Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 384) to extend the existence of the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group for 2 years.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 384, the Senate bill under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Committee on Government Reform, I am pleased to call for the consideration of S. 384, a bill that extends the existence of the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group. I commend the esteemed Senator from Ohio, Mike DeWine, and my distinguished colleague in this body, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), for working on this bill. I am proud to be a cosponsor of it.

Senate 384 extends by 2 years this worthy working group that was originally created by Congress through Public Law 105-246 in 1998. The group is made up of government agency representatives who are directed to oversee the declassification of U.S. Government records that contain information about Nazi war crimes.

Such information includes trafficking of assets seized by the Nazis and post-war communications between U.S. Government and former Nazi officials, unless declassification would unduly violate personal privacy or harm national security or foreign policy interests. The law also allowed for expedited processing of Freedom of Information, FOIA, requests made by survivors of the Holocaust.

On December 6, 2000, as part of the Intelligence Authorization Act for 2001, Congress changed the group's name to the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group. This action expanded the mission of the group to include the declassification of U.S. Government records related to World War II era war crimes committed by the Japanese Imperial government.

The project has produced some valuable accomplishments. It has allowed the release of over 8 million previously classified documents and generated a great deal of historical research.

However, the CIA has resisted disclosing certain files, preventing the completion of the work within the 3-year time frame anticipated by the original law. Recently, however, the CIA has agreed to modify its position on a number of key issues and work with the National Archives and other groups to declassify remaining relevant information. Accordingly, S. 384 would extend the law for another 2 years, to give all parties sufficient time to complete the project.

Madam Speaker, all in all, the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group is a valuable effort that informs the American people of the actions of their government while balancing the protection of legitimate national secrets.

Again, I thank the gentlewoman from New York and the Senator from Ohio for seeing this legislation through both Chambers of Congress. I urge strong support for this measure.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, again I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) for her extensive work on this legislation over a long period of time. I reinforce the gentlewoman's thank you and say that the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Tom Davis) wants to be on the record thanking the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Hoekstra) for waiving jurisdiction on S. 384 so we could take it up more quickly, and that was obviously very important.

I just want to say that I know the gentlewoman is going to ask for a roll call vote, and I join in that effort because I think Members want an opportunity to vote on this bill. I urge all Members to support the passage of S. 384.

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

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Government Reform have until midnight, March 31, 2005, to file a Report on Oversight Plans under clause 2 of rule X.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding me time, and I just want to rise in strong support for the gentleman from Massachusetts' (Mr. Delahunt) bill and a bill supported by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the majority leader, and to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for always being out front on such important issues.

This bill takes a very meaningful step. It may be small, but it is meaningful to ensure those who are most vulnerable in emergency situations, women and children, are not exploited.

In my work as chairman on the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations, I have had the opportunity to witness the crucial and awe-inspiring work of humanitarian aid organizations around the world. I am, frankly, in awe of organizations like AmeriCares, Save the Children, MercyCorps and so many others. They do extraordinary work.

As an original cosponsor of this legislation, I can clearly state we have no intention of hindering, in any way, the crucial work these and other humanitarian organizations do. In fact, most of the organizations working with the USAID already have adopted policies that protect their beneficiaries.

What we do want to say, however, is that with the U.S. Government's financial assistance comes some responsibility, and so by passing this legislation we will require aid organizations to adopt a code of conduct that protects beneficiaries of their assistance from sexual exploitation and abuse. This is not a burdensome condition.

In fact, the United Nations created a Task Force on Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in Humanitarian Crises and established a set of six core principles. This legislation clarifies the code of conduct should be consistent with those six principles to the maximum extent practicable.

We can all agree that Americans want to know our foreign assistance is being put to good use and certainly that it is doing no harm. I am sincerely grateful to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) and to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay). It makes me feel encouraged that on a bipartisan basis we can do something that has meaning and frankly will not only bring our country together, but bring this Congress together.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 5, the Class Action Fairness Act.

This legislation will work to balance class actions. Currently, plaintiffs' lawyers take advantage of the system by bringing large, national lawsuits in specific jurisdictions with relaxed certification criteria.

Attorneys are increasingly filing interstate class actions in State courts, mostly in what are known as ``magnet'' jurisdictions. Courts in these jurisdictions are attractive to lawyers because they routinely approve settlements in which attorneys receive large fees and the class members receive virtually nothing, and they also decide the claims of other state's citizens under the court's state law.

This results in more and more class actions being losing propositions for everyone involved--except for the lawyers who brought them.

