SCIENCE, STATE, JUSTICE, COMMERCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006 -- (House of Representatives - June 16, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Ms. MALONEY) for yielding me this time and for her leadership over the years on this issue that is very important for America, to speak out in terms of reducing the number of abortions that take place throughout the world.
Mr. Chairman, I came to the floor because I listened with interest to the statements that were being made here, especially by a couple of speakers ago about China, including my distinguished friend, the gentleman from New Jersey Mr. Smith. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and I have worked together over the years to speak out against China's coercive family planning, as they call it, policies. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and I have fought together against the human rights abuses in China. We spoke against them when there was a Democratic President. We spoke against them when it was the policy of a Republican President. We never hesitated to criticize Presidents of our own party for their coddling of the Beijing government while they were repressing their people.
None of us takes second place to anyone in our denunciation of the regime in Beijing for its inhumane treatment of its own people. The list is a long one that we could go into, but we do not have time for that now.
Where the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and I part company is on their characterization of the role of UNFPA. Certainly, I think without any question, every person in this body would denounce the coercive abortion policy of the Beijing government. Certainly we want fewer abortions to take place. The best way to do that is to have family planning. For some reason, there has been a campaign against UNFPA, because they have been effective in promulgating family planning information to women in need so that they will not find themselves in a situation where an abortion is an option.
When I was ranking member on the Committee on Foreign Operations Appropriations a number of years ago, we put forth a compromise where the money would go forth for UNFPA, but none of the funds would be used in China. It was a compromise. I was not happy with that, because it made certain concessions, but it was a compromise, and each side had to yield something on it.
I just want our colleagues to know that a vote for the Maloney amendment is not a vote in support of any organization that would be sympathetic to the coercive abortion policies in China. It simply is not so.
UNFPA has done very, very valuable work. We go through this year in and year out. I remind my colleagues that in 2001, President Bush, our new President, sent a team to China who certified that UNFPA had nothing to do with China's coercive policies, and they were not in violation of Kemp-Kasten, and $21.5 million went forward.
Since 1999, there have been 60 delegations and 145 diplomats from around the world who have visited UNFPA's China program. None of them have found any evidence to suggest that UNFPA is doing anything other than making the situation better. Family planning reduces abortions. It is that simple. Even after President Bush's first certification, Secretary Powell was part of reviewing the activities there as well and came back with the same result.
What we are talking about here today is, let us reduce abortions, let us denounce the Beijing regime for what they do not only in this area, but in other areas, and not look the other way from that, because that is in my view, a crime against humanity, the way they treat women.
The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) knows chapter and verse. There is probably nobody in the Congress who knows better than the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) how coercive their abortion policies are. He has tried to move to give some opportunity to people who have been victims, and I salute him for that. But I disagree with the gentleman when he says that UNFPA is a part of any of that, and that they have done anything other than make the situation better in China.
So I hope that our colleagues will understand these distinctions and support the very important Maloney amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT