannot be minimized or dismissed.

The individual who brought this loophole to my attention reported to his employer what he believed were unfulfilled contract requirements that resulted in questions regarding the firm's ability to provide adequate security. After his boss dismissed his concerns, he then scheduled a meeting with the base security personnel to discus the matter. Before this meeting could occur, the individual was fired by the firm and barred from the base. At that time, he brought these concerns to me. However, since the law requires that a potential whistleblower be a current employee at the time he/she discloses pertinent information to a federal official, it was too late for him to be eligible for protections and/or remedies. Specifically, my legislation would expand the universe of those to whom an individual can properly report concerns to include the individual's chain of command, before and after any retribution, so that the individual will be protected and have the right to be reinstated if an investigation shows that the individual was punished for bringing the matter to the attention of proper authorities.

As we are all aware, in recent years the Department of Defense has looked increasingly to private security contractors to guard and police our military installations across the country. The men and women filling these positions deserve to be protected when they report violations and concerns to their superiors and especially if they are subsequently punished in an attempt by their employer to downplay or even cover up a violation. It is imperative that we amend the law to ensure that these employees are eligible for the same remedies as other whistleblowers.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 1230, which conveys a very clear and unmistakable condemnation of the violence we have seen in Zimbabwe following the elections in that country. I strongly support the resolution's call for a peaceful solution to the grave crisis there today.

If anyone had a doubt about the regime of Robert Mugabe before this

most recent wave of government-inspired violence, surely this thug has dispelled it now.

Mugabe has clamped down on the press and has thwarted the assembly of the opposition, detaining his opposition figures on numerous occasions. We have heard gut-wrenching testimony and seen gruesome pictures of the intimidation, the violence and the torture of those who disagree with this dictator.

And there are credible reports that some 36 people have been murdered by those loyal to Mugabe.

The opposition candidate, Morgan Tsvangirai, was courageous to return to his country, but we have all held our breath as Mugabe's forces have detained him several times.

No one feels safe in Zimbabwe today, Madam Speaker. Even United States diplomats attempting to monitor the regime's abuses have been harassed, their access to public places restricted.

Mugabe has even stooped to the pilfering of food aid and has halted international relief operations.

With a run-off election scheduled for June 27, we need to send a message, a good, strong, bipartisan message, that we in the United States and the world expect fair, peaceful balloting. The will of the people must be heard.

I ask the support of my colleagues for this resolution and pledge my support for the people of Zimbabwe in these very difficult times.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished ranking member from California.

Madam Speaker, I would like to again thank my good friend and colleague, Mr. Payne, for his sponsorship of this resolution. I think it sends a clear message to Zimbabwe and to Mugabe himself and to all of the enablers that have not done their fair part in trying to mitigate and hopefully end this crisis.

And I want to thank Mr. Royce for his very eloquent statement made just a moment ago and for his leadership as well.

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

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Terrorism and Nonproliferation.

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

And I, too, rise in strong support of H. Res. 1270 and want to commend our ranking member, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, for authoring this and helping to bring it to the floor. And I thank the majority for its support, including Chairman Payne, of this important resolution.

This resolution addresses the courage of those brave souls who took a stand for peace and democracy as they sought to block an arms shipment that was headed for Zimbabwe. I also strongly support this resolution's call for an arms embargo against the Mugabe regime.

In these dark days in Zimbabwe, it is encouraging that we recognize something positive, the efforts of those who have tried to stop the violence, the intimidation, and the bloodshed that have become the hallmark of the Mugabe regime.

It is no secret to the people of Zimbabwe or to those in the region that this regime has become the poster child for human rights abuses, but in order to bring about change in Zimbabwe those in the region and the wider international community have to take a real stand. That is what dock and freight workers did in the port city of Durban, South Africa, when a Chinese ship reportedly carrying millions of rounds of AK-47 ammunition, 1,500 rocket-propelled grenades, and thousands of other bombs for the Zimbabwean Defense Force came into port in early April. The dock and freight workers, as my colleagues have already told us, of the South African Transport and Allied Workers Union refused to offload the weapons--another reason why I like labor unions. They refused to get the blood of the people of Zimbabwe on their hands. With other civic groups of South Africa supporting the workers, a movement grew for an international boycott of the Chinese ship. Eventually, the governments of South Africa, Mozambique and Tanzania denied the ship permission to enter their ports.

Now I ask my colleagues to support a move to go a step further and support an international arms embargo against Zimbabwe for as long as Mugabe and his cronies are undermining democracy and using violence in that country. The more weapons that enter Zimbabwe, the more likely that Mugabe's forces will use them against their opponents.

H. Res. 1270 will send a message to the international community and to Mugabe himself that civilized nations will not sit by and allow him to run roughshod over his own people. It remains to be seen if China will see fit to

place principle over profit and ensure that its weapons stay out of Mugabe's hands. Its track record not just in Zimbabwe, but also in Sudan, has not been a good one, and so, frankly, I would not be that optimistic about China's performance in the future.

This is a good resolution, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 1127, and I urge my colleagues to adopt this condemnation of the anti-Semitism that is sadly so widespread in the Arab media and the press.

As the resolution of my good friend and colleague, Mr. Ackerman, points out, this anti-Semitism often takes the violent forms of Holocaust denial and incitement to violence.

Madam Speaker, when political leaders fail to speak out against anti- Semitic hatred and incitement, the void is not only demoralizing to the victims, but silence actually enables the wrongdoing. Silence by political leaders, in particular, conveys official approval or at least acquiescence and contributes to a climate of fear and a sense of vulnerability.

It is tragic that modern Arab leaders have not done a better job of speaking out against anti-Semitism. We here in the U.S. Congress can speak out today. It is very important that we do so. But our words are not as effective as would be the condemnations from Arab leaders. Members of Congress are going to have to carry, as we go forward to Middle Eastern countries or meet with the leaders when they come here, the sentiments contained in this resolution, and again, as we have in the past, explain to them the importance of speaking out. We cannot remain silent any longer.

If this fight against anti-Semitism in the Arab world is to succeed, we need officials in the U.S. and Europe and again the Arab world to, without hesitation or delay, denounce anti-Semitic acts whenever and wherever they occur. There can't be any exceptions. The purveyors of hate never take a holiday or grow weary, nor should we. Holocaust remembrance and tolerance education must dramatically expand, especially in the Middle East where it is almost nonexistent, and must find a footing in the Arab world. We have to ensure that our laws and the laws of other countries punish those who incite violence against Jews. And it is not utopian to begin to encourage modern Arab governments to adopt such laws. It is time to push this issue harder, far harder than we have done so in the past.

Madam Speaker, on June 16, 2004, the Helsinki Commission held a hearing, and I chaired it, one of several in a series on combating anti-Semitism. Our prime witness at that hearing, as he had been previously, was one of the greatest, finest, most effective and certainly the most courageous human rights leaders the world has ever known, Natan Sharansky.

As we all know, Natan Sharansky spent years in the Soviet Gulag. Congressman Frank Wolf and I in the 1980s actually went to Perm Camp-35 where he had spent many of his years in solitary confinement, where he had been tortured, and met with many of the political prisoners who knew him well, and they had nothing but accolades and respect for this man.

He pointed out at our hearing that, ``Thirty years ago I was a dissident in the former Soviet Union. The irony is that 30 years later I am in the same job, collecting information about anti-Semitism,'' in that case as a cabinet minister in the Israeli government.

He pointed out that the new wave of anti-Semitism is characterized by two components. The first one is the so-

called new anti-Semitism, and the lines between anti-Israeli propaganda and anti-Semitic propaganda are blurred.

He said the second is the classical anti-Semitism, the old, deep, primitive prejudice against Jews used over and over again to hurt individuals. He points out that this time, these images and this promotion of anti-Semitism is coming mainly through state-sponsored and state-supported media in the Middle East.

He pointed out that if you want to be successful in this struggle, we have to, like any other evil, we must have moral clarity about the issue. It is important to define the line between legitimate criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism. Israel, he said, is a strong democracy and the only democracy in the Middle East, and it is built on criticism from within and from without.

Of course, we support all forms of legitimate criticism, he went on, but it is very important to see the difference, draw the line between legitimate criticism and anti-Semitism.

He gave us a way of discovering it, or pointing it out and exposing it. He called it the three D's. You know it is anti-Semitism when it is all about demonization, double standard and delegitimization.

At our hearing, Madam Speaker, he brought with him a 150 page study entitled ``Anti-Semitism in the Contemporary Middle East.'' The study surveys anti-Semitic reporting, editorials and editorial caricatures in the government-controlled press of Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Lebanon and the Palestinian Authority, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. In the more than 100 editorial cartoons included in the report, Jews and Israelis are invariably represented as poisonous snakes, murderous Nazis and bloodthirsty crusaders. When I looked at it, I was sickened. It was disgusting.

The report found that vicious anti-Semitism expressly calls for massive terrorism and genocide against Jews, Zionists and the State of Israel. He pointed out as well in the report that the overwhelming majority of the propaganda again was from government-controlled media and from supposedly respectable publishing houses closely tied to those regimes.

In a brief review of the findings, classic European and anti-Semitic imagery is widespread in the Middle East, as is Holocaust denial and the identification of Israel as a Nazi state. The borders between anti- Semitism and anti-Americanism and anti-Westernism are blurred, almost completely blurred, the report found. Islamic religious themes, quotations and sayings are being widely mobilized to demonize Jews and Israelis and to justify the outright annihilation of the State of Israel and all its Jewish and non-Jewish supporters.

The Arab-Israeli conflict is increasingly portrayed as part of an internal confrontation between pan-Islamic nations and the infidels, Jews and Christians alike, who embody all evil. All Israelis, men and women and children, and Jews around the world, the report found, as well as their crusader allies, are held responsible for alleged crimes committed by the Jews.

He also showed at that hearing a movie, part of a movie, a 15-hour movie, an anti-Semitic film produced in Syria. That film was all about blood libel. He pointed out to us that that film is not seen just in the Middle East, and it ran for 15 hours every night during the Ramadan season, it is also seen in Europe.

We wonder why people are incited to hate Jews. We watched just a few minutes of it, and, again, it was despicable and made it seem as if blood liable was real.

Finally, Madam Speaker, Sharansky concluded by telling us that anti- Semitism is not only a threat to Jews. History has shown us that left unchecked, the forces behind anti-Semitism will imperil all the values and freedom that our civilization holds dear. We must not let that happen; to which I say again, and this resolution strongly suggests, we must not let that happen.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 350, which raises congressional concerns about the continued practice of whale hunting.

With the 60th annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission set to begin in Santiago, Chile, it is fitting and proper to consider this resolution. Over two decades after this Commission adopted a moratorium on commercial whaling, the hunt continues.

The humpback whale, a species designated as endangered under the provisions of the U.S. Endangered Species Act, was included among those whales pursued in the most recent hunting season. The marine life in our oceans, as we all know, including the whale, forms a precious part of these natural resources which we should strive to preserve.

Mr. Speaker, I support the resolution and reserve the balance of our time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), ranking member of the Committee on Natural Resources.

(Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas, Judge Poe.

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

Madam Speaker, I submit the following:

Requesting Member: Rep. Christopher H. Smith.

Bill Number: H.R. 5658.

Account: Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy Account.

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: McGee Industries Incorporated.

Address of Requesting Entity: Nine Crozerville Road, PO Box 2425, Aston, PA 19014.

Description of Request: The next generation aircraft carriers will be built using new technology that replaces the traditional steam catapults with an Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS). The environment around aircraft carrier catapults is among the most corrosive (i.e. seawater spray, heat, deck contaminants) with which the Navy must contend. No reliable corrosion or fracture data exists for the new EMALS materials and configuration operating in a catapult-like environment. A T&E program initiated to develop design-specific corrosion data under simulated catapult conditions needs to be continued in order to permit further design refinement, that will: (1) prevent premature component failures (2) minimize costly fleet maintenance and (3) enhance operational readiness.

Corrosion protection is an important element in producing a durable, highly reliable EMALS that will meet or exceed all Navy performance goals. It can be expected that unforeseen corrosion issues will arise as full-scale development, testing, and implementation of the EMALS proceeds. There is a window to generate corrosion data and recommend changes through 2009. Corrosion fatigue and stress corrosion cracking are critical problems that if addressed correctly, would improve performance, extend their life cycle and lower Operation and Maintenance costs for the carriers and their test facilities. Fracture mechanics testing of various corrosion control alternatives in a realistically simulated environment is required to resolve these concerns.

Detailed Finance Plan--McGee Industries: The total cost of this program has been valued at $3,000,000. We will need to design and develop load frames that will replicate the harsh catapult trough environment. Test equipment will need to be built that simulates the heat extremes, vibration effects, various deck contaminate and their effects on corrosion. All of these parameters will need to be monitored on a periodic basis to assure that we are simulating the EMALS operating conditions. At present we plan to evaluate more than 20 different chemicals and coatings.

The research program planned will follow the direction of the testing results and the direction of appropriate NAVAIR personnel. We estimate that we will need man hours for chemists, engineers, technicians and laboratory services as well as clerical and administrative support.

Breakdown of the Requested Funding: $1,250,000 for Design and Test Equipment; $500,000 for Laboratory Supplies and Equipment; $750,000 for Man Hours for Chemists, Engineers, Technicians; $250,000 Administrative, Travel; $250,000 Technical Assistance from Research Institutes.

Though this program is specifically directed at the EMALS system controlled by NAVAIR, McGee Industries plans to include updates pertinent to NAVSEA. Corrosion issues and improved corrosion protection are a problem throughout all military branches due to the age of existing equipment and the harsh environments which they must operate in successfully. Thus, this program offers conditioned maintenance improvements for the Navy, Army, Air Force, Marines and the Coast Guard.

I thank my good friend for yielding.

Madam Speaker, in December of 2006 and then again in March of 2007, my Human Rights Subcommittee's computers were attacked by a virus that, in HIR's words, ``intended to take control of the computers.'' At that time, the IT professionals cleaned the computers and informed my staff that the attacks seemed to come from the People's Republic of China. They said it came through or from a Chinese IP address. The attackers hacked into files related to China. These contained legislative proposals directly related to Beijing, including the Global Online Freedom Act, e-mails with human rights groups regarding strategy, information on hearings on China--I chaired more than 25 hearings on human rights abuses in China--and the names of Chinese dissidents. While this absolutely doesn't prove that Beijing was behind the attack, it raises very serious concern that it was.

Like Mr. Wolf, I too speak out often against the systematic abuse of human rights by the Chinese Communist government, whether it be religious persecution, the systematic use of torture, the total absence of labor rights, press freedom or free speech, and since 1979, the pervasive use of forced abortion to implement the barbaric one-child- per-couple policy, the gravest violation of women's and children's rights ever. So I was deeply concerned that the perpetrators of these crimes searched the China files on my computers.

It is now coming to light, Madam Speaker, that some other Members may as well have been attacked, and more needs to be done to combat this danger. So I thank my friend for offering this very important resolution.

Madam Speaker, cyber attacks on Congress are only a small, but not insignificant, part of a much larger pattern of attacks to which the executive branch, the Pentagon, and American business is the chief target. I want to recommend, as my colleague Mr. Wolf did a moment ago, ``The Chinese Cyber-Invasion,'' an eye-opening feature article that recently appeared in the National Journal. There we learn that some of our top cyber security experts believe that Chinese hackers have already shown that they can hack down our power grid. The experts believe that the Chinese hackers have caused power blackouts in the U.S. One blackout in 2003 was the largest in U.S. history and affected some 50 million people.

Chinese hackers and cyber warriors are mapping U.S. government and commercial networks at a rate that in the last 18 months has increased exponentially. A high-level ODNI official has referred to ``a kind of cyber militia . . . coming in volumes that are just staggering,'' he said. The same official said that what makes the Chinese hackers stand out ``is the pervasive and relentless nature of the attacks.''