The Class Action Fairness Act works to improve our legal system by allowing larger interstate class action cases to be heard in Federal courts, closing the magnet jurisdiction loophole.

This bill will also make it easier for local businesses to avoid harassment. Currently,

plaintiffs' lawyers can name a local business in a nationwide liability suit to stay out of Federal court. This legislation will put an end to this unfair practice.

Finally, S. 5 protects consumers with a consumer class action bill of rights. The bill of rights includes several provisions designed to ensure class members--not their attorneys--are the primary beneficiaries of the class action process, and are not simply awarded a coupon at the end of a trial.

Allowing judges to limit attorney's fees when the value of the settlement received by the class member is small in comparison and banning settlements that award some class members more simply because they live closer to the court will make class action suits more fair and help compensate the people who were wronged, not the attorney's handling their case.

I strongly support S. 5 and encourage my colleagues to do so as well.

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

Mr. Chairman, the Castle amendment is a sensible amendment to the base bill, and I thank the gentleman from Delaware for offering it. People who present a false driver's license to the Transportation Security Administration are turned over to the proper authorities, but for some reason that is beyond me we do not add these people to our flight watch list. It blows me away that we do not already utilize this commonsense practice.

Improving the information contained in passenger screening databases will enhance our ability to identify potential terrorists from gaining access to airlines. We have taken some important steps to improve our security at airports, but we need to do more.

This amendment enhances our last line of defense by tracking potential high-risk passengers without interfering with the rights of everyday travelers. It just makes so much good sense, and I hope that we adopt it quickly.

Mr. Chairman, welcome to the world of Mohammed Atta: Legal visa to come in, 6 months; driver's license from Florida, 6 years.

Like many in this Chamber, I was a strong supporter of the intelligence reform legislation passed last year, but when I voted for it, I believed we needed to go further in several areas, including strengthening driver's license guidelines.

In my home State of Connecticut, we take strong steps to ensure the integrity of our identification cards, but we are not perfect. To receive a driver's license in Connecticut, you must prove you are a legal resident of the State, and you are not a legal resident of the State if you are not legally present in the United States, period.

This is common sense to me. Driver's licenses are verifiable forms of identification in the United States. Providing such identification cards to people who are illegally present in our country presents serious concerns.

The problem, however, is that not all States maintain this high standard. That means that someone who is illegally present in the United States and takes advantage of a weak law in another State can obtain a driver's license and use the document to identify him or herself in the State of Connecticut. They can also use that document to access Federal buildings, rent a vehicle or get on a plane.

Tightening access to State-issued identification cards is an important and necessary improvement for our homeland security. Many Members have raised concerns about the impact of driver's license provisions in H.R. 418 in our home States. Connecticut Governor Jodi Rell stated, ``In my view, if a noncitizen is lawfully in this country, he or she should be able to obtain a driver's license for the time frame in which he is lawfully allowed to be here. Conversely, if someone is in this country illegally, he or she should not be able to obtain a driver's license in Connecticut or any other State.''

I could not agree more with her. Frankly, most of our constituents could not agree more with her.

Let me raise one other point about this legislation and commend the chairman for including this provision. A legally present visitor to the United States can obtain a driver's license in Connecticut, as he can in other States. However, in Connecticut we issue licenses for 6 years at a time. In that time, visitors can leave and come back, whether legally or illegally, an untold number of times. During subsequent visits, this person can continue to use the license for whatever purpose he or she wants. This is wrong. Frankly, it is stupid.

Requiring a temporary ID for persons temporarily in our country is a no-brainer. I do not think Mohammed Atta would like it, but, I do not care what he wants.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to mourn the death and celebrate the life of Mr. Edward Malcolm Chapman.

Edward Malcolm Chapman was born in Greenwich, Connecticut to Malcolm and Jessie Chapman on December 14, 1942.

While growing up in Greenwich, Ed attended the Greenwich school system. He was a member of the high school choir, played in the band where he was the first student to go Allstate in their freshman year. He attended Bethal A.M.E. Church where he sang in the choir. He graduated from Westchester Business School and graduated with a degree in Business and attended music school in Stamford, Connecticut.

Eddie entered the work force at a young age. He held several positions in the work force from the technological end to the consultive; Bunker Ramo; Perkin Elmer; and Digital Equipment Corporation. He spent the last nine years of his career at Drake Beam Morin, ``DBM'' becoming a very present part of the lives of many displaced individuals, consulting and encouraging them to be ever faithful in their present journey.

