International Relations Committee recording also available from
http://www.house.gov/international_relations/archive.html
look under
October 3, 2000 - Full Committee Mark-up, Part V
time 17:15 to 51:20 of smi file in link
http://boss/2/navisitestreaming.net/real/2/freeland/hir/56ir1003dm.smi
This official transcript saved from url:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?IPaddress=wais.access.gpo.gov&dbname=106_house_hearings&docid=f:69978.wais
<DOC>
[106th Congress House Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:69978.wais]
H. RES. 596, H. CON. RES. 404, H. RES. 577,
H. CON. RES. 397, S. 2682, S. 1453,
H. CON. RES. 414, H. CON. RES. 382, H. RES.
588, H. CON. RES. 361, H. CON. RES. 410
=======================================================================
MARKUPS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 28 AND OCTOBER 3, 2000
__________
Serial No. 106-196
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/
international<INF>--</INF>relations
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
69-978 WASHINGTON : 2001
_______________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250
Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York, Chairman
WILLIAM F. GOODLING, Pennsylvania SAM GEJDENSON, Connecticut
JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa TOM LANTOS, California
HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
DAN BURTON, Indiana Samoa
ELTON GALLEGLY, California DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
DANA ROHRABACHER, California CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California PAT DANNER, Missouri
PETER T. KING, New York EARL F. HILLIARD, Alabama
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio BRAD SHERMAN, California
MARSHALL ``MARK'' SANFORD, South ROBERT WEXLER, Florida
Carolina STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey
MATT SALMON, Arizona JIM DAVIS, Florida
AMO HOUGHTON, New York EARL POMEROY, North Dakota
TOM CAMPBELL, California WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
KEVIN BRADY, Texas BARBARA LEE, California
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania
GEORGE RADANOVICH, California [VACANCY]
JOHN COOKSEY, Louisiana
THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado
Richard J. Garon, Chief of Staff
Kathleen Bertelsen Moazed, Democratic Chief of Staff
Hillel Weinberg, Senior Professional Staff Member and Counsel
Marilyn C. Owen, Staff Associate
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
[...]
October 3, 2000
[...]
Markup of H. Res. 588, expressing the sense of the House of
Representatives with respect to violations in Western Europe of
provisions of the Helsinki Final Act and other international
agreements relating to the freedom of individuals to profess
and practice religion or belief................................ 113
[...]
The Honorable Benjamin Gilman, concerning H. Res. 588............ 134
The Honorable Tom Lantos, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California, concerning H. Con. Res. 410............... 134
[...]
Chairman Gilman:
We will now take up resolution H. Res.
588, expressing the sense of the House with respect to
violations in Western Europe of provisions of the Helsinki
Final Act.
The Chair lays the resolution before the Committee. The
Clerk will report the title of the resolution.
Ms. Bloomer:
``H. Res. 588, a resolution expressing the
sense of the House of Representatives with respect to
violations in Western Europe of provisions of the Helsinki
Final Act and other international agreements relating to the
freedom of individuals to profess and practice religion or
belief.''
Chairman Gilman:
Without objection, the first reading of
the resolution will be dispensed with.
[The resolution appears in the appendix.]
Chairman Gilman:
Without objection, the Clerk will read the
preamble and the text of the resolution in that order for
amendment.
Ms. Bloomer:
``Whereas under article 18 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to
freedom----''
Chairman Gilman:
Without objection, the resolution is
considered as having been read and is open for amendment at any
point.
I now recognize the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Salmon, the
sponsor of the resolution, who has an amendment.
Mr. Salmon:
Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment in the nature
of a substitute at the desk.
Chairman Gilman:
The Clerk will read the amendment. The
Clerk will distribute the amendment.
Ms. Bloomer:
``Amendment in the nature of a substitute
offered by Mr. Salmon. Amend the preamble to read as follows.''
Chairman Gilman:
Without objection, the resolution is
considered as having been read and is open for amendment at any
point.
[The amendment appears in the appendix.]
Chairman Gilman:
I now recognize the gentleman from
Arizona, Mr. Salmon, to speak on his amendment for 5 minutes.
Mr. Salmon:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate the opportunity to talk on this measure. First
I might say that I appreciate the Democrats working with me to
craft this substitute motion. I believe that this piece of
legislation is fair, it is responsible, it covers a broad range
of problems in terms of religious freedom and the persecution
of certain religious minority groups, and I know that is one of
the things that has stirred up some controversy in the past.