Madam Speaker, with enormous aid, comfort and scads of one-of-a-kind technological assistance from U.S. companies, including Microsoft, Cisco, Google and Yahoo, the Chinese Government has achieved a huge qualitative capability to suppress freedom of speech on the Internet at home and to wage cyber warfare abroad.

Two years ago, I chaired the first congressional hearing on this unseemly, dangerous partnership, an alliance that enables the Chinese secret police to find, arrest, incarcerate, and torture religious believers and pro-democracy activists in China. Google, for its part, has become the de facto center for China's ubiquitous anti-American, anti-Tibetan, anti-religious propaganda machine, while Cisco has made the dreaded Chinese secret police among the most effective in the world.

I have introduced the Global Online Freedom Act, which has cleared all three committees of jurisdiction and is ready for floor action, and I, again, respectfully ask the leadership to bring it to the floor to combat this ever-worsening threat. For the Chinese people, it will make the prospect of freedom and democracy more achievable. For Chinese dissidents, it's a matter of survival, and for us, it may inhibit the transfer of technologies that we must prevent from falling into the hands of the enemies of fundamental human rights.

Mr. Wolf's resolution is a wake-up call, and it alerts us to take more effective action and thwart disruption and the theft of sensitive data. I strongly support the resolution.

Will the gentlewoman yield?

I appreciate my friend for yielding.

One of the concerns is, while they may be terrorists or homegrown, we're talking about and we are very concerned about is that this is the Government of the People's Republic of China and their enablers, people who are part of a network, that is very much focused on trying to wreak havoc and to glean information about dissidents, about legislative strategy, and about what we know about what's going on----

I thank my good friend, the ranking member, for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and didn't get here in time to speak on the resolution lauding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is among the most durable, enduring, inspiring and historic set of fundamental principles ever enunciated by anyone ever in history. It ranks right up there with the Magna Carta. It ranks right up there with the U.S. Bill of Rights, which obviously enumerated a number of our fundamental freedoms that we love and enjoy as Americans.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 60 years after its adoption, continues to serve as a backdrop to judge government policies and behaviors toward its citizens. And that is especially important as to how a government treats the weak, its most vulnerable and those who might otherwise be disenfranchised.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a promissory note. It's a paper promise that must be backed by deeds. It has only, however, been realized in part over the last 60 years. It is a work in progress. The Declaration inspires people to realize that they, as human beings, endowed by God, by our Creator, with certain inalienable rights, ought to fight for those rights. And this gives them a very useful tool in that endeavor, a means to that end.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has emphasized a number of important and hallowed rights, including religious freedom, the right to life, freedom from torture, equal protection, due process, labor nights and freedom of assembly. Under it, no one should ever be left behind. And that means that regardless of race, ethnicity, age, disability, or condition of dependency, no one should be left behind.

We know in many countries of the world, sadly that is not the case. In places like the People's Republic of China, human rights are systematically and pervasively violated by Beijing, whether it be religious freedom or the outrages we recently saw in Tibet, where the government crackdown crushed dissent with an iron fist. China persecutes the Uighurs in the autonomous region and families, especally women as part of their draconian one-child-per-couple policy which has made brothers and sisters illegal throughout China. That's right. Brothers and sisters are illegal in the People's Republic of China. A couple is required to get government permission to have a child. And forced abortion and huge fines are imposed on women and men who do not submit to the plan. In Burma and North Korea, human rights are also violated with grave impunity. And the U.N. Human Rights Council and other bodies of the U.N. need to do more to implement the intent of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Sadly, they have largely failed.

We have seen a very disturbing rise in anti-Semitism throughout Europe, certainly in the Middle East, and even in the United States and Canada. That too has to be combated. We see a rise in modern-day slavery, human trafficking--sex trafficking or labor trafficking. That needs to be combated and eradicated and victims assisted. Everyone should be free of that kind of terrible and despicable mistreatment. The Sudan, Zimbabwe, the genocide occurring in the Darfur region of Sudan is also a grave violation of human rights, completely antithetical to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Like the last, this is a century of victims.

And let me say before the West gets too smug about how well we are doing, we, too, have our problems. We see them every day. We have fallen short of the standard. I respectfully submit to my colleagues that we have failed to treat the defenseless unborn child with compassion and justice. We know now more than we have ever known before about the magnificent world of an unborn child. Ultrasound, 4-D ultrasound, the ability to do intrauterine blood transfusions and microsurgery have shattered the myth that an unborn child is somehow not human or alive. Of course they are. We know that these babies are society's littlest patients, in need of care and love, increasingly surviving at earlier, earlier times if born prematurely.

Abortion needs to be looked at, in my opinion, Mr. Speaker, as a serious violation of human rights. Abortion is violence against children. The dismemberment or chemical poisoning of a baby is antithetical to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. All abuse is contrary to the Declaration and that holds true no matter how old you are, and that includes unborn children. We also know abortion hurts women psychologically and physically. And that evidence grows by the day.

So I would hope that we would look at human rights as being for everyone, at all times, regardless of age, condition of dependency, regardless of race, no matter where you live. The universal declaration is for you. We need to speak out more boldly with better, more focused appeals employing all the tools at our disposal, linking sanctions and withholding of certain aid if a country doesn't live up to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Again, the Declaration is a backdrop. And I hope that we do even better than we have in the past. The past has been checkered. Certainly we have moved the ball down the court. Much more needs to be done however to respect everyone's fundamental human rights.

I thank my colleagues.

I thank my good friend for yielding, Madam Speaker, and I especially want to thank Mr. Wu, the gentleman from Oregon, for offering this very important resolution, and I'm very proud to be one of the cosponsors.

Madam Speaker, when a friend is struck by a tragedy, perhaps the death of a family member, we all know what to do. We call them up, we visit with them, we reach out to them. And that's what they need at that moment, to know that they are not alone, that they are accompanied by friends.

I think that is with nations as well. When tragedy strikes a nation, other nations have to reach out and remind them that they are part of a great human family and that other nations grieve with them. So it is right that our country should make this gesture after the tragedy that struck the great Chinese people.

Madam Speaker, lest anyone doubt the importance of this gesture, let me remind them of the outpouring of support that came from every corner of the globe after the attack on the World Trade Center in 2001. That meant so much to us.

Madam Speaker, many of us in this House number Chinese human rights activists among our friends, and among the list of people we admire most are people like Harry Wu, Joseph Kung, Wei Jingsheng, Bob Fu, and so many others come to mind. Over the past 10 days, I have been reminded of them as I have seen their mixture of practical earnestness and great generosity in the Chinese people's response to this tragedy, the outpouring of help from everywhere throughout China. The Chinese people continually amaze me for their willingness to stand by the unfortunate and the oppressed, and that sentiment is very strong among the people.

So, Madam Speaker, let us ask God to comfort all of those who have lost family members and friends in this terrible earthquake. I hope we can remember particularly the parents. Several days ago, I read an article in the Los Angeles Times, which I will enter into the Record, which reminds us, as

the headline says, ``One-Child Policy Adds to the Grief of China Quake.'' This is in the L.A. Times.

In Chinese culture, parents shower an extraordinary love on their children, investing their time and hope in them. The Chinese Government has cruelly and forcibly prevented most mothers and fathers from having more than one child, making brothers and sisters literally illegal. Now these parents have lost that one child. So we need to keep them in our prayers as well.

China's 1-Child Policy Causes Extra Pain

(By Christopher Bodeen)

After their daughter was born, Bi Kaiwei and his wife,

Meilin, decided to adhere to China's one-child policy and its

slogan, ``Have fewer kids, live better lives.''

For them and other couples who lost an only child in this

week's massive earthquake, the tragedy has been doubly cruel.

Robbed of their sole progeny and a hope for the future, they

find it even harder to restart their shattered lives, haunted

by added guilt, regret and gnawing loss.

``She died before becoming even a young adult,'' said Bi,

an intense, wiry chemical plant worker, standing beside the

grave of 13-year-old Yuexing--one of dozens sprinkled amid

fields of ripened spring wheat and newly planted rice. ``She

never really knew what life was like.''

Yuexing, a bright sixth-grader, was in school when Monday's

quake struck, bringing the Fuxin No. 2 Primary School

crashing down, killing her and 200 other students. Teachers

had locked all but one of the school's doors during break

time, parents said, leaving only a single door to escape

through.

