Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2006 and 2007 - 2

FOREIGN RELATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEARS 2006 AND 2007 -- (House of Representatives - July 19, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

AMENDMENT NO. 12 OFFERED BY MR. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, for several years now I have pushed USAID and the Congress to establish a program to assist women who suffer from obstetric fistula. According to the USAID, an estimated 2 million women suffer needlessly from fistula and from 50,000 to 100,000 new cases are added every year, mostly in Africa.

Fistula occurs during obstetric labor, which sometime damages soft tissues. The destroyed tissues leave a hole or fistula in the pelvic floor area which causes incontinence. Tragically, the constant leaking of urine and feces leads to sickness, desertion by husbands and family, extreme social isolation, and poverty. Who are vulnerable, according to the USAID, very young mothers, women experiencing their first birth, women whose growth has been stunted due to malnutrition or illness, and poor women who lack access to the most basic of obstetric services.

My amendment and the underlying language in H.R. 2601, section 901, that I put into the bill, establishes 12 centers for the treatment and prevention of obstetric fistula. Funding is authorized at $5 million in 2006, and the amendment increases the authorization by $2.5 million to $7.5 million in fiscal year 2007.

Amazingly, for $150 to a couple hundred dollars, a woman victimized by fistula can obtain a surgical repair that gives her back her life. No woman should be denied this minimal, life-saving surgical repair. My amendment requires that the centers include increased access for women to emergency obstetrical care, including increased access to skilled birth attendants and care facilities.

My amendment states that the centers may include activities to expand abstinence education, postponement of marriage and child bearing until after the teenage years, and access to family-planning services.

During markup, an amendment was offered to exclude, and this would be the result of that language, certain faith-based health care providers who, while deeply committed to mitigating the pain of fistula, would be barred from receiving funds. I have been in contact with Dr. Kent Hill, the Acting Assistant Administrator for Global Health at USAID, and he concurs that my amendment is preferable and balanced because it permits inclusion of family planning programs, gives USAID the flexibility to get the job done, and is consistent with the conscience clause we secured through an amendment I inserted in Mr. HYDE's $15 billion HIV/AIDS law.

Section 901 is a modest $5 million in 2006, $7.5 million in 2007, and we need to begin in earnest to give women who suffer the tragedy of fistula the basic care that they need.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Just to make the very clear point to my colleagues, this section 901 creates a brand new program that, until this legislation is enacted, has not existed. I authored section 901, and the emphasis is on surgical repair. We have 2 million women who are in dire need of repair-the walking wounded-and it takes a very modest amount of money to effectuate the repair of their damaged bodies so, again, they can get their lives back.

Secondly, the gentleman from New York's (Mr. Crowley) amendment, wittingly or unwittingly, will preclude a number of faith-based hospitals-language that he added that at first blush looked okay but upon further scrutiny and study, we found that it was a major problem. There are at least four hospitals, one in Uganda, Congo, Ethiopia, and in Bangladesh, that would be denied fistula funding, because under Crawley, inclusion of contraception is absolutely mandatory. It should be discretionary. These are proposed fistula centers pursuant to AID's plan to role out and to implement. So we are talking about those who could provide fistula services being told they cannot have the money.

Let me also point out to my friends and colleagues that the U.S. spends about $450 million in overseas family planning per year in the budget. Nobody is touching that. That will go forward in FY '06. Some of that money can be used to try to prevent and repair fistula and to incorporate the two. But let me point out to my colleagues, that my language says the centers may include: "Activities to expand abstinence education, postponement of marriage" and "expand access to family planning services." That is my amendment. Expand access to family planning services. It is discretionary however. I would suspect that some-maybe most-of the fistula centers will do just that. But there are faith-based health centers for which that is a problem, and we want to get this fistula repair program out to as many women as humanly possible.

Let me just tell my colleagues as well if they vote against this amendment, they are also voting against $2.5 million in addition to what is in the bill to expand surgical repairs for these women.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Once again I have to express my disappointment that we find ourselves here now in final passage of this bill when we had an amicable agreement in the committee and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and I, somewhat working together in the committee, agreed to this initial amendment to include my language.

I will just say for the record it says in the underlying text of the bill: "Each center established pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall, to the maximum extent practicable." It is not mandatory. It does not say they have to do this. Shall "carry out the following activities," and included in that is contraception.

My question for the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) is, is contraception included in family planning?

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CROWLEY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, it is very obvious that family planning includes contraception, and our language makes that very clear.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

AMENDMENT NO. 14 OFFERED BY MR. ACKERMAN

Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment, but I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?

There was no objection.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, while H.R. 2601 funds the protection of foreign missions operations' account at the administration's request of $9.39 million, there are ongoing recurrent high expenses for the protection of foreign missions and officials, especially in New York, that make this amendment necessary. In addition, the Department of State agrees that the City of New York is owed $19.58 million in back payments for security work the city has done in relation to the United Nations.

This amendment authorizes the necessary funds to pay what we owe to New York for protection services already provided and covers projected costs in the next two fiscal years. The majority accepts and supports the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

AMENDMENT NO. 19 OFFERED BY MR. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I am offering this amendment on behalf of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella), my good friend and colleague, who was unavoidably detained on official business. As a supporter of the Fossella amendment, I offer it on his behalf.

This amendment very simply seeks to withhold U.S. funding from any U.N. commission, organization or affiliated agency that is chaired or presided over by a country the government of which the Secretary of State has determined has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism until such time that the President determines that they are no longer doing so.

If Members of the U.N. elect known state sponsors of terrorism to lead U.N. organizations, we believe U.S. tax dollars should not support those entities.

In a post-9/11 world we are seeking to build multilateral strategies to address threats of global terror. We must use all available diplomatic tools and leverage such as U.S. contributions, to halt the influence of countries that sponsor and export terror.

This amendment seeks to prevent identified state sponsors of terrorism such as Iran, Syria, North Korea, Cuba and Libya from being able to attain leadership positions at U.N. commissions, organizations or affiliated agencies such as the Conference on Disarmament and U.N. human rights bodies.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

This is a parallel issue to the one we had with respect to cutting off 50 percent of the funding for the United Nations.

Every single Member of this body is in full agreement that rogue states should not be chairing United Nations organizations. But it is equally clear that an intelligent approach to making it impossible to keep rogue states from chairing United States bodies is to give our Secretary of State the discretion to cut off funding and not to put things on automatic pilot.

Given our concerns, I would ask the gentleman if he would modify the amendment to make the authority to withhold funds subject to the discretion of the Secretary of State. Could we insert on line 4, after the comma, the relevant secretary or head of agencies authorized to withhold the funds? Would the gentleman be willing to ask unanimous consent to do so?

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LANTOS. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. With all due respect to my friend and colleague from California, I know that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Fossella), who is really the prime sponsor of this amendment, had prior knowledge of that potential language that you just offered and he did not want to accept it. So on his behalf and my own I would have to reject it regrettably.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov