[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 10]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 14419-14420]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




CHINA'S ONE-CHILD POLICY: THE GOVERNMENT'S MASSIVE CRIME AGAINST WOMEN 
                           AND UNBORN BABIES

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, September 29, 2011

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, last week I held an extremely 
important hearing that examined the consequences of thirty-three years 
of China's implementation of its one child per couple policy.
  China's one child policy is state sponsored cruelty and constitutes 
massive crimes against humanity. The Nuremberg Nazi war crimes tribunal 
properly construed forced abortion as a crime against humanity--nothing 
in human history compares to the magnitude of China's 33 year assault 
on women and children.
  Today in China, rather than being given maternal care, pregnant women 
without birth allowed permits are hunted down and forcibly aborted. 
They are mocked, belittled and humiliated. There are no single moms in 
China--except those who somehow evade the family planning cadres and 
conceal their pregnancy. For over three decades, brothers and sisters 
have been illegal; a mother has absolutely no right to protect her 
unborn baby from state sponsored violence.
  Over the years I have chaired 29 congressional human rights hearings 
focused in whole or in part on China's one child policy. At one, the 
principal witness, Wuijan, a Chinese student attending a U.S. 
university, testified about how her child was forcibly murdered by the 
government. She said, ``[T]he room was full of moms who had just gone 
through a forced abortion. Some moms were crying. Some moms were 
mourning. Some moms were screaming. And one mom was rolling on the 
floor with unbearable pain.'' Then Wuijan said it was her turn, and 
through her tears she described what she called her ``journey in 
hell.''
  Last week we heard the testimony of other victims of forced abortion, 
and we are extremely grateful that they joined us. Not only did it take 
a great deal of courage to share what must be some of the most painful 
experiences of their lives, but they are also spoke truth to power, a 
Chinese Government that may well retaliate not only against them, if 
given the opportunity, but also family members who may still be in 
China. Again, I thank them for sharing their stories.
  Women bare the major brunt of the one child policy not only as 
mothers. Due to the male preference in China's society and the 
limitation of the family size to one child, the policy has directly 
contributed to what is accurately described as gendercide--the 
deliberate extermination of a girl--born or unborn--simply because she 
happens to be female.
  As a result of the Chinese government's barbaric attack on mothers 
and their children, there are some 100 million more males than females 
in China today. It has been noted that the three most dangerous words 
in China today are: ``it's a girl!''
  In July, I offered an amendment demanding the release and an end of 
the torture of Chinese defense attorney Chen Guangcheng,

[[Page 14420]]

