[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 4951-4954]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 CONCERNING THE GOVERNMENT OF ROMANIA'S BAN ON INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTIONS 
      AND THE WELFARE OF ORPHANED OR ABANDONED CHILDREN IN ROMANIA

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
agree to the resolution (H. Res. 578) concerning the Government of 
Romania's ban on intercountry adoptions and the welfare of orphaned or 
abandoned children in Romania.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                              H. Res. 578

       Whereas following the execution of Romanian President 
     Nicolae Ceausescu in 1989, it was discovered that more than 
     100,000 underfed, neglected children throughout Romania were 
     living in hundreds of squalid and inhumane institutions;
       Whereas United States citizens responded to the dire 
     situation of these children with an outpouring of compassion 
     and assistance to improve conditions in those institutions 
     and to provide for the needs of abandoned children in 
     Romania;
       Whereas, between 1990 and 2004, United States citizens 
     adopted more than 8,200 Romanian children, with a similar 
     response from Western Europe;
       Whereas the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) 
     reported in March 2005 that more than 9,000 children a year 
     are abandoned in Romania's maternity wards or pediatric 
     hospitals and that child abandonment in Romania in ``2003 and 
     2004 was no different from that occurring 10, 20, or 30 years 
     ago'';
       Whereas there are approximately 37,000 orphaned or 
     abandoned children in Romania today living in state 
     institutions, an additional 49,000 living in temporary 
     arrangements, such as foster care, and an unknown number of 
     children living on the streets and in maternity and pediatric 
     hospitals;
       Whereas, on December 28, 1994, Romania ratified the Hague 
     Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in 
     Respect of Intercountry Adoption which recognizes that 
     ``intercountry adoption may offer the advantage of a 
     permanent family to a child for whom a suitable family cannot 
     be found in his or her State of origin'';
       Whereas intercountry adoption offers the hope of a 
     permanent family for children who are orphaned or abandoned 
     by their biological parents;
       Whereas UNICEF's official position on intercountry 
     adoption, in pertinent part, states: ``For children who 
     cannot be raised by their own families, an appropriate 
     alternative family environment should be sought in preference 
     to institutional care, which should be used only as a last 
     resort and as a temporary measure. Inter-country adoption is 
     one of a range of care options which may be open to children, 
     and for individual children who cannot be placed in a 
     permanent family setting in their countries of origin, it may 
     indeed be the best solution. In each case, the best interests 
     of the individual child must be the guiding principle in 
     making a decision regarding adoption.'';
       Whereas unsubstantiated allegations have been made about 
     the fate of children adopted from Romania and the 
     qualifications and motives of those who adopt 
     internationally;
       Whereas in June 2001, the Romanian Adoption Committee 
     imposed a moratorium on intercountry adoption, but continued 
     to accept new intercountry adoption applications and allowed 
     many such applications to be processed under an exception for 
     extraordinary circumstances;
       Whereas on June 21, 2004, the Parliament of Romania enacted 
     Law 272/2004 on ``the protection and promotion of the rights 
     of the child,'' which creates new requirements for declaring 
     a child legally available for adoption;
       Whereas on June 21, 2004, the Parliament of Romania enacted 
     Law 273/2004 on adoption, which prohibits intercountry 
     adoption except by a child's biological grandparent or 
     grandparents;
       Whereas there is no European Union law or regulation 
     restricting intercountry adoptions to biological grandparents 
     or requiring that restrictive laws be passed as a 
     prerequisite for accession to the European Union;
       Whereas the number of Romanian children adopted 
     domestically is far less than the number abandoned and has 
     declined further since enactment of Law 272/2004 and 273/2004 
     due to new, overly burdensome requirements for adoption;
       Whereas prior to enactment of Law 273/2004, 211 
     intercountry adoption cases were pending with the Government 
     of Romania in which children had been matched with adoptive 
     parents in the United States, and approximately 1,500 cases 
     were pending in which children had been matched with 
     prospective parents in Western Europe; and
       Whereas Romanian children, and all children, deserve to be 
     raised in permanent families: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
       (1) supports the desire of the Government of Romania to 
     improve the standard of care and well-being of children in 
     Romania;
       (2) urges the Government of Romania to complete the 
     processing of the intercountry adoption cases which were 
     pending when Law 273/2004 was enacted;
       (3) urges the Government of Romania to amend its child 
     welfare and adoption laws to decrease barriers to adoption, 
     both domestically and intercountry, including by allowing 
     intercountry adoption by persons other than biological 
     grandparents;
       (4) urges the Secretary of State and the Administrator of 
     the United States Agency for International Development to 
     work collaboratively with the Government of Romania to 
     achieve these ends; and
       (5) requests that the European Union and its member States 
     not impede the Government of Romania's efforts to place 
     orphaned or abandoned children in permanent homes in a manner 
     that is consistent with Romania's obligations under the Hague 
     Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in 
     Respect of Intercountry Adoption.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 578 expresses deep disappointment that the 
Romanian government has instituted a virtual ban on intercountry 
adoptions with serious implications for the well-being of orphaned and 
abandoned children in Romania.
  Immediately after the December 1989 revolution, Mr. Speaker, which 
ousted the much-hated dictator Nicholae Ceausescu, the world learned 
that tens of thousands of underfed, neglected children were living in 
institutions, called orphanages, throughout Romania. A month after the 
fall of Ceausescu, Dorothy Taft, who is our deputy chief of staff at 
the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, and I traveled to 
Bucharest and visited those orphanages. We also met with