In keeping a rhythm with all life's great gifts, Ed was able to hit the golf course before photographing his five grandchildren, in the middle of preparing egg rolls in the wok to the melodious sounds of Stan Getz, all while hearing, listening, and understanding the problems of others.

He openly received the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ into his life in 1997 while attending Full Harvest International Church under Bishop Clarence E. McClendon. He was baptized in the summer of 2002, and excitedly proclaimed the Word of God with every opportunity. It is Ed's fondest wish that we continue to convey the Gospel throughout the world.

He is survived by his wife, Pamela Chapman; his parents, Malcolm and Jessie Chapman; his children, Darlene, Kimberly, Darrin, and Jamal; his brother, Arnold; his sisters, Deborah and Diane; his five grandchildren, Olivia, Austin, Karl, Lauryn, and Xavier; and a host of family and friends.

Ed's giving and loving spirit lives on through all who survive him and his presence though never forgotten will often be missed.

Mr. Speaker, on January 25, I was participating in the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland and, therefore, missed two recorded votes.

I take my voting responsibility very seriously and would like the Congressional Record to reflect that, had I been present, I would have voted yes on recorded vote number 8 and yes on recorded vote number 9.

Mr. Speaker, on January 26, I was participating in the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and, therefore, missed four votes.

I take my voting responsibility very seriously and would like the Congressional Record to reflect that, had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on recorded vote No. 10, ``no'' on recorded vote No. 11, ``no'' on recorded vote No. 12 and ``yes'' on recorded vote No. 13.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to insert in the Congressional Record the following statement by Jennifer Dempsey. Jennifer's brother Jack died bravely serving our nation in Iraq on November 13, 2004.

Corporal Kevin John ``Jack'' Dempsey December 9, 1980--November 13,

2004--A Son, A Brother, A Friend

I would just like to say a few words about my brother,

Jack. As a young child, Jack was always on the move. From a

very young age he was involved in team sports. His nickname

was Tiger because of his fearless personality. He excelled in

every sport he played because of his natural ability and

drive to be the best. As a son and brother he was loving and

protective. He has a great love for animals. Our mom took us

to every zoo and animal park she could find. Even as a

Marine, he showed that love. There was a stray dog at Camp

LeJeune that Jack used to feed and take care of.

Jack is loved by many people. He had a great smile and an

even greater laugh. He was a sweet kid who always wanted to

do something great with his life. My brother was a wonderful

man who accomplished many great things. He excelled in the

Marines and felt he was truly part of a brotherhood. My

mother and I are incredibly proud that he was able to do this

for himself and his country. We love him dearly and this loss

is tremendous to us. But we are extremely proud of the man he

became. He was a sweet soul with the courage of a tiger. My

brother Jack made the ultimate sacrifice to protect all of

us. Honor him well.

Mr. Speaker, on January 6, I was conducting oversight in Southeast Asia of tsunami disaster relief efforts and, therefore, missed one recorded vote.

I take my voting responsibility very seriously and would like the Congressional Record to reflect that, had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on recorded vote No. 7.

Mr. Speaker, we are being told that time is running out to pass intelligence reform legislation. The truth is, time ran out on September 11. We are on borrowed time.

Prior to September 11, three commissions, the Bremer Commission, the Hart-Rudman Commission, and the Gilmore Commission, all came to Congress and said the same thing, that the terrorist threat is real; that we need an assessment of this threat, a strategy to address it, and a reorganized government to implement that strategy. Sadly, few listened then; and, tragically, no one acted.

September 11 was the wake-up call from hell that told us that the terrorist threat is real; that Cold War doctrines of containment, reaction, and mutually assured destruction are totally invalid. And our policy now must be to detect and prevent and, on occasion, preempt those who wish to do us harm. That requires better intelligence.

Congress and the administration made significant changes over the last 3 years to improve our security, but today we are taking the most critical step by reorganizing our intelligence community, creating a Director of National Intelligence with budget and personnel authority. Thank you to all who have made this possible. We are changing and improving transportation. And, yes, while we could do more, we are moving forward with immigration reform.

I believe, I am confident that we can enact stronger immigration reforms in the next Congress, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to see that this is done. But do not defeat this bill because you want greater changes in immigration and lose the changes that have to happen on intelligence reform. We will get the job done. This is the beginning, the most important step; but we are not finished.

Mr. Speaker, in November 2004, the American Physical Society (APS) released a report on the Moonars program. The report reached many important conclusions and I encourage my colleagues to review APS's findings.

Currently, NASA's agenda is set by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Decadal Surveys. The panel is comprised of outstanding scientists who represent the full range of research within astronomy.

