[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 101 (Thursday, July 10, 2003)]
[House]
[Page H6583]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             AIDS IN UGANDA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, as we all know, this week the President is in 
Africa visiting five countries and describing his personal commitment 
to combating the global HIV/AIDS pandemic, among other things. This is 
a good thing.
  Just 6 weeks ago the President signed into law H.R. 1298, the United 
States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Act of 
2003, to provide $15 billion over 5 years to 12 African countries and 
Haiti and Guyana in the Caribbean. Throughout the debate on this bill, 
which Uganda's approach to its own AIDS epidemic was highlighted very 
prominently as a model for the bold initiative that we were proposing 
and for our heavy reliance on the ABC model of prevention. That is, 
abstain, be faithful, or use a condom.
  People on the ground in Uganda were telling us that while the message 
of the ABC model was important in helping to drive down infection rates 
and raise awareness of this disease, it was equally important that 
Uganda's President Museveni exerted strong political leadership in 
combating the disease and for the country to engage in a frank and open 
dialogue about sex and how the disease is transmitted.
  But when we were debating this bill, the administration and social 
conservatives in this body put their own spin on Uganda's AIDS efforts 
by claiming that it was primarily the practice of abstinence that had 
reduced Uganda's rates from 15 percent to 5 percent in over 10 years 
despite evidence to the contrary.
  In debate during the committee markup of H.R. 1298, we successfully 
placed abstinence, fidelity and the use of condoms on equal footing by 
successfully passing an amendment which I offered. The majority of 
members on the committee understood the danger of attempting to steer 
our prevention funding from Washington instead of allowing each 
individual country to determine how best to spend its prevention 
resources. Even the Washington Times indicated in an editorial on May 
1, 2003, that it would be better to leave such decisions to experts in 
the field.
  Unfortunately, the social conservatives in this body did not heed 
this very practical advice and persisted in promoting a misguided 
amendment that directs 33 percent of all prevention money in the bill 
towards abstinence-only programs. Now 6 weeks after the President 
signed the bill that we passed into law, he is visiting Africa to tout 
his commitment to fighting AIDS in Africa. Everywhere Africans are 
wondering what the true depth of the President's commitment is to 
fighting AIDS in Africa, and whether or not he will provide the full $3 
billion per year authorized in our legislation.
  There is also a considerable amount of concern in Africa that the 
President's focus on abstinence as the most important method of 
prevention will sidetrack the initiative based on an unrealistic 
understanding of the situation on the ground.
  I want to be clear here. I agree that abstinence is an important 
method of prevention, but it must be balanced by a comprehensive 
prevention policy that includes the use of condoms, otherwise it cannot 
be effective in stopping the spread of the virus. It is important for 
programs like the AIDS Support Organization of Uganda, which runs the 
clinic in Entebbe that the President will visit tomorrow, to provide 
this kind of comprehensive education so that young adults who are just 
becoming sexually active know what to do to protect themselves.
  Mr. Speaker, we are right in the thick of the appropriations process 
that provides the funding that will carry out this initiative. 
Unfortunately, we are about $1 billion short of the $3 billion 
authorized in our global AIDS legislation, mostly because the President 
does not believe we should provide more than $2 billion this year.
  I am hopeful that by visiting the TASO clinic tomorrow, the President 
will understand the true gravity of the situation and will push for the 
full $3 billion in funding. The lives of thousands of Africans can 
still be saved if this money is provided now. That is why over 100 
Members of this body wrote President Bush asking him to provide an 
emergency appropriation of $1 billion in funding if we are unable to 
get $3 billion through the regular appropriations process.
  So it is not too late, and I am asking this Congress, I am letting 
the rest of our country know that the President is visiting Uganda 
tomorrow and that we want people in Africa to understand that we are 
committed in terms of delivering on the promises which we made in terms 
of making sure that the full $3 billion that we authorized becomes 
real.

                          ____________________