[[Page 4952]]

government officials and spoke about the hope for democracy in that 
country. But one of the most lasting impressions that I have from that 
trip is being in an orphanage in Bucharest, where dozens of children 
were lined up with no one to turn them, to change their diapers and, in 
some cases, even to feed them with the frequency that their little 
bodies required. It left a lasting impression upon me.
  Sadly, all these years later, Mr. Speaker, Romania's child 
abandonment rate that we witnessed firsthand on that trip has not 
changed significantly over those years. As of December 2005, 76,509 
children are currently in the child protection system.
  While the Romanian government deserves at least some credit for 
reducing the number of children living in institutions from 100,000 to 
28,000, this is only part of the picture. The government statistics do 
not include the abandoned infants living for years in maternity and 
pediatric hospitals, where donations from charities and individuals 
keep the children alive; and more than 40,000 of the children moved out 
of the institutions are living in nonpermanent settings or foster care, 
or with maternal assistance, paid by the government or with a distant 
relative who do not intend to adopt them, but do accept them for a 
stipend.
  In the context of Romania's ascension to the European Union, 
unsubstantiated allegations have been made about the qualifications and 
motives for those who adopt internationally and the fate of those 
adopted children.
  Intercountry adoption, Mr. Speaker, was falsely equated with child 
trafficking, and Romania faced relentless pressure to prohibit 
intercountry adoptions. Sadly, rather than focusing on the best 
interest of the children, Romanian policymakers acquiesced to the 
European Union's pressure, especially its rapporteur, Lady Emma 
Nicholson, by enacting a law in 2004 that banned intercountry adoption, 
except by biological grandparents. By foreclosing foreign adoptions, 
the laws codified the misguided proposition that a foster family, or 
even an institution, is preferable to an adoptive family outside of the 
child's country of birth.
  Between 1990 and 2004, I would note, more than 8,000 Romanian 
children found permanent families in the United States and thousands 
more joined families in Western Europe and elsewhere. This possibility 
is now gone. Some Romanians and Europeans argue that this law, this 
misguided law, is somehow consistent with Hague Convention on the 
Intercountry Adoptions and the Rights of the Child Convention. They 
also allege that ``there is little scope, if any, for international 
adoptions in Romania because there are so few children who are legally 
adoptable.''
  Mr. Speaker, the low numbers declared ``legally adoptable'' is not 
something to be proud of. It is a contrivance. Indeed, it is a 
denunciation of the child welfare system, which now places such an 
unrealistic priority on unification with blood relatives that it is 
nearly impossible to determine any child is adoptable, no matter how 
old and how long they have been in state care without contact with the 
blood relatives.
  If more children were made available for adoption, there would be a 
great need for intercountry adoption. Barely a thousand children have 
ever been domestically adopted in Romania in any given year. As a 
result of the new laws, only 333 children were entrusted for domestic 
adoption last year.
  For thousands of children abandoned annually in Romania, domestic or 
intercountry adoption offered the hope of a life outside of foster care 
or an institution. That hope has now been dashed and destroyed.
  Last September, Mr. Speaker, I chaired a hearing of the Commission on 
Security and Cooperation in Europe at which Maura Harty, the Deputy 
Under Secretary of State, rebutted the argument that the adoption ban 
is somehow consistent with Romania's intercountry international treaty 
obligations. Likewise, our witnesses, including Dr. Dana Johnson, 
Director of the International Adoption Clinic and Neonatology Division 
at the University of Minnesota's Children's Hospital, testified that 
Romania's concentration on reunification of an abandoned child with his 
or her biological family is only superficially consistent with the U.N. 
Convention on the Rights of the Child.
  He also talked about the deleterious effect of such waiting, being 
held in foster care and especially in institutions, has on a child's 
mental, as well as their physical health.
  When Romania enacted its intercountry adoption ban, there were 211 
pending cases in which children have been matched with adoptive parents 
in the United States. Approximately a thousand more have been matched 
with parents in Western Europe, Israel and Australia. In the past few 
weeks there have been unofficial reports that pending applications are 
being rejected across the board and the dossiers returned to the 
adoptive parents.
  A document from the Romanian Office for Adoption acknowledged that 
fewer than 300 of these children have been placed in permanent 
situations, either returned to biological parents or adopted within 
Romania. The vast majority remain in limbo. This cannot be the last 
word of what we often call ``the pipeline cases.''
  The Romanian government repeatedly promised to analyze each pending 
case thoroughly, but the review that has supposedly been done was not 
transparent, was not done on a case-by-case basis, and was not 
conducted according to clear and valid criteria that is in the best 
interest of each individual child. These cases involve prospective 
families who have proven their good faith, by waiting for years for 
these children. Many cases involve children who will not be 
domestically adopted due to their special needs, medical or societal 
prejudices.
  In at least three cases, Mr. Speaker, children are already living in 
the United States with their prospective adoptive parents while 
receiving life-saving medical treatment, including a child with spina 
bifida. These children were legally adoptable until Romania's new law 
took effect.
  Let me say that when I introduced this resolution in November, I 
asked the question, who in the European Union will stand with Members 
of our Congress, to protect these defenseless children?
  Today I am happy to say, members of the European Parliament are 
challenging the anti-adoption monopoly over this issue and that is 
encouraging. On December 15, the European Parliament urged Romania to 
act in the pending cases with the goal of allowing intercountry 
adoptions to take place where justified and appropriate. In March, the 
European Parliament's rapporteur for Romania's EU accession, Mr. Pierre 
Moscovici, reported that he notably differs on the issue of 
international adoption of Romanian children from the previous 
rapporteur, Baroness Emma Nicholson, whose virulent anti-adoption views 
that hurt the children of Romania are now very, very well known.
  I applaud the European Parliament and I am glad that our parliament, 
this Congress, is poised to go on record very strongly in trying to 
resolve these pipeline cases.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution 
and yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, it is remarkable that more than 15 years after the fall 
of the Berlin Wall we are still dealing with the vestiges of failed 
experiments in totalitarian social engineering.

                              {time}  1200

  One of these cases is the shocking situation of children in Romania 
in orphanages. For many years, the dictator of Romania, Nicolae 
Ceausescu, had a policy of encouraging population growth to enhance the 
country's international importance. He encouraged parents to have large 
numbers of children, but the economic and social conditions in Romania 
made it impossible to support large families. As a result, many parents 
were forced to abandon their children to state-run institutions that 
were grossly underfunded and understaffed.

[[Page 4953]]

  My wife, Annette, and I visited a large number of these Romanian 
orphanages, and what we saw was worse than pathetic. Many children 
spent long periods of time in miserable conditions that stunted their 
development and left them detached from the society at large.
  Upon the discovery of the large number of Romanian orphans, people 
from around the world, particularly in the United States, opened up 
their hearts and proceeded to try to adopt Romanian orphans. In 1990, 
121 Romanian children were adopted by American parents. A decade later, 
the number had increased tenfold.
  Because of a new Romanian law, Mr. Speaker, last year this number 
shrank to zero, and the hundreds of U.S. couples who had already been 
approved for international adoption were caught up in the change of law 
that did not allow those adoptions already in the pipeline to go 
forward. Their dream of having children and creating a family has been 
devastated.
  No one doubts that there have been serious problems regarding the 
international adoption situation in Romania since the earlier 1990s. 
Exorbitant fees and false medical information, in some cases, have 
blazed across the media, and the Romanian moratorium on international 
adoptions that was instituted in 2001 may well have been a wise move, 
although children in mid-process were caused needless suffering.
  Rather than creating a pause and developing a new system, Romania has 
instituted a new law that virtually prohibits international adoptions. 
Clearly, we all support children remaining in their home countries, 
being integrated into their own societies. However, where there are not 
enough willing parents, international adoption is one way to address 
the best needs of the orphan child.
  I am very pleased, Mr. Speaker, that our Department of State has 
taken a strong interest in this matter and that they are pushing the 
Romanians, at a minimum, to deal with American citizens whose petitions 
were in mid-process. I also support their efforts to clarify the 
European Union's role in this new law, since the Romanian government 
has suggested that the new approach is based on accession talks with 
the European Union.
  Mr. Speaker, let me say that in the next year the United States will 
become a party to The Hague Convention on Inter-Country Adoptions. This 
will work to ensure that all countries avoid the abuses that led 
Romania to close their adoptions in the first place.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support our carefully crafted 
resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of our time.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bradley), who has 
several cases in his own district that he has been advocating for.
  Mr. BRADLEY of New Hampshire. Mr. Speaker, I would like to first 
start out by congratulating my friend, the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Smith), as well as the bipartisan support from Mr. Lantos on this 
effort, and certainly their leadership in trying to resolve this issue. 
While it only affects a couple of hundred American families right now, 
for those families that it does affect, it is a profound issue in their 
lives.
  As I think Mr. Lantos has very eloquently summarized, as has Mr. 
Smith, the large implications of the cases, I would like to bring it 
down to what it means to an individual family, that family in New 
Hampshire being Allison and Mike Schaaf of Stratham.
  They have adopted a Romanian child. They have provided that child 
with a loving home, a home that would not have been possible for that 
young man, Hunter, to have been able to have had in Romania, where 
there were some 100,000 orphans living in orphanages, and the Schaafs 
and a number of other people in my district have done that.
  As a result of the success that they had and the ability to be able 
to bring this child to the United States and provide him a loving home, 
they wanted to have a second Romanian baby that they adopted, and in 
the course of going through the paperwork and getting the final 
approval, all of which were in place, the Romanian government changed 
their laws, which is understandable given the fact that they wanted to 
become a member of the European Union.
  What we are advocating and what this resolution would help us do is, 
once again, remind the Romanian government that for those cases that 
were previously approved and for everything, except actually releasing 
the orphans to their American parents when this law changed, that in 
fact the Romanian government should follow through on that commitment 
for those 200 or so American families that have gotten all of their 
paperwork approved and the cases all but resolved except for this law.
  It is my hope that the European Union and the leaders of the European 
Union are going to recognize the legitimacy of the claims of the 200 or 
so American families and perhaps as many as 2,000 other European 
families and resolve these cases that have been previously approved for 
the benefit of families in this country, like Allison and Mike Schaaf, 
who provided such loving, kind and warm homes.
  I once again thank the bipartisan sponsors, Mr. Lantos and Mr. Smith, 
for their continued advocacy on this and look forward to continuing to 
work with you to try to resolve this situation, and I thank you again.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much 
and his work on behalf of his constituents.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 
all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under 
consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hayes). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from New Jersey?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  In closing, I want again to thank Chairman Hyde and Ranking Member 
Lantos for their tremendous support for this resolution and the 
underlying issue of trying to encourage intercountry adoption in a 
country, Romania, that has now, in a misguided fashion, turned their 
back on those children who could find loving, durable homes with the 
adoption option.
  Let me also thank so many other people who were a part of this, but 
especially Maureen Walsh, who is our General Counsel for the Commission 
on Security and Cooperation in Europe, for her extraordinary expertise 
and work on the issue and this resolution. We have had an ongoing 
process, contacting the highest levels of the government of Romania, 
from the President on down. It has been ongoing. It has been frequent.
  Our hearing that Ben Cardin and I put on last year I think brought 
all of these issues to the fore in a way that were very persuasive on 
the part of the pipeline families, as well as the issue itself. The 
intercountry adoption is a loving, compassionate option, and certainly 
is far better than languishing in an orphanage somewhere where the 
child is warehoused.
  Mr. Speaker, so we call upon the Romanian government again to reverse 
its position, to cease its mucking under Lady Nicholson's pressure, 
which is now going into reverse. The European Union, as I said before, 
is showing clear signs that it concludes it has made a profound 
mistake.
  I want to thank Mr. Cardin, who is our ranking member on the 
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, who has been working 
on these issues side by side.
  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of 
H. Res. 578 encouraging the nation of Romania to complete the 
processing of intercountry adoption cases that have already begun, and 
to amend its laws to decrease this and other barriers to adoption.
  The statistics regarding abandoned children in Romania are shocking: 
9,000 children are abandoned by Romania's maternity wards and pediatric 
hospitals every year; 37,000 remain in adoption institutions; and 
49,000 more live

[[Page 4954]]

in foster care or with their extended families. These children deserve 
every possible opportunity to be raised in loving, permanent families, 
and many such opportunities are available outside of their home nation. 
Romania's current laws are detrimental not only to these children, but 
to the American families that are ready and willing to welcome them 
into their homes.
  Since June 2004, one of these children, Otilia Rotaru, has lived in 
Falls Church, Virginia with Scott and Lisa Lampman, two of my 
constituents. Otilia was born with a form of cerebral palsy known as 
Spastic Diplegia, preventing her from walking independently and causing 
her significant visual impairment in her right eye. She was abandoned 
by her biological parents soon after her birth in 1996, and was placed 
with a foster family who abandoned her in 2003.
  Otilia received permission to come to the United States in 2004 for 
medical treatment, and after surgery and rehabilitation, she can now 
walk with the assistance of a walker. The Lampmans continue to provide 
love, physical care and financial support for Otilia, who attends 3rd 
grade at the local elementary school, has joined the local Brownie 
Troop, and is taking swimming lessons at the local pool.
  Despite living in a loving, well adjusted home, the Lampmans' 
petition to adopt Otilia was rejected by the Romanian Government 
because their petition was filed after the appropriate deadline for 
international adoption. If returned to Romania, Otilia would be 
returned to an institution, with no family and no access to the medical 
treatment that will one day allow her to walk independently for the 
first time.
  Mr. Speaker, we must give Otilia and the thousands of children like 
her the opportunity to grow up in a loving, caring, stable home, 
whether that home is in Romania or here in the United States. I 
strongly encourage my colleagues to support H. Res. 578 and ask the 
Romanian Government to open their adoption laws and provide such 
opportunities to these children.
  Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support 
of the thousands of children currently overflowing Romania's orphanages 
and hospitals, hopefully awaiting the chance to find a permanent home. 
Today there are over 1,000 pending adoption cases that have been left 
in limbo as a result of Romania's ban on inter-country adoptions. Right 
now, parents in the U.S. and EU are separated from their children, left 
wondering if they will ever be able to bring them home.
  I have to admit I find it difficult to understand the rationale 
behind Romania's ban on inter-country adoptions. No one denies the 
importance and significant advantage permanency brings to a child's 
life. In fact, in its interpretation of the Convention on the Rights of 
the Child in January 2004, UNICEF clarified the importance of permanent 
placement for children and its support for intercountry adoption. Yet, 
permanency for children is precisely what the Romanian government has 
taken away.
  I am pleased to join my colleagues in supporting this important and 
timely resolution. The United States stands with Romania's children. I 
hope our colleagues in the European Union will also assert their 
support for the welfare of Romanian children, and that the Romanian 
government will reconsider this oppressive ban and expedite the pending 
adoption cases.
  Mr. Speaker, we do not have time to waste. These families should not 
have to wait any longer. I urge my colleagues to let the Romanian 
children know we stand with them, and pass H. Res. 578.
  Mrs. NORTHUP. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 578 
concerning the Government of Romania's ban on intercountry adoptions 
and the welfare of orphaned or abandoned children in Romania and 
throughout the world. I would like to thank the Co-Chairman of the 
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki Commission), 
Representative Chris Smith, for continuing to raise this issue of 
adoption as part of the Commission's human rights portfolio.
  As the case in Romania has shown us, the barriers to adoption for 
children and families continue to be great. These barriers are 
cultural, political and often have deep roots in a community. While 
some of these barriers will continue to be difficult to cross, I 
believe others can be overcome succinctly as part of a continuing 
dialogue on child welfare between the United States and the European 
Union (EU) and nations such as Romania. In this particular case, I am 
saddened that one Member of the European Parliament can hold so much 
sway over a country on important child welfare issues and successfully 
play on the fears of a nation that is trying to become a participant in 
the enormous social and economic opportunities offered by the EU.
  For signatories of the Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption, 
including the United States, Romania and current Members of the EU, 
there is supposed to be a formal international and intergovernmental 
recognition of intercountry adoption. Intercountry adoption, as defined 
and treated by the Convention, is a means of offering the advantage of 
a permanent family to a child for whom a suitable family has not been 
found in the child's country of origin.
  However, Romania turned from its obligations under the treaty when 
they enacted a law in 2004 effectively banning intercountry adoption 
and limiting any domestic adoption. Of course, it is in Romania's 
authority to enact such laws. But as Members of the United States 
Congress, acting in the best interests of our own children and as a 
Nation committed to fighting for all human dignity, we shall continue 
to advocate for the placement of children in permanent homes. 
Furthermore, as long as there are thousands of families in the U.S. 
wishing to adopt and to give a child a loving home that would otherwise 
not have one, I will continue to take every opportunity to explain to 
our counterparts abroad why this is such an important cause--for our 
children and for the health of our nations. There is simply no greater 
gift than a home and no greater support network than a family.
  Meanwhile, there are currently 37,000 children in orphanages in 
Romania and an estimated 49,000 living in temporary arrangements, such 
as foster care. These numbers are staggering. This is an entire 
generation of young people who will not have the support of a parent to 
excel in school, the comfort of a family when sick or in need, and more 
fundamentally, the love and care essential to the development of a 
child.
  It is not just Americans that advocate for lowering barriers to 
adoption. Citizens of several European countries and Israel had a 
number of pipeline adoption cases that were pending when the moratorium 
was instilled in 2001. The U.S. is also a sender country of American 
orphans, something that people often forget. Last December, the 
European Parliament voted unanimously on an amendment to their Report 
on the Extent of Romania 's Readiness for Accession to the European 
Union in favor of the completion of all the pending international 
adoption cases in Romania. Additionally, according to UNICEF:

       For children who cannot be raised by their own families, an 
     appropriate alternative family environment should be sought 
     in preference to institutional care which should be used only 
     as a last resort and as a temporary measure, until the child 
     can return to the family environment.

  I am disheartened by the actions so far of Romania in failing to 
complete the pipeline adoption cases which would have resulted in 
placing over 1,000 orphans with permanent, loving homes abroad. I hope 
that as we face more of these challenges and political barriers down 
the road which directly impact children, we will work together to get 
past those barriers which are artificial.
  Mr. Speaker, I will conclude by respectfully requesting that this 
body continue to engage in a dialogue with our allies and colleagues 
abroad on the importance of adoption, both domestic and international, 
as a preferable alternative to institutional care.
  Thank you.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of our 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) that the House suspend the rules 
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 578.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will 
be postponed.

                          ____________________