According to the report, the scope of the Moon-Mars initiative has not been well defined, its long-term cost has not been adequately addressed, and no budgetary mechanisms have been established to avoid causing damage to NASA's scientific program.

To accommodate the Moon-Mars initiative, NASA has already begun to reprogram its existing budget, resulting in indefinite postponement or delay of scientific programs that were assigned high priority by the NAS decadal studies.

The consensus achieved by the committee is that the recent success of the Mars Rovers demonstrate that we can use robotic means to address many scientific questions. The panel also found that human exploration has a role in NASA, but it must be within a balanced program in which funding is distributed to other initiatives as well.

APS makes 3 recommendations, which I encourage Members of Congress to take into consideration as we continue the debate on the President's Moon-Mars proposal.

First, NASA should continue to be guided by the recommendations of the NAS decadal studies in formulating its science programs.

Second, before the United States commits to the Moon-Mars proposal, a review of the initiative's science impact should be carried out by the

Mr. Speaker, I support the Fiscal Year 2005 Omnibus Appropriations Act, but I would like to state my opposition to the Weldon refusal clause provision.

The Weldon provision would exempt health care companies from any federal, state or local government law that ensures women have access to reproductive health services, including information about abortion.

If passed, this provision would have many negative effects.

It would override federal Title X guidelines that ensure women receive full medical information. A fundamental principle of Title X, the national family planning program, ensures pregnant women who request information about all their medical options, including abortion, be given that information, including a referral upon patient request.

I am also concerned this bill does not include an increase in funding for Title X. Each year approximately 4.5 million low-income women and men receive basic health care through 4,600 clinics nationwide that receive Title X funds. This program reduces unintended pregnancies and makes abortion less

necessary. Had funding for Title X kept pace with inflation since 1980, with no additional increases, it would be funded today at double its current budget.

While Title X is receiving flat funding from last year, H.R. 4818 gives abstinence-only programs an increase of $35 million. Unlike Title X, abstinence-only programs do not provide clinical health services.

Additionally, research shows comprehensive sex-education programs, which teach both abstinence and contraception, are the most effective. There is no federal program that earmarks dollars for comprehensive sex education.

I support a woman's right to choose whether to terminate a pregnancy subject to Roe v. Wade.

Abortion is a very personal decision. While a woman's doctor, clergy, friends, family, and public officials may have an opinion, the ultimate decision rests solely with her. It is vital for every woman to have access to as much information as she needs in order to make this decision.

While I support the bill, I oppose these provisions and amendments.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H.R. 4818 and salute Chairman Kolbe and Ranking Member Lowey in their efforts to bring this important measure forward.

Mr. Speaker, the foreign operations bill is a critical funding measure that allows the United States to engage and uplift the world's poorest citizens. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Department of State, the Department of Agriculture and now the established Millennium Challenge Corporation, should be proud of the work they do in partnership with American charitable organizations and various national governments around the globe to alleviate poverty and ease hardship. USAID effectively partners with several organizations based in Connecticut's Fourth Congressional District such as TechnoServe based in Norwalk, Save the Children, based in Westport and AmeriCares, based in Stamford.

TechnoServe's mission is quite simple; it provides hardworking men and women in the developing world with the tools and the means to participate in and benefit from the global economy. In partnership with USAID, the Department of State, USDA and some of the world's most respected corporations, TechnoServe is helping entrepreneurs build businesses that create real economic growth.

TechnoServe helps entrepreneurs build solid businesses that produce quality products for local, regional and international markets. These businesses provide jobs and raise incomes especially in the agricultural sectors of rural communities.

I am also grateful to have Save the Children headquartered in the Fourth Congressional district. Save the Children works tirelessly to provide hope to children in need across the world. The organization's ambitious mission calls its workers to service in the areas of education, HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention, women and children's health, economic development, combating hunger, and assisting refugees. Save the Children also produces excellent reports, which my staff and I use to better assess living conditions for women and children across the globe.

I am also grateful for the important work of AmeriCares, which provides disaster relief, humanitarian aid and is equipped to immediately respond to emergency medical needs for people all around the world. AmeriCares solicits donations of medicines and other relief materials from U.S. and international manufacturers and delivers them quickly and efficiently to indigenous health care and welfare professionals around the world.

Mr. Speaker, the foreign operations bill is a vital funding component of our presence in the developing world and a bill that will truly save lives and build hope for the future. I salute those in the United States government who are involved in humanitarian and development activities and am grateful for the opportunity to highlight the work of organization's like TechnoServe, Save the Children and AmeriCares as this measure moves to final passage.