At the outset, I would like to thank Karen Lord of the
Helsinki Commission, and Hillel Weinberg of the Full Committee
for their hard work in helping to draft this resolution for
markup today.
Unfortunately, government discrimination against minority
groups and individuals in Western Europe based on religion or
belief continues to persist. Such discrimination has been
documented in several State Department human rights reports and
U.N. reports. This discrimination takes place at the national
and local levels of government and has included the denial of
business licenses, the exclusion from government employment and
political parties, and the prevention of performances or
exhibitions by minority religions. Religious and minority
discrimination appears to be permeating in European countries
like France, Belgium, Austria and Germany.
For example, in Belgium, the most recent international
Helsinki federation report mentions that religious minorities
in Belgium have been subjected to various forms of harassment
and other human rights violations, such as slander, anonymous
threats, loss of jobs, bomb threats, and denial of room rental
for religious ceremonies.
In France, the French National Assembly passed a bill that
would restrict the free expression, growth and development of
173 ``blacklisted'' religious groups including, but not limited
to, Jehovah's Witnesses, Scientologists, Opus Dei, Muslims,
Unificationists, and certain denominations of Orthodox Judaism.
Furthermore, this bill would imprison religious proselytizers
for up to 2 years for mental manipulation of the public.
Another example took place in Austria. The 1999 U.S.
Department of State Annual Report on International Religious
Freedom stated that the conservative Austrian people's party
formally accepted a decision that the party membership is
incompatible with membership in a sect. This policy led to the
resignation of a local party official.
Lastly, Germany continues to engage in discriminatory trade
practices by using a sect filter to ensure that a firm is not
affiliated with a certain religion or belief before granting a
contract to them. We heard testimony in this Committee a couple
of months ago regarding a certain vendor that provides services
to Microsoft, and we remember the problems that we are having
there.
It is time that this blatant discrimination came to a stop.
I, along with my colleagues, Mr. Payne and Mr. Gilman, have
introduced resolution 588, which expresses the sense of the
House relating to the freedom to profess and practice religion
or belief in Western Europe. The resolution also documents
several of the examples I have just discussed.
I urge my colleagues to vote yes on Resolution 588, and I
would like to also call to your attention letters sent to
Chairman Gilman by several religious leaders supporting my
resolution and urging its adoption. If I could, without
objection, I would like to enter them into the record.
Chairman Gilman:
Without objection.
Mr. Salmon:
These letters encourage the passage of this
resolution, because these religious leaders recognize, as we
have, that this is a serious problem. As you can see, there are
all kinds of organizations from those that represent the
Catholic religion to the Jewish religion to the family research
council. So there are many, many groups that have recognized
the problem.
I have another letter from a group called the Religious
Action Center of Reformed Judaism which also supports the
passage of this resolution.
[These letters appear in the appendix.]
Mr. Salmon:
I would like to close by quoting a very, very
profound and moving quote that is inscribed on the second floor
at the end of the permanent exhibit in the Holocaust Museum.
``First, they came for the socialists. I was not a socialist. I did not speak out. Then they came for the trade unionists. I was not a trade unionist, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.''
That is pastor Martin Nemor.
I know that some have said, why in the world would we want to say something about problems with our friends. We should only be beating up on our so-called enemies. But let me quote to you in the letter that was sent to Chairman Gilman by these religious leaders, a quote that I think is very, very appropriate.
``If we do not halt this antireligion movement in Eastern Europe, particularly in liberal democratic states like France, what right do we have to criticize nonwestern countries whose policies do not measure up to our own standards of religious freedom? Should the American community of faith not be concerned that the government of France, like that of Communist China, will not discuss issues of religious liberty with the United States Government. If we can't talk to our friends, who can we talk to?''
Mr. Chairman, I encourage the adoption of this measure. It
is something that has been debated over the last 3 years. I
know because I have been involved in all of those debates. I
know when I have gone to OSCE meetings to the various
participating countries it is an issue that we have constantly
brought up, yet the problems still persist. If we truly are
about religious freedom in this country and we serve as a
beacon for the rest of the world, if we are that light on the
Hill that President Reagan once talked about, then let's be the
light on the Hill. Let us stand up for religious liberty
throughout the entire world.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Gilman:
The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Bereuter.
Mr. Bereuter:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would say to the
gentleman from Arizona, I was relieved to find when I first
began to examine your bill that this was not a traditional
scientology resolution with all of its defects and
inaccuracies. I want to ask you to make sure I am addressing
the right one. Are we talking now about H. Res. 588? Is that
the one we have before us?
Mr. Salmon:
Yes.
Mr. Bereuter:
I have a number of specific questions, if I
could just go over them line by line with you, and these are
reports from various people, mostly international
representatives from some of the European countries involved
here.
On page 3, the whereas clause that begins about 10 lines
down, with respect to the French National Assembly, we were
told by State just as a matter of accuracy that the National
Assembly has not yet passed the bill and they would say it is
under consideration. I wonder if you know if, in fact, that is
accurate?
Mr. Salmon:
My understanding--yes, it did pass the House,
and it is under consideration in the Senate, so it has not
passed both bodies.
Mr. Bereuter:
But it has passed the assembly?
Mr. Salmon:
Right.
Mr. Bereuter:
That is your understanding?
Mr. Salmon:
Correct.
Mr. Bereuter:
Well, then, perhaps State is wrong or that is
now out of date.
Also on that same page, with respect to the French National
Assembly, the State Department indicates that the Seventh Day
Adventists should not be on that list. I don't have any
knowledge one way or another.
Mr. Salmon:
Could you repeat the question?
Mr. Bereuter:
That on the list on the last whereas clause
on number 3, our State Department says that Seventh Day
Adventists should not be listed there.
Mr. Salmon:
They are not on the list. They are not on the
list of the 173. If you read the statement as it is written, it
does not say they are part of that list. It says that--let me
see, ``whereas in 1996, French National Assembly report listed
173 organizations as suspect, including,'' and it goes through
and lists those groups. And then it says, ``and official
entities harass, intimidate, deny employment.'' That is not
continuing with the list.
Mr. Bereuter:
I see your point. So you believe that the
second reference is accurate?
Mr. Salmon:
That is correct.
Mr. Bereuter:
Okay. On page 5, the whereas clause that
begins ``whereas Scientologists''--this is a matter of
interpretation and I would just like your clarification. At
least the German Government suggests that the German Government
is not orchestrating boycotts in Germany. Now, your legislation
does not say that, although they are concerned about the
implications, so I would just like your clarification. There
may well be orchestrated boycotts. But you are saying the
German Government is, in no way, involved in orchestrating such
boycotts? Is that consistent----
Mr. Salmon:
Yes, it does not refer to a boycott perpetrated
by the German Government. It simply says boycotts. And to my
knowledge, that is the same information that we have gotten as
well, that there is no governmental entity that is actually
overtly instigating any kind of boycotts.
Mr. Bereuter:
On the top of page 4, Mr. Salmon, this could
be clarified, just a minor point. The Austrian law, somehow we
believe it was enacted in 1998, but that is just a minor point.
That can be collected, I gather. You may be right.
I thank the gentleman for his responses to these questions.
One of the concerns that I have had--and I know various
governments in Europe have had--is related to their subsidy of
church bodies and the treatment by the State or various levels
of their government with respect to subsidies paid to the
churches. They are particularly concerned in some cases, for
example, in Germany, since they do subsidize the recognized
churches, that subsidies do not flow to churches that they do
not recognize as religions, but contend that they do not,
thereby, justify, or in any way condone discrimination against
it.
Is there anything in your legislation that you think is
addressing the tax issue appropriately or inappropriately?
Mr. Salmon:
This legislation is silent on any
recommendations as far as tax policy of other countries. It is
not our intent to step in and tell these countries who they are
to give the subsidy to or who they are not. There is no
language on that.
Mr. Bereuter:
Mr. Salmon, thank you very much for your
responses. I yield back.
Chairman Gilman:
Thank you, Mr. Bereuter.
Mr. Payne.
Mr. Payne:
Thank you very much. Let me commend Mr. Salmon
for the outstanding job that he did, of course, as a cosponsor.
We worked diligently on this legislation. I am glad that it is
broadened enough so that those who had specific problems with
the fact that we talk about religious persecution and have
included Scientologists, that now seems to be put down further
in the resolution, and therefore, finds less objection. I
thought that the resolution, as it stood for the last 4 or 5
years, should have been passed, but I was in the minority, and
of course it was not.
So I am pleased that with this broadening and widening and
including of 189 groups, we could finally get some resolution
passed. We should certainly, though, seriously be against
intolerance everywhere, and we are finding that there is more
and more of it growing in the world. It seems like as the world
moves to sort of a one-body, one-Europe, you know, almost one
North America with NAFTA and all that, we are finding that
intolerance is on the increase and it doesn't make sense--not
religious intolerance, racial intolerance, intolerance for
sexual preference.
So I hope that this resolution passes. I think that it
certainly expresses the sense of the House with respect to the
violations in Western Europe. We certainly have been critical
of ourselves and we still need legislation here in the United
States to protect minorities and others also. So we are not
doing something that we are looking over there and not over
here. So once again, I would like to commend Mr. Salmon and I
strongly support the resolution, I support the broadening of
it, I support the inclusiveness of it, and I would hope that we
would be able to have this resolution passed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Gilman:
Thank you, Mr. Payne.
Dr. Cooksey.
Mr. Cooksey:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have some concerns about a trend that I have seen on this
Committee. It seems that every week, we spend an inordinate
amount of time on another resolution going over something that
maybe makes everyone on the Committee feel good about
themselves and the greater worth about what they are doing; but
at the same time, we are ignoring present day problems--the
history of the 20th century. In the 20th century, apparently
there was genocide by the Ottoman Turkish Empire, and we have
spent 10 hours discussing that.
The history of the Nazis and the Holocaust is well-known.
Stalin killed 11 million Ukrainians, or some large number. We
have our Trail of Tears in the United States that we seem to
ignore, and Congress existed when this occurred and Congress
participated in it. And this Congress, in this Administration,
sat by on our hands when hundreds of thousands of people were
killed in Rwanda, Burundi, the Congo, and more recently in
Sierra Leone.
So today, we are telling four European countries, Austria,
Belgium, France, and Germany how to run their government, how
to treat their religions. At the same time, if they were to
tell us how to run our government, how to run our Congress, how
to manage our relations with religion, I am sure we would
resent it, and properly so.
I am convinced that God will indeed judge us by our deeds
as individuals, and I don't think God is going to judge us on
our mixing politics and religions. That was one of the
foundations of this country. So I am opposed to this piece of
legislation. I don't really think it serves any purpose.
I would point out in relation to Scientology, which has
been a nagging problem for this Congress every year and it is
always defeated, this Administration, once they came into
office in 1993, was the first time Scientology had ever been
recognized. That was in 1993. So how can we criticize Germany
for not recognizing Scientology when our Administration made
probably a political decision on a group that I know has a
history of preying on elderly, perceived wealthy little widows,
and apparently preys on some people in the entertainment
industry that are not smart enough to do anything else but be
entertainers.
So I really am opposed to this and do not think it serves
any useful purpose. I think that if we are going to do
something useful or meaningful, we need to address some of the
problems of infectious disease around the world, some of the
problems of current day human rights abuses. Because I don't
really think anyone is suffering in Austria or Belgium or
France or Germany to the extent that it has been brought up
today.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Gilman:
Thank you, Dr. Cooksey. Are any other
Members seeking recognition?
Mr. Campbell.
Mr. Campbell:
Very briefly, to my good friend from
Louisiana in particular, I read the resolution and I think it
is a correct statement of the Rules of the House that we do not
enact the whereas clauses. That is to say the whereas clauses,
they are not numbered, they don't become part of law, and I
tell you why I say that, because the resolution starting at
page 6 with the lines that are numbered do not, in my judgment,
carry any of the dangers that the gentleman from Louisiana
observed, which are entirely contained in the whereas clauses.
Now, that is not to say that a friend looking at our
actions overseas will treat that difference with the same
respect that a student of statutory construction would here in
the United States. But I don't find anything objectionable in
the enacting clauses, the therefore clauses, and I would yield
to my good friend from Louisiana, if there is any aspect there
that you would like to identify, and then would I yield
whatever time I have back to the author of the resolution as
well. But just for a second, if there is anything that you see
on page 6 or 7 that you would like to draw attention to, I
would be pleased to yield, and if not, I don't want to put you
on the spot. I yield to you.
Mr. Cooksey:
I would ask the author if he would be willing
to withdraw the whereas for the Scientology group.
Mr. Campbell:
I yield to Mr. Salmon.
Mr. Salmon:
I respectfully would decline to the gentleman.
This is about religious inclusion for all of these various
groups, and I don't want to diminish the bill in any way. I
might also thank the gentleman for yielding. Every one of these
countries, these 4 countries that are noted in this resolution
cite international covenants in which they willingly signed and
agreed to these international covenants. We are simply trying
to put their feet to the fire and make sure that they adhere to
them.
