[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 20]
[House]
[Pages 27108-27114]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR CHINESE HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS HUANG QI AND TAN 
                                 ZUOREN

  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the

[[Page 27109]]

resolution (H. Res. 877) expressing support for Chinese human rights 
activists Huang Qi and Tan Zuoren for engaging in peaceful expression 
as they seek answers and justice for the parents whose children were 
killed in the Sichuan earthquake of May 12, 2008.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The text of the resolution is as follows:

                              H. Res. 877

       Whereas Chinese human rights activists Huang Qi and Tan 
     Zuoren both sought to help the parents whose children were 
     killed as a result of the collapse of numerous school 
     buildings during the Sichuan earthquake of May 12, 2008;
       Whereas the parents allege that school buildings collapsed 
     at a much higher rate than other types of buildings during 
     the Sichuan earthquake;
       Whereas the parents also allege that poor construction 
     contributed to the higher rate of school building collapses 
     and that possible corruption among local officials and 
     builders contributed to inferior construction and poor 
     maintenance of the school buildings;
       Whereas Chinese courts have refused to hear lawsuits 
     brought by parents seeking accountability for the school 
     collapses, and Chinese officials have warned lawyers not to 
     take on these cases;
       Whereas local Chinese officials have taken steps to prevent 
     parents from petitioning to higher authorities and have kept 
     some parents in arbitrary detention;
       Whereas, Huang Qi, founder of the human rights advocacy 
     website Tianwang Human Rights Center (64tianwang.com), 
     traveled to the earthquake zone after the Sichuan earthquake 
     and later posted articles on his website about the demands by 
     parents for an investigation into the collapse of school 
     buildings that killed thousands of children;
       Whereas plainclothes police took Huang into custody on June 
     10, 2008, and Chengdu public security officials formally 
     arrested him on July 18, 2008, on charges of illegally 
     possessing state secrets;
       Whereas Huang's lawyer said that during Huang's detention, 
     authorities questioned him about interviews he conducted 
     during visits to areas affected by the quake;
       Whereas Chinese officials have considerable discretion to 
     declare information a state secret, and their power to use 
     such a charge to deny defendants access to counsel and an 
     open trial is subject to few limitations;
       Whereas Huang's closed trial was held on August 5, 2009, 
     and according to the international nongovernmental 
     organization Human Rights in China, four police officers 
     kidnapped a volunteer for the Tianwang Human Rights Center, 
     Pu Fei, to prevent him from testifying on Huang's behalf;
       Whereas Huang suffers from numerous serious medical 
     conditions, but Chinese authorities reportedly have denied 
     him adequate treatment;
       Whereas Chinese officials denied requests to allow Huang to 
     visit his seriously ill father, who passed away in early 
     September 2009;
       Whereas following the Sichuan earthquake, writer and 
     environmental activist Tan Zuoren was active in calling for 
     the government to investigate the cause of the large number 
     of school building collapses during the earthquake;
       Whereas Tan was quoted in a May 27, 2008, South China 
     Morning Post article as saying that ``the government and the 
     public must work together to find an answer'' regarding why 
     so many school buildings collapsed and urging local 
     governments to inspect other school buildings for poor 
     construction;
       Whereas in February 2009, Tan issued a proposal via the 
     Internet calling on volunteers to travel to Sichuan to 
     compile lists of students killed in the quake, research the 
     treatment of the deceased students' parents, and conduct an 
     independent investigation into the quality of school building 
     construction;
       Whereas Tan issued a preliminary report in March 2009 that 
     criticized officials for failing to follow through on a 
     commitment to fully investigate the role that inferior 
     construction played in the school building collapses and for 
     failure to deal with parents' demands;
       Whereas authorities detained Tan on March 28, 2009, three 
     days after the report was published;
       Whereas the indictment, dated July 17, 2009, said Tan was 
     charged with inciting subversion of state power in part 