Many among the more than 22,000 people killed across

central China were students in school. Nearly 6,900

classrooms collapsed, government officials said Friday, in an

admission that highlighted a chronically underfunded

education system especially in small towns and compounded the

anger of many Chinese over the quake.

In Wufu, a farming village two hours north of the Sichuan

provincial capital of Chengdu, most of the dead students were

a couple's only child--born under a policy launched in the

late 1970s to limit many families to one offspring. The

policy was meant to rein in China's exploding population and

ensure better education and health care.

The ``one-child policy'' has been contentious inside China

as well as out. The government says it has prevented an

additional 400 million births. But critics say it has also

led to forced abortions, sterilizations and a dangerously

imbalanced sex ratio as local authorities pursue sometimes

severe birth quotas set by Beijing and families abort girls

out of a traditional preference for male heirs. The policy is

law but there are exceptions.

Farther down the lane from where Yuexing is buried, 10 more

graves were laid out, some accompanied by favorite items--

textbooks for English and music, a pencil box, a Chinese

chess set. At one, grandmother threw herself to the dirt and

wailed as her husband lit a handful of ``spirit paper''

believed to comfort the dead in the afterlife.

Another bereaved parent, Sang Jun, stood where his

daughter, Rui, is buried, a simple mound of dirt beside his

quake-shattered farmhouse. The house is surrounded by burned

bushes--a traditional disinfectant. ``The house is gone and

the child is dead,'' said Sang, who wore a T-shirt and

plastic sandals. His parents, both in their 70s, looked on

with tears in their eyes.

Resistance by ordinary Chinese has forced Beijing to relax

the policies, allowing many rural families to have a second

child if the first was a girl. But in Wufu, the family

planning committee seems to have prevailed on most families

to stop at one child. Slogans daubed on boundary walls and

houses all along the rutted country road leading to Wufu call

on families to ``stabilize family planning and create a

brighter future.''

Standing in the rubble of the school holding his daughter's

ID and a posed shot taken at a local salon, Bi--pronounced

``Bee''--said starting a new family, either by having another

child or adoption, is simply imponderable.

``I'm 37 years old and my child was 13. If we were to do it

again, I'd be 50 when this stage comes along,'' Bi said.

Parents who lose children in disasters often feel intense

guilt for what they see as a failure to protect them, said

psychology professor Shi Zhanbiao. Parents, he said, may also

recall their past relationships with their children with

regret, thinking they were too stern, did not show them

sufficient love or did not interact with them enough.

``They'll think that if they just hadn't sent their

children to school that day, they would have been saved,''

said Shi, a researcher with the Chinese Academy of Science in

Beijing.

The loss is intensified for those with no other offspring

to lavish with care and affection, Shi said. And in China,

other, more practical concerns may also come into play

because children are generally expected to care for their

aging parents.

``They'll be worried about the future, because for the

later part of their lives, they'll have no one to depend

on,'' Shi said.

Bi said Yuexing was polite and smart. She had won a coveted

place at the county's best high school on the recommendation

of a teacher. She was a top student who got better after the

family moved closer to school to reduce her commuting time,

said Bi, who completed high school but failed the national

university entrance exam.

In her pictures, Yuexing, whose name combined the Chinese

characters for moon and star, is smiling and demure. The

studio shot shows her wearing a bright yellow sweater and

looking playfully over her shoulder.

Parents in Wufu said they plan to bring a formal complaint

over what they say was corruption and malfeasance in

construction of the school. They say officials moved the

students from a group of one-story classrooms--all of which

survived the quake--into a modern-looking, but unsafe

building.

``We have nothing else, no other wish but to win justice

for our children,'' said Sang's wife, Zhao Jing. ``We put all

our hopes on these kids, and this is the return we get.''

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

I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 1106, acknowledging the month of April as National Autism Awareness Month and supporting research efforts for the causes and treatment of autism, as well as the very special and enormous challenges faced by the parents of autistic children.

As founder and cochair of the Congressional Autism Caucus that I formed along with my good friend and colleague Mike Doyle back in 2001, I am very pleased to be here in strong support of this resolution. I would note parenthetically that we have 165 members in our caucus from both sides another aisle. I think with that kind of strength, we have been able to push a lot of new funding, both at NIH and CDC, which is I think appreciated by the community.

Awareness, Mr. Speaker, is in fact a crucial part of our fight, again making this resolution important. The more we inform and educate the general public about autism spectrum disorders, the earlier the medical community can effectively diagnose children with autism and get them the help that they need, and that is important news for the 1.5 million children and adults who currently suffer from autism spectrum disorders and their families.

I would like to first and foremost recognize and commend the parents and the families of individuals with autism for their sacrifice and dedication in providing for the special needs of their children and brothers and sisters with autism.

They are heroic. I also want to extend heartfelt thanks and appreciation to the teachers, physicians, therapists, and all other advocates who work with such diligence and compassion to support individuals with autism and their families.

Mr. Speaker, when I was first elected back in 1980, the prevalence of autism was estimated to be one out of every 10,000. Just 10 years ago, that number had been changed or updated to be one child in every 500. Today, it is estimated that one in 150 children in the United States will have autism spectrum disorder; and, once diagnosed, early intervention is key to significantly improving the outcome of individuals with this developmental disorder.

Autism, as we know, robs individuals of their ability to communicate and interact with others in society, but early intervention can help those individuals live a more satisfying life. I recognize the success of the worker training programs tailored for Americans with autism. With proper support, training, and early intervention, people with autism can be more productive members of our workforce.

I would like to thank the author of the resolution, Mr. David Reichert of Washington, for his leadership in raising autism awareness and commending the efforts of those who care for individuals with autism.

It is important that, in addition to this important awareness resolution, that we move forward in Congress with other important legislation to help those with autism and their families, such as the bill that I have introduced, along with Mike Doyle, called the Global Autism Assistance Act. This bill would establish a $10 million program to fund projects to address autism in the developing world over a period of 3 years. Grants would aim to raise awareness and understanding of autism and to aid service providers in less developed countries. The idea actually came when I was in Lagos in Nigeria and met with some individuals who are caring for autistic children who are absolutely without funds, and yet through love and through expertise they were helping children. But only a small number of kids were getting help in Nigeria, and that is where the idea was formed.

Another critical initiative is a bill that I joined Mike Doyle in introducing, called the Expanding the Promise for Individuals with Autism Act, H.R. 1881, which would authorize $350 million over 5 years to improve access to comprehensive treatment, intervention, and services for individuals with autism and their families, including adults with autism. Among its important provisions, it would create a task force of experts to evaluate current therapies and services, establish several grant programs to assist States to provide services for children and adults with autism, and call for a study of public and private financing of treatments and services.

You hear a lot about the lack of bipartisanship in Washington, DC, these days, Mr. Speaker. In the fight to combat autism, nothing could be further from the truth. Members on both sides of the aisle are united and committed to providing care and services for individuals with autism and the families.

I urge strong support for this resolution.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

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

Let me begin by thanking my good friend and colleague, Mr. Wynn, for authoring this very important resolution. I rise today in strong support of it, recognizing May as the Bebe Moore Campbell National Minority Health Awareness Month. Bebe Moore Campbell will be remembered as a celebrated writer and journalist whose New York Times best selling novel, ``72 Hour Hold,'' challenged minority communities to be open with their mental health and lower the stigma associated with receiving therapy. Her ability to assess

the mental health delivery system from a minority vantage point has helped raise awareness and remove barriers.

Mental illness, Mr. Speaker, can be crippling, not only to the individuals suffering from this disease, but obviously also the family and friends of that person. In some cases, therapy is declined or refused because mental health care is seen as the treatment of last resort. But we must improve public awareness and erase the stigma that is so often associated with mental illness.

Again, I would like to thank my friend and colleague, the author of the resolution, Mr. Wynn of Maryland, for raising public awareness of mental illness in minority communities and the importance of getting proper mental health treatment to those and for those who have been diagnosed. I encourage all of my colleagues to vote in favor of the resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.