I must respectfully disagree, if the gentleman from
Louisiana does not agree that religious freedom is a human
right. You stated that we should spend our time dealing with
human rights issues. This country was founded on religious
freedom. That is what we are about. The First Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States is about religious freedom.
That is why we came here. That is why the pilgrims originally
came to this country, to escape religious discrimination.
People of my faith have endured religious discrimination even
in this country.
Maybe the gentleman has never had to encounter that, but I
have sat through hearing after hearing after hearing, and I
have heard of multiple problems right now in Europe. It is a
serious problem, and if we don't stand in this Congress for
defending religious liberty, we have no right to speak on other
things.
In China, where we have had the PNTR vote, every year it
comes up, we talk about the religious freedom issues in China.
I do not think the gentleman from Louisiana believes that those
are not very serious issues. They are very serious. To me, this
is very, very important. I am sorry that you don't agree that
it is an important issue to try to defend religious liberty
worldwide, but I believe that that is a very fundamental part
of what we are about here.
Mr. Campbell:
I will reclaim my time. My attempt to pour
oil on troubled waters has failed. The whole idea of my
intervention was to say, hey, nothing to disagree about on the
enacting clauses, and instead, I am afraid I have made things
worse; so I am going to withdraw, unless my friend from
Louisiana wants to use the rest of my time.
Mr. Cooksey:
Why don't we drop the whereas on all of the
different religions, all of them, without singling out any one.
I am for religious freedom, but my point is, we are
dwelling on this issue in these four European countries, and we
are sitting on our hands while people are dying in Sierra
Leone. I was there 2 months saying I saw it. You saw the abuses
that have gone on there, that have gone on all over west Africa
because we have one group that does not have the courage to do
the right thing in west Africa and a group in our party that
does not care, it seems. And this is true with the Kurds, in
Iran, Turkey, Iraq. There are a lot of groups--I mean, what
greater human right is there than the right to life?
Mr. Salmon:
If the gentleman would yield.
Mr. Campbell:
I reluctantly yield.
Mr. Salmon:
I do not disagree whatsoever. I think we are
singing from the same sheet of music. I would be happy to work
with the gentleman on any legislation that he would like to put
forward on Sierra Leone or talk to the Administration, but I
don't understand why it is not possible to do two goods. I am
not responsible for the fact that we haven't taken up any
legislation or any issues regarding Sierra Leone or defending
life. I certainly agree with that. I don't oppose the
gentleman. I simply am asking you to work with me on this one
and I would be happy to work with you on the other. Thank you.
Chairman Gilman:
The gentleman's time has expired.
I support the pending resolution. It is unfortunate that
countries like those named in the preamble, which are so
important as allies, and where liberty is, in general, so
highly regarded, seem to have a blind spot when it comes to
religious liberty.
This is a carefully drafted resolution dealing with a
problem that is widely recognized in the community of observers
of religious liberty in this country. It is supported by
representatives of diverse religious groups from southern
Baptists to Sikhs. I have received letters in support of it
signed by personalities ranging from the Interim Dean of the
Catholic University Law School to Michael Novak of the American
Enterprise Institute.
Accordingly, I believe this measure deserves the support of
all Members of the Committee and I urge its adoption. I ask
unanimous consent to insert my full statement into the record.
[The prepared statement appears in the appendix.]
Chairman Gilman:
Are there any other Members seeking
recognition or seeking to offer amendments?
If there are no further amendments, the previous question
is ordered on the----
Mr. Cooksey:
Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Gilman:
Mr. Cooksey.
Mr. Cooksey:
I would like to request a recorded vote and I
notice there is not a quorum here right now.
Chairman Gilman:
Are you making a point of order with
regard to a quorum?
Mr. Cooksey:
Yes.
Mr. Ackerman:
Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Gilman:
Mr. Ackerman.
Mr. Ackerman:
Could I make a unanimous consent that we
suspend further discussion on this bill until we complete the
rest of the calendar and take this one up at the end?
Chairman Gilman:
A motion has been made to--a unanimous
consent has been made. Is there objection to the unanimous
consent request? Dr. Cooksey.
Mr. Cooksey:
Mr. Chairman, I would object.
Chairman Gilman:
Dr. Cooksey objects.
Mr. Cooksey:
I object to the unanimous consent request.
Chairman Gilman:
There is an objection to the unanimous
consent request.
The Chair will now----
Mr. Ackerman:
Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Gilman:
Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
Mr. Ackerman:
I make a motion to table the request of Mr.
Cooksey.
Chairman Gilman:
A motion has been made to table the
request.
Mr. Bereuter:
Could we have a clarification of
parliamentary situation?
Chairman Gilman:
I am going to ask our counsel to set forth
the parliamentary situation.
Mr. Weinberg:
Mr. Chairman, my understanding is that a
point of order of no quorum was made by Dr. Cooksey, and I
believe that there is no higher motion available such as a
motion to table at this point. The Chairman would be obliged, I
would advise the Chairman that he ought to count for a quorum
and then we would establish whether or not we had a quorum
present, following the normal procedure.
Chairman Gilman:
The Chair will count for a quorum.
The Clerk will call the roll.
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Gilman.
Chairman Gilman:
Aye , present.
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Gilman votes aye.
Mr. Goodling.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Leach.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Hyde.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Bereuter.
Mr. Bereuter:
Present.
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Bereuter votes present.
Mr. Smith.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Burton.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Gallegly.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Ballenger.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Rohrabacher.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Manzullo.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Royce.
Mr. Royce:
Present.
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Royce votes present.
Mr. King.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Chabot.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Sanford.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Salmon.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Houghton.
[No response.]
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Campbell.
Mr. Campbell:
Present.
Ms. Bloomer:
Mr. Campbell votes present.
Mr. McHugh.
[No response.]
Mr. Cooksey:
Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Gilman:
Dr. Cooksey.
Mr. Cooksey:
I would like to interrupt the quorum call for
a second and yield to Mr.----
Chairman Gilman:
It is not in order, but are you
withdrawing your request?
Mr. Cooksey:
I want to yield to Mr. Campbell, and then I
want to make one more statement after his statement.
Chairman Gilman:
Well, it is not in order unless you want
to withdraw the request for a quorum and then we can recognize
you.
Mr. Cooksey:
Okay. I will withdraw my request for a quorum.
Chairman Gilman:
The gentleman has withdrawn his request
for a quorum. I now recognize Dr. Cooksey.
Mr. Cooksey:
I ask unanimous consent to speak.
Chairman Gilman:
Without objection.
Mr. Cooksey:
Mr. Chairman, I want to go back and make the
same point I made earlier. This Committee is spending too much
time on resolutions like this, and I am not sure that we really
help anyone out. I am sitting here right now with a news
release about 5 Catholic priests that have died in Kenya, and I
worked in Kenya off and on for 6 years. Why haven't we
condemned the government of Kenya, why haven't we taken
decisive action there? Taking someone's right to life,
someone's life is a far greater human rights violation than
what we have seen in these four European countries. I am
convinced that we are not doing enough along these lines, and I
think that we need to reconsider what we are doing----
Mr. Ackerman:
Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. Cooksey:
I would hope that next year when this Congress
reconvenes and this Committee reconvenes, we will spend more
time on worrying about people that have either lost their lives
or are currently under the threat of losing their lives.
I yield.
Mr. Ackerman:
I would just like to remind the gentleman
that the Committee's intent to take up the resolution on Kenya
doing exactly what you just said if we are allowed to continue
without having a disruption of disbanding because of the
possible suggestion of the lack of a quorum.
Chairman Gilman:
We will continue----
Mr. Cooksey:
Well, I have withdrawn my quorum call.
Mr. Bereuter:
Would the gentleman from Louisiana yield?
Mr. Cooksey:
Yes, I yield.
Mr. Bereuter:
I want to clarify my own position. I intend
to vote for this resolution, and in fact will be voting to move
it forward because of the work that Mr. Salmon has done. My
concern is that this Member does not want to do anything to
suggest that Scientology is a religion. But I look at the
language here and it does say religion or belief. Certainly,
people who are engaged in Scientology have a belief, and that
gives me an opportunity to express my view without being
opposed to the resolution. But I want it particularly clear
that I do not consider this vote to be a concession on my part
that Scientology is a religion. I thank the gentleman for
yielding for that clarification for the record and to make
myself feel comfortable about it.
Chairman Gilman:
Thank you, Mr. Bereuter. Are there any
other Members seeking recognition? If not, if there are no
further amendments and no further requests, I recognize the
gentleman from Nebraska for a motion.
Mr. Bereuter:
Mr. Chairman, I move that the Chairman be
requested to seek consideration of the pending resolution as
amended on the suspension calendar.
Chairman Gilman:
The question is now on the motion of the
gentleman from Nebraska. All those in favor signify in the
usual manner; opposed. The ayes have it. And the resolution is
agreed to.