     because he gave interviews to international media after the 
     earthquake in which he allegedly harmed the image of the 
     Communist Party of China and the Chinese Government;
       Whereas Tan's trial, held by the Chengdu Intermediate 
     People's Court on August 12, 2009, was marred by procedural 
     violations;
       Whereas the court reportedly rejected requests by Tan's 
     lawyers to call three witnesses, including Ai Weiwei, a noted 
     artist who helped design the Beijing Olympics' National 
     Stadium, or Bird's Nest, and who also was investigating 
     student deaths in the Sichuan earthquake;
       Whereas Ai told various news agencies that police came to 
     his hotel and used force to prevent him and 10 other 
     volunteers from leaving until after the trial ended;
       Whereas Tan's lawyers reported that the judge frequently 
     cut them off during the trial and that their request to show 
     video evidence was not accepted;
       Whereas the parents of earthquake victims who attempted to 
     attend Tan's trial were detained;
       Whereas court officials reportedly did not allow reporters 
     into the courtroom, and police also barred hundreds of 
     supporters from entering the courtroom, saying the supporters 
     needed passes even though court officials had told them 
     earlier that no passes were necessary;
       Whereas the courts have not yet issued judgments in either 
     Huang's case or Tan's case; and
       Whereas the Chinese Government's own National Human Rights 
     Action Plan, issued by the State Council Information Office 
     in April 2009, says that ``the state will guarantee citizens' 
     rights to criticize, give advice to, complain of, and accuse 
     state organs and civil servants, and give full play to the 
     role of mass organizations, social organizations and the news 
     media in supervising state organs and civil servants'': Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
       (1) expresses its support for Huang Qi and Tan Zuoren for 
     engaging in peaceful expression as they seek answers and 
     justice for the parents whose children were killed in the 
     Sichuan earthquake of May 12, 2008; and
       (2) calls on the Government of the People's Republic of 
     China to--
       (A) provide Huang Qi and Tan Zuoren with the rights that 
     all Chinese citizens have under article 35 and article 41 of 
     China's Constitution, namely freedom of speech and 
     association and the right to make suggestions to officials 
     free from suppression and retaliation;
       (B) ensure that Huang Qi and Tan Zuoren are afforded the 
     rights guaranteed to all defendants under the Criminal 
     Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China; and
       (C) implement its own National Human Rights Action Plan by 
     allowing parents, concerned citizens, and the news media to 
     conduct their own investigations into the role inferior 
     construction and corruption may have played in the collapse 
     of school buildings during the Sichuan earthquake, free from 
     government harassment and official interference, and by 
     ensuring that citizens have full access to effective legal 
     remedies for their grievances.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Berman) and the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-
Lehtinen) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BERMAN. 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. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  I rise in strong support of this resolution. This resolution 
expresses support for two Chinese activists who have been crusading for 
answers and justice for the parents of the thousands of children killed 
in the Sichuan earthquake of May 12, 2008.
  I would like to thank my friend the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu) 
for introducing this resolution and for bringing the plight of these 
two activists to our attention.
  This past August, Chinese courts held separate trials for Huang Qi 
and Tan Zuoren, both of whom sought to help the parents of children who 
died in the collapses of school buildings during the May 2008 
earthquake in Sichuan Province. That devastating earthquake left almost 
69,000 people dead and 18,000 missing. Five thousand three hundred 
thirty-five children were, according to official records, killed or 
missing in that earthquake.
  The collapse of such a large number of schools, while nearby 
buildings remained standing, raised questions of shoddy construction. 
Chinese officials acknowledged that poor construction may have 
contributed to the buildings' collapse.
  They also initially pledged to investigate the collapses and punish 
those responsible. But officials later were unwilling to honor those 
commitments and, even worse, responded with suppression and harassment.