who bravely defended forced abortion victims in China. Both Chen and 
his wife Yuan Weijing are at risk of dying from repeated beatings by 
the Chinese secret police and refused access to critically-needed 
medical care.
  In the latter part of August when Vice President Joe Biden was 
visiting China, he stated that he ``fully understood'' the one child 
policy, and that he's not ``second guessing.'' Can you imagine what the 
public reaction would be if the Vice President had said that he ``fully 
understands'' and is not ``second guessing'' copyright infringement and 
gross violations of intellectual property rights?
  The one child per couple policy is the most egregious systematic 
attack on mothers ever. For my Vice President to publicly state that he 
fully understands the one child policy and then say he won't second 
guess it is unconscionable, and sells out every mom in the PRC who has 
suffered this abuse. Instead of defending the one child policy, Vice 
President Biden should have asked for the release of Chen and Yuan, or 
at least made a formal request to see them.
  Although Vice President Biden attempted to backtrack on his 
extraordinarily callous comment about the policy, his voting record as 
a Senator shines a spotlight on his long-held disregard for the 
severity of this human rights violation. On September 13, 2000, he 
joined 52 other senators in defeating an amendment by then-Senator 
Jesse Helms condemning the one child policy. Then-Senator Biden 
reportedly did so because he was concerned that condemning China on 
fundamental human rights would interfere with the normalization of 
trade relations.
  I invited the Vice President to to a hearing I held last week to 
explain his ``full understanding'' of the one child policy. I was 
informed that he was not in D.C. and could not attend. Given the grave 
importance of this issue, and the literally millions of lives at stake, 
I extend to the Vice President an open invitation to testify at a 
hearing at his convenience to share his ``understanding'' with the 
Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Human Rights, and what 
actions, if any, the Obama Administration is taking to end this 
barbaric policy.
  I also asked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at a hearing on March 
1st of this year whether she or President Obama raised the issue of 
forced abortion in China directly in a face-to-face manner with 
President Hu when he was in Washington. She refused to answer it then, 
and I have yet to receive a response.
  Not only is the current Administration turning a blind eye to the 
atrocities being committed under the one child policy, but it is even 
contributing financial support--contrary to U.S. law--through the 
UNFPA. Twenty seven years ago--on May 9, 1984--I authored the first 
amendment ever to a foreign aid bill to deny funding to organizations 
such as the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) that are complicit 
with China's forced abortion and involuntary sterilization policy. 
After all these years, it is amazing and disheartening to me that most 
policy makers--including and especially the Obama Administration--
remain indifferent or worse, supportive, of these massive crimes 
against women and children. The Obama Administration has long enabled 
this cruel policy by its silence and financial support to the tune of 
$50 million a year to the UNFPA, an organization that supports, plans, 
implements, defends and whitewashes the Chinese government's brutal 
program.
  U.S. funding for the UNFPA was withheld in accordance with what is 
known as the Kemp-Kasten provision, which prohibits any monies for an 
organization that supports or participates in the management of a 
program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization, for Fiscal 
Years 1986-1993, 1999, and 2002-2008.
  In June 2008, Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte notified 
Members of Congress that he had determined that UNFPA had provided 
``financial and technical resources through its sixth cycle China 
Country Program to the National Population and Family Planning 
Commission and related entities,'' and therefore provided support for 
and participated in the management of the Chinese government's program 
of coercive abortion and involuntary sterilization. It was on this 
basis that no funding was provided to the UNFPA that year.
  Unfortunately, despite the fact that the Seventh Country Programme, 
2011-2015, clearly indicates that UNFPA's support and participation in 
China's coercive policies continue, the Obama Administration is 
allowing money to flow to UNFPA in violation of the Kemp-Kasten 
Amendment.
  On one of several trips to Beijing, I challenged Peng Peiyun--then 
China's director of the nation's population control program--to end the 
coercion, we had quite a debate. Madame Peng told me that the UNFPA was 
very supportive of the one child per couple program and that the UNFPA 
adamantly agrees with her that the program is voluntary and that 
coercion doesn't exist. In other words, I--we--are simply making it all 
up.
  For over 30 years, the UNFPA has consistently heaped praise on 
China's population control program and repeatedly urged other countries 
to embrace similar policies.
  A few years ago this fall, the UNFPA and the Chinese government 
rolled out the red carpet and hosted high level diplomats from Africa 
including health ministers to sell ``child limitation'' policies. 
Despite the fact that China's enforcement mechanism relies on heavy 
coercion and its aging population will soon implode its economy, many 
African leaders seem to have taken the bait. Limitations on the number 
of children a mother may carry to term are under active consideration 
throughout the continent.
  President Paul Kagame of Rwanda for example wants a limit of three 
children per woman. I spoke to him directly about it and heard the same 
arguments I heard from family planning officials on trips to Beijing.
  Last week, we heard about the broader social implications of the one 
child policy and the extreme disparity between the numbers of men and 
women in China, particularly in terms of security. Therefore, the 
negative ramifications of the policy for the Chinese people that we 
will be examining have implications also for numerous other countries 
and the world in general.
  I appreciated hearing from all of our distinguished witnesses, and 
wish to extent my sincere gratitude for them joining us last week.

                          ____________________