[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 103 (Tuesday, July 20, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1608-E1609]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 AMERICAN EMBASSY SECURITY ACT OF 1999

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, July 19, 1999

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2415) to 
     enhance security of United States missions and personnel 
     overseas, to authorize appropriations for the Department of 
     State for fiscal year 2000, and for other purposes.

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Gilman-Campbell-
Maloney/Crowley, et al. Amendment to H.R. 2514, the American Embassy 
Security Act. Passage of this secondary amendment to the Smith 
amendment would allow up to $25 million to be appropriated for the 
United Nations Population Fund

[[Page E1609]]

(UNFPA) in FY2000 for vital family planning and maternal and child 
health care programs.
  Some of my colleagues have suggested that funding the UNFPA would 
support the Chinese government's coercive abortion activities. Last 
year, they eliminated all U.S. fuding for UNFPA in the omnibus 
appropriations bill due to concerns about China. This amendment would 
allow us to fund UNFPA, while actively discouraging the organization 
from any activity in China; indeed, one dollar of appropriated U.S. 
funds would be deducted for each dollar UNFPA spends of other donors' 
funds in China. Any U.S. contribution that would be made to the UNFPA 
in FY2000 would have to be maintained in a separate account, none of 
the funds could be spent in China, and UNFPA would have to certify that 
it does not fund abortions.
  The U.N. Population Fund does not support abortion. In fact, UNFPA 
works to reduce the need for abortion by enhancing access to family 
planning. In addition to addressing the reproductive health needs of 
women, UNFPA devotes significant resources to preventing the spread of 
HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. Cutting of funds to 
the U.N. Population fund for even one year will lead to disastrous 
results; it is estimated that the result of the elimination of U.S. 
funding for UNFPA in FY1999 appropriations will have led to 500,000 
more unintended pregnancies and 200,000 more abortions throughout the 
developing world, along with 1,200 more maternal deaths and 22,000 more 
infant deaths. We cannot risk results like this for another year.
  The U.S. government should not, as a matter of principle, hold family 
planning and UNFPA hostage to a legitimate concern about the conduct of 
the Chinese government. There is a well-founded concern about China's 
family planning program--not UNFPA's. the concerns of the U.S. 
government should be placed on the U.S.-Chinese bi-lateral agenda, 
along with other human rights issues, and linked as appropriate to 
trade and other negotiations.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to join with me in support the 
Gilman-Campbell/Maloney-Crowley amendment to fund the United Nations 
Population Fund.

                          ____________________