[[Page 27110]]

  Mr. Huang publicized the parents' demands on his human rights Web 
site, while Mr. Tan organized an independent investigation into the 
causes of the collapses. For their actions, the Chinese Government 
charged Mr. Huang with illegal possession of state secrets and Mr. Tan 
with inciting subversion. The pair's separate trials were reportedly 
marred by procedural irregularities and misconduct, and both their 
trials have adjourned without verdicts issued.
  Mr. Huang and Mr. Tan were engaged in peaceful activities guaranteed 
under China's constitution and international law, and this resolution 
urges the Chinese Government to protect their rights to freedom of 
speech, expression and association.
  The resolution also calls on the Chinese Government to allow parents, 
concerned citizens and the media to conduct their own investigations 
into the school collapses, free from harassment or interference. I urge 
the Chinese Government to provide greater transparency regarding its 
own investigations into the building collapses and release any 
information it may have.
  The parents of those children killed at the school during the 
earthquake deserve answers and deserve justice. Mr. Tan and Mr. Huang 
deserve our support for their efforts in trying to help those parents.
  I strongly urge the resolution be supported.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I rise in support of this resolution, which addresses the unjust 
incarceration of two Chinese human rights advocates whose only crime 
was to seek answers and justice for the parents of children killed in 
the collapse of a schoolhouse during a major earthquake last year. Any 
parent would understand this resolution.

                              {time}  1700

  This is about dead school children. This is about accountability. 
These courageous individuals sought such accountability from a 
government which allowed the construction of substandard buildings for 
school children, buildings which could not withstand the aftershocks of 
a major quake.
  It has been widely assumed in China that the building materials used 
for these schools were substandard due to the corruption involving 
those officials who authorized the construction. Grieving parents have 
a right to know why their children died after being buried in rubble, 
but their efforts for legal redress were summarily dismissed. These two 
brave men sought answers for the grieving parents, but their efforts 
led to their own imprisonment on trumped-up charges followed by trials 
in kangaroo courts.
  How can anyone call the Chinese regime a responsible stakeholder when 
it uses its massive police force and its court system to engage in a 
major cover-up of corruption which led to the deaths of innocent 
children? And how can America be silent to such blatant defiance of not 
only the rule of law but also what is considered decent and moral?
  This resolution is more than just about two human rights activists, 
heroic victims of injustice though they are. This is about a 
totalitarian system which is so afraid of its own population that it 
resorts to harsh and brutal measures to conceal the truth about the 
deaths of innocent school children.
  This is about the massive human rights abuses such as the continued 
persecutions of tens of thousands of Falun Gong petitioners, an issue 
addressed in a resolution which I introduced with wide bipartisan 
support months ago but which has yet to reach the floor of this 
Chamber. This is about the continued repression of the Tibetan and 
Uyghur people and the need to engage in truth-telling with their 
leaders, the Dalai Lama and Ms. Kadeer, not only in Beijing, but in the 
White House here in Washington, D.C.
  This is about speaking truth to power. It is about President Obama 
during his upcoming summit in China putting human rights and religious 
freedom issues squarely on the table, instead of just agreeing to 
disagree.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from California, my good friend, Mr. Lewis, the ranking member on the 
Committee on Appropriations.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciate the 
gentlelady yielding, and I rise in part to express my appreciation to 
both her and Mr. Berman for working so hard on behalf of human rights 
throughout the country.
  But, Mr. Speaker, I rise at this moment to express my grave concerns 
about the impact the Democratic health care plan will have upon 
businesses and jobs in this country, another human rights concern.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my grave concerns about impact 
that the Democrat health reform plan will have on businesses and jobs 
across this country. Despite the trillions the Federal Government has 
spent on shoring up our economy, today we learned that national 
unemployment rose over 10 percent--the highest since 1983. In the 
Inland Empire of California that I represent, unemployment remains over 
a staggering 14 percent.
  Instead of focusing on fixing the economy and creating more jobs--the 
House is taking up a $1.3 trillion government takeover of healthcare 
that includes $135 billion in new taxes on businesses. The 
Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that this tax on jobs will 
reduce the hiring of new workers and President Obama's own advisor has 
suggested that 5.5 million jobs could be lost due to this bill's new 
taxes.
  As we approach the holiday season this House is threatening to 
deliver a big bah hum bug. No sensible business owner is going to hire 
more workers in the face of these new taxes.
  Mr. Speaker, we must work together in a bipartisan fashion to fix 
this economy and create more jobs--not pass massive spending increases, 
job-destroying taxes, and a government takeover of health care.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 6 minutes to the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu), a former member of our committee and 
the sponsor of this resolution.
  Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, it is a tragedy when any child is killed. It is 
an abomination when the act of asking questions about one's child's 
death leads to harassment or persecution by one's own government.
  We all remember when a major earthquake struck Sichuan Province, 
China, on May 12, 2008. It was the most devastating natural disaster to 
hit China in over three decades. That day, I was the first personally 
to present condolences to the Chinese people for their grievous loss. 
Particularly heartbreaking were the stories of the children who were 
killed as their school buildings collapsed around them and the images 
of parents overwhelmed with grief.
  In the aftermath of the earthquake, these parents started questioning 
why school buildings collapsed at a much higher rate than other types 
of buildings. They allege that poor construction and corruption among 
local officials and builders contributed to the school building 
collapses.
  These allegations have been stonewalled or, worse, resulted in the 
harassment of the complainants. Chinese courts have refused to hear 
lawsuits brought by the parents. Local officials have even kept some 
complaining parents in arbitrary detention. As a parent myself, I find 
it a tragic failure of justice to have these grievances go unaddressed, 
especially if a society chooses to enforce a one-child policy.
  Two human rights activists from Sichuan's capital city of Chengdu 
attempted to stand up for these grieving parents and give voice to 
their concerns. Soon after the earthquake truck, Mr. Huang Qi posted 
articles on his Web site, the Tianwang Human Rights Center, about the 
parents' demands for an investigation into the school building 
collapses.
  Separately, in February of this year Mr. Tan Zuoren issued a proposal 
on the Internet calling for volunteers to travel to Sichuan to compile 
lists of students killed in the quake, to document the parents' 
treatment, and to conduct an investigation of school building 
construction.
  Mr. Tan's report criticized officials for failing to follow through 
on their

[[Page 27111]]

commitments to fully investigate the role that inferior construction 
played in the school building collapses and for failure to deal with 
the parents' demands.
  For these actions, the local Chengdu municipal government charged 
both Mr. Huang and Mr. Tan with endangering national security. Mr. 
Huang was charged with illegally possessing state secrets, and Mr. Tan 
was also charged with inciting subversion of state power. After months 
of being held in prison, Mr. Huang for over a year, both of these men 
were put on trial in August of this year.
  There are allegations that both trials were fraught with numerous 
substantive and procedural violations. In the case of Mr. Tan, the 
parents of the earthquake victims said they were detained to prevent 
them from attending the trial.
  The court reportedly rejected requests from Mr. Tan's lawyers to call 
three witnesses, including the noted architectural designer, Ai Weiwei, 
who helped design the Beijing Olympics' Bird's Nest Stadium and who 
also was investigating student deaths in the Sichuan earthquake. 
According to Mr. Ai, police came to his hotel and used force to prevent 
him and 10 others from leaving the premises until after the trial 
ended.
  Mr. Huang's trial was allegedly fraught with similar violations, 
including the detention of a volunteer from the Tianwang Human Rights 
Center to prevent him from testifying on Mr. Huang's behalf.
  To date, judgments have not issued in either Mr. Huang's or Mr. Tan's 
trial. The trials have been suspended or held open. Both men continue 
to be held in prison.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to pass House 
Resolution 877 to express their support for Mr. Huang's and Mr. Tan's 
peaceful request for answers and justice on behalf of the parents whose 
children were killed in the Sichuan earthquake. This bipartisan 
resolution, with 176 cosponsors, calls on the Chinese government to 
adhere to its own constitutional guarantees, its own criminal procedure 
laws, and its own recently passed national human rights action plan to 
ensure that Mr. Huang and Mr. Tan and all Chinese citizens are accorded 
the right to free speech and the right to criticize and make 
suggestions to their government as guaranteed by their own 
Constitution.
  Mr. Speaker, no one who suffers the loss of a child deserves 
abandonment by or punishment from his or her own government. Support 
this resolution.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 4 minutes to the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the ranking member on 
Appropriations, on Commerce, Justice, and Science, and a longtime 
advocate of human rights for the people of China and elsewhere.
  Mr. WOLF. I thank the gentlelady, and I particularly thank her for 
her comments about China.
  I rise in support of this, but there is a connection because in China 
today there are 35 Catholic bishops that are either in house arrest or 
in jail and Protestant pastors that plundered Tibet.
  China, unfortunately, and I think the American people know, has now 
become our banker. This ties in to the health care bill that we are 
ready to vote on tomorrow. That bill will cost $1 trillion.
  To think America is unsinkable, the White House projects the Federal 
debt will grow by more than $9 trillion in the next 10 years. How big 
is a trillion? One million seconds equals 12 days. One trillion seconds 
is more than 30,000 years. China is our banker. This bill will cost $1 
trillion, and it is important that we deal with this issue.
  Now, the second poster sums up on where we are today. This happens to 
be Uncle Sam. He is saying, don't let the debt defeat a great nation.
  We are obligated to China. China holds a large portion of our debt. 
The Saudis hold a large portion of our debt. The Saudis, who funded the 
radical madrassas up on the Pakistan-Afghan border and some who were on 
the airplanes that killed the people on 9/11, 30 or more so from my 
congressional district, hold our debt.
  We need to get control of this debt. And the health care bill will 
not lower costs. The health care bill will cost over $1 trillion. What 
kind of legacy are we leaving for our children, and I have five, or our 
grandchildren, and I have 14? A legacy of debt and deficit.
  So $1 trillion for this health care bill. We have $57 trillion of 
unfunded obligations. We have $12 trillion in debt.
  So I close by saying to vote against the bill, because it costs us 
money; and on behalf of Uncle Sam we say, don't let debt defeat a great 
nation.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega), the chairman of the 
Asia, Pacific, and Global Environment Subcommittee.
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I certainly would like to thank our 
distinguished chairman of our Foreign Affairs Committee and our senior 
ranking member, the gentlelady from Florida, for their leadership and 
sponsorship and certainly support for this important resolution. I also 
would like to particularly thank my colleague, the gentleman from 
Oregon, for his authorship of this important bill.
  I think I know something about earthquakes, since recently my own 
district was just devastated by an 8.3 Richter scale earthquake for 
which the distance was only about 120 miles south of Samoa. Traveling 
at about 500 miles an hour, the shock wave was such that, within a 
matter of minutes, we ended up with a 20-foot tsunami that caused 
tremendous devastation in property, our homes, and villages, and the 
deaths of many people.
  I do want to commend my good friend from Oregon for his leadership 
and for raising this important issue to our colleagues and also to 
commend the two citizens who really wanted just to investigate how was 
it that, because of faulty construction of these classroom facilities, 
that these children died, and the government of China did not allow 
these investigations to go on.
  I have tremendous respect for the leaders of the People's Republic of 
China, given the fact they have only been in existence for about 60 
years. As I remind my colleagues sometimes, when China was founded in 
1948, there were 400 million people living in China at the time. Yes, 
under Communist rule, China has evolved itself, and it still has a lot 
of serious problems, like any other country.
  I think also in the time I have that I want to express very much the 
concerns that I have that I think it is time, especially under the 
circumstances on how these children ended up dead because of faulty 
construction of the buildings and the Chinese government refused to 
have this kind of investigation, for which these two citizens of China 
were victimized and prosecuted and certainly abused by the Chinese 
officials. This is not right.
  I want to again thank my good friend from Oregon, David Wu, for 
bringing this matter to the attention of our colleagues, and I urgently 
urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

                              {time}  1715

  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller), an esteemed member of the 
Financial Services and Transportation Committees.
  Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. I thank the gentlewoman for the 
time. The resolution before us deals with China, and many of our jobs 
are going to go to China if the health care bill the Democrats are 
proposing is enacted. The administration is using the American Medical 
Association and AARP to garner support for their health care bill. The 
AMA House of Delegates is meeting today in Houston, Texas. It is made 
up of elected representatives from across the country, representing 
doctors and their members of the AMA. They meet to vote on policy 
issues affecting doctors. They're saying that it was an unauthorized 
vote of the board prior to the delegates arriving that went to support 
this bill.
  AMA doctors are demanding a vote of no confidence against the board 
of directors. In fact, there are two resolutions that they're demanding 
to be

[[Page 27112]]

heard tomorrow. One is from the rank-and-file membership and members of 
the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association. It reads: 
``We of the rank and file membership and the members of the House of 
Delegates of the American Medical Association do hereby object to your 
recent vote supporting H.R. 3962, also known as the Affordable Health 
Care for America Act.
  ``Whereas, H.R. 3962 will change the practice of medicine in America 
forever; and whereas, the AMA leadership voted to support H.R. 3962 
prior to the convening of our House of Delegates; and whereas the AMA 
House of Delegates has strong feelings, beliefs that in many cases 
grave misgivings regarding H.R. 3962; and whereas the AMA leadership 
has denied our membership full discussion on this vitally important 
issue, we the undersigned do hereby demand, prior to addressing any 
item of business on the current agenda, immediate suspension of the 
rules of the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association.''
  And they called for a ``full discussion and debate of H.R. 3962, 
including a vote of no confidence in our leadership by the members of 
the House of Delegates.'' A very, very strong statement.
  The second resolution was filed, and it's called Resolution 1006. It 
was introduced by the Alabama delegation, the Arkansas delegation, the 
Delaware delegation, the District of Columbia delegation, the Florida 
delegation, the Georgia delegation, the Kansas delegation, Louisiana 
delegation, the New Jersey delegation, the South Carolina delegation, 
the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the 
American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the Congress of 
Neurological Surgeons, the American Society of General Surgeons and 
Triological Society.
  The subject is ``Withdrawal support of H.R. 3962.'' Obviously, there 
is a problem that doctors are having with this bill. AARP has also come 
out saying that they represent seniors supporting this bill. But you 
have to look at this bill. I represent over 70,000 Medicare-eligible 
seniors in my district alone. The bill cuts over $500 billion out of 
Medicare starting in 2010, including $23.9 billion in cuts to skilled 
nursing facilities, $143.6 billion in cuts to hospitals, including 
skilled nursing facilities, long-term care facilities, inpatient 
rehabilitation facilities, psychiatric hospitals and hospital care. 
Again, $143.6 billion in cuts to hospitals.
  Worst of all is $170 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage, which 
effectively will eliminate Medicare Advantage in the future. You can't 
support this bill and say you support seniors and you support doctors 
who represent their patients. With unemployment over 10.2 percent, a 
26-year high, in reality it's 17.5 percent when you include the 
individuals who are discouraged trying to find jobs and they can't find 
them and those who are underemployed having part-time jobs and would 
really prefer to work full time.
  We have a problem in this country. We've passed a stimulus bill that 
said unemployment would not go above 8 percent. It's 10.2 percent 
today. It said it would not go up to 8 percent and lose more jobs, and 
it lost over 3 million jobs since then. We need to look at what we're 
doing. We need to say we care about the American people; we care about 
those people who are going to be taxed to pay for this; and we care 
about a system of health care that's the best in the world that will be 
ruined.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), a very distinguished member 
of our committee.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished chairman, and I 
thank the distinguished ranking member for coming together around the 
legislation of my friend Mr. Wu from Oregon.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to recapture the moment of why we're here on this 
floor today. We will have an expanded opportunity tomorrow, Saturday, 
for there to be a vigorous debate on this health care reform, which, by 
the way, Mr. Speaker, the American Medical Association has indicated 
their recognition of the importance of this legislation. But I think 
it's important for us to recapture the horrific scenes, those of us who 
are parents, those of us who engaged with children during the tragedy 
of the earthquake in China on May 12, 2008.
  We looked in horror as rescue workers worked feverishly to draw out 
children, limp bodies covered with dirt and dust, crying parents, some 
losing more than one child, children being where they were supposed to 
be, in school, just as any of us who during our lifetime have dropped 
our precious souls off at a school building. You can imagine the outcry 
and the pain.
  Just go back to that time and see the video of parents on their knees 
screaming, maybe in prayer to ask for mercy, maybe to hope that their 
child either would be found or the limp body was not their child. Can 
you imagine two wonderful, heroic individuals Huang Qi and Tan Zuoren 
who came to speak for those voiceless parents, many of them oppressed 
by, unfortunately, the structure of China, even though it is a country 
that is represented to have democratic and constitutional rights.
  These men, these individuals were working to get the truth. What 
happened? Why did most of the school buildings fall as they did? What 
kind of cheap construction? Why was life so cheap that they did not 
focus?
  This resolution recounts that these individuals who are human rights 
activists were literally picked up by plain-clothes police on June 10, 
2008, and formally arrested on July 18, 2008, on charges of illegally 
possessing state secrets. All they were trying to do was to give a 
voice to the voiceless and to recognize that truth had to be found. 
When Huang's closed trial was held on August 5, 2009--and according to 
the international nongovernmental organization of human rights in 
China, four police officers kidnapped a volunteer for the human rights 
center to prevent him from testifying on Huang's behalf. So there are a 
lot of violations. In fact, China has violated their own constitutional 
rights.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. BERMAN. I am pleased to yield the gentlewoman 1 additional 
minute.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman. So when they reached 
out to try to get others to join their cause, to tell the truth or have 
the truth be told to these parents, these mourning parents, these 
parents without children--and we all know about China's birth control 
policies. Some may have had only one child. Each child is precious. So 
I rise today to support providing these human rights activists with the 
rights that all Chinese citizens have under article 35 and 41 of 
China's constitution, namely, freedom of speech and association, a 
right to make suggestions to officials free of suppression and 
retaliation. I ask for a human rights plan for China. It is time to 
tell the truth, but it is also time that China rises to recognize the 
rights of all of its citizens and the right to promote human rights.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman 
from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), a member on the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I too rise in support of this resolution and 
commend my friend and colleague and classmate from Oregon. He and I 
share something. We both have children about similar ages, elementary 
school, now middle school ages. I can't think of anything more horrific 
than your children dying when the buildings collapse upon them and the 
frustration of a parent who just wants answers.
  When I think about those buildings collapsing on those children, I 
can't help but think about the incompetency of a large centralized 
government that's in charge of every facet of their economy. Here we 
are faced this weekend with a debate of whether or not we're going to 
move our government in that same direction, of building a huge 
bureaucracy, one that is separated from the people, one that will be a 
thousand miles away, that won't really have the passion or interest, 
other than just passing paper around desks, and realizing that their 
lack of interest allows for this waste and the fraud and

[[Page 27113]]

the abuse that's inherent in the buildings that collapsed in Sichuan.
  I fear that as we grow our massive government and bureaucracy to 
manage the government's portion of the health care taking over 18 
percent of our economy, we're going to have to live with that level of 
incompetency, fraud, waste and abuse. Think of those schools collapsing 
and that equaling how our health care is going to be run in this 
country.
  Another thing that the gentleman from Virginia said--and I want to 
associate myself with his remarks--this is a $1.2 trillion bill. Yeah, 
they raise a lot of taxes to be able to pay for it. Some of it's $500 
billion out of Medicare. My worry is that that $500 billion out of 
Medicare really isn't going to be cut. It's just going to go to our 
national debt. Therefore, we're going to have to rely on China to buy 
that debt from us. Again, relying on it. Notice that this resolution 
condemns the action of the Chinese Government for their humanitarian 
violations, but there are no penalties here.
  See, when they're our creditors and they own us like they do and will 
continue to own more of us when we have to sell our debt to them, it 
limits our abilities to sit down and negotiate with them. Did you 
notice that the last couple of administration officials that have gone, 
or even congressional officials that have gone, to China haven't 
brought up human rights violations with China?
  Well, that's because they know they've got us by the economics. We 
can't do that or they could do such things as flood the world's economy 
with our debt, ruining our dollars and further jeopardizing our economy 
and more jobs. But then again, maybe the bright side of this health 
care bill, perhaps costing as many as 5.5 million jobs, is that they 
can go to China and help rebuild Sichuan.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Cassidy), a member of the Committees on 
Agriculture, Education, and Natural Resources.
  Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. Speaker, when they have events such as they had in 
China, one thing that happens is that as the buildings fall upon folks, 
they crush their muscles, and they end up having kidney failure. This 
comes to mind because after Katrina, one of the disasters that happened 
was that there were many people on dialysis that had to be evacuated 
from New Orleans to Baton Rouge, and there had to be an emergency 
dialysis center situation established.
  I thought about it: one of the great things about our current system 
of care is that there is this elasticity that exists in our country 
that often does not exist elsewhere. Yet when I toured recently those 
dialysis centers in my city, as it turns out, they're kept afloat by 
the few patients they see who have private insurance. Many of those 
patients are on Medicaid or Medicare. As it turns out, Medicaid pays 
about 60 percent of costs and Medicare pays about 90 percent of cost. 
So were it not for the private insurers paying over cost, we would not 
have the ability to treat the dialysis patients here or in the 
emergency situations, those that are evacuated up.
  It brings to mind immediately, of course, the health care bill that 
is before us. It attempts to expand the system of Medicaid and Medicare 
that is actually depriving our system of the resources it needs to care 
more carefully for those who are in times of natural disaster.
  That said, it is admirable to control costs in this bill, but 
paradoxically, the CBO says that this bill, which supposedly controls 
costs, actually will have an inflation rate of 8 percent per year. So 8 
percent per year more than doubles costs over the next 10 years, Mr. 
Speaker. It's ironic when the President says that if we do nothing, 
costs will double in 10 years, if we do this bill, according to the 
Congressional Budget Office, costs will more than double in the next 10 
years.
  So I guess, Mr. Speaker, in closing I would say that there are three 
imperatives to health care reform: it is controlling costs so we can 
expand access to quality care. We've seen in other countries where 
there is inadequate resources placed or inadequate attention to cost 
that, indeed, these are not addressed. I would ask that we reject this 
reform for its deleterious effects on our system.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield the remainder of 
my time to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), a member of the 
Committee on Appropriations.
  Mr. KINGSTON. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. When I think of 
China, I think of this health care plan. Centralized planning, that's 
what it is. Mr. Speaker, I know you and so many others have been 
spending their weekends reading this 1,990-page monstrosity, which some 
people think is going to save health care. I think rather it will save 
the bureaucracy.

                              {time}  1730

  This bill, these 1,990 pages, which have yet to be amended with yet 
another amendment called the manager's amendment. Now, what goes into 
the manager's amendment are kind of what is the result of having your 
arm twisted. What did you get for your twisted arm? It will be in the 
manager's amendment, which is not in these 1,990 pages. But what is?
  Premium increases, tax increases, Medicare cuts, bureaucrats between 
you and your doctor, and at a mere cost of $1 trillion.
  In the year that we have had the highest deficit in the history of 
the United States, $1.4 trillion, the Pelosi plan comes in weighing at 
$1 trillion, when we just got our unemployment figures back.
  Think about this: The President, with an 8.5 percent unemployment 
rate, pushes upon the Congress a $787 billion stimulus bill, and now 
unemployment has gone from 8.5 percent to 10.2 percent, and in so many 
other pockets of America it's 14, 15, and 16 percent.
  Where are the jobs? Why have we taken the focus off the main thing, 
the economy? Why are we going down the track of government takeover of 
health care and massive mandates on individuals, doctors, and small 
businesses, just like China? Mr. Speaker, 1,990 pages, it's ridiculous.
  The Republican alternative, which is not even half, not even 25 
percent, but I'd say maybe 15 percent in size, weighing in at, say, 
maybe a mere 150 pages: Cross-line selling to bring more competition 
for individuals. Association health care plans to let small businesses 
pull together. Expansion of health savings accounts. Medical 
malpractice reform to reduce frivolous lawsuits. This is the Republican 
alternative.
  The difference in the philosophy is simple. If your kitchen sink is 
leaking, you fix the sink. You don't take a wrecking ball to the entire 
kitchen. That's what the Pelosi plan does.
  The Republican plan focuses on those who have unfortunately fallen 
through the cracks, people who may be too young for Medicare, too 
wealthy for Medicaid. Maybe they're 40 years old, unemployed in this 
Obama economy, and maybe they have a preexisting illness. The 
Republican targeted reforms try to help that person. They don't try to 
take the health care away from the rest of the American public who are 
happy with what they have. We do not need a centralized command/control 
government in Washington, D.C., that tries to take away the rights of 
businesses and individuals in the form of a huge government takeover of 
health care.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute simply to point out 
that the relevance of the size of the Democratic health care bill to 
the Republican alternative is, I think, limited to the ratio of people 
covered under the Democratic bill and covered under the Republican 
bill, about 10 to 1.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) that the House suspend the rules 
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 877.
  The question was taken.

[[Page 27114]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the grounds that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.

                          ____________________