in 2005, the anti-spyware coalition created a consensus definition of spyware which stated that tracking software done covertly is spying. this this is probably the most important development behind decriminalization. criminalize the operations to surreptitiously track and facilitate a crime. it is past time to intercept tracking location and intercepting electronic communication. no one should profit from encouraging or enabling criminal act. stalking cap and device -- app and devices are making money. there should be a very modest

private right of action. think, is quite low. we have insurance that would cover the accidental oversight. it should not cover that if you are doing it willfully with mallon tenant. in fact parallel state laws. since the overwhelming majority of these investigations are done at the local level, we hope this model will become a model for state statute. positiveeen countless ways that technology can increase the safety and support of victims and survivors of abuse and stalking. we think verizon, facebook, the application developers alliance, and so many more for working with us to increase victims safety. this will never really impact a handful of ad actors that designer operate products sold crimes.itate terrifying senator franken, thank you for

your tireless efforts to end violence against women. thank you for your long support of the violence against women act. >> thank you. seven minute rounds for questioning. detective, you mentioned that you are investigating an attempted murder where the victim was being tracked by a stocking cap -- stalking app that advertised itself as parental monitoring software. we had a public hearing to debate this bill teat of years ago and i read on the website that it was named e-phone tracker. suspect your spouse is cheating? track every text, call, every move they make using our easy cell phone spy software.

there's a lot of press about it after that hearing. we checkedame day the website again and this is what it looked like. is your child exposed to sexting? all the stuff about your spouse was gone. is a common for apps to disguise themselves like this? >> absolutely. they will typically advertise themselves as being a family tracker or to track your employees. >> why don't you just go after stalking apps and leave legitimate apps alone but these are two separate issues. your answer tells me that if we want to stop the stalking apps, we cannot target just those that label themselves as that. we also have to lay down a few basic rules of the road for any that is collecting your basic

location information. like they will just change the name to something else stalkers will figure out. >> we don't want to interfere with a legitimate parental monitoring app, but we do want to block those that are pretending to be something they are not. how do you do that? >> legitimate parental monitoring apps if they follow the best practice of the visible.based apps are the child knows they are being monitored and they have control functions. they can see there is monitoring occurring. there is no problem knowing that your device is being monitored. the spyware industry definition says if it is a monitoring product, it is spying if it's not visible to the user. there is no exception for a child or employee.

need consent but they would still need notice. or provision is absolutely critical here. -- dr. atkinson, you and your testimony say that reminders might make it harder for parents to keep track of kids because they will know they are being tracked. as you just heard, we cannot limit the reminders only to apps that call themselves stalking apps. a lot pretend to be parental and things like that. more importantly, i disagree with you that the provision proved too broad for all using geolocation data."

my bill requires minors only us a nap is running in a way that is intercept the ball. -- only if an app is running inperceptible. you say this is a legitimate app imperceptibleably to the user." took a look at the home screen on my iphone and there it was. this is not my iphone but it is second from the left on the top there and it shows up on your .ome screen by default you cannot delete it. it is impossible. every time it gets your location, a little arrow pops up . i don't know if you can see this

. it is also in your privacy settings under location services . p is reallyd book ap easy to perceive, at least to me. any apps like passbook app would not have to remind of anything under my bill. my point is that it is not a app ishat passbook running transparently. that is just the industry best actress. they will not have to send any extra reminders using best actresses. dr. atkinson, isn't it already industry best practice that location apps run in a way that they are transparent to the user?

>> i should have made it more clear but imperceptible is perhaps a vague standard. you should look at what should be a better definition in the bill as what is imperceptible related but to the size of the icon, seeing it in the list. that is 1.i was trying to make their. . fully agree with you there are tracking apps, or apps report location that run in the background like carrier iq, and an individual cannot access them. i cannot go to the website and find where my phone is. that's the point i was making. make sure the definition of any of these apps is only for those were an individual could but something on the phone and then the individual could get access to that data stream. otherwise, there are others

fused for system performance. >> i really don't think carrier iq should be a model here. people were outraged when they found out the software was running in secret. user,, the single biggest remove the software from 26 million devices. i'm sure there are isolated cases where the reminder might the superfluous or it might be difficult. this just seems, by and large, very straightforward to me. >> in your written testimony,

you note that there are a number of products that would be considered mobile devices under the legislation but they are not smart phones. these are like smart shoe apps, watchers, health devices that shows you how many steps you've walked that day. notifications.ow stifle innovation in these areas if you have issues or regulations that cover that? >> i think it could. ms. southworth mentioned an app that is a gps device and the amber alert sells a gps device you can put in your child back act. they could put one of those devices in someone's trunk.

i support the notion that we should have notice on those, there are certainly other technologies where you could not do that. then you have some of the new things. how would you do notice on a show, a shirt, something like that. there could be notice when you are doing an actual computer-like device. that, sheng up on said the location privacy protection act will narrowly impact a handful of bad actors that designer operate products created or sold to facilitate terrifying crimes. is that inaccurate description of the legislation, that it would simply impact a handful of bad actors? some of the proponents towards the end of the bill would certainly do that and are

needed. bill is really just focused on broad, generalized, commercial use of geolocation data which has nothing to do with stalking, no relation to stalking or identity theft. the bill would address those issues in a way that i think could limit innovation. >> i certainly agree on that point. as a big part of the bill that i support. stalking legislation is part of about i remain concerned some of the stifling innovation. do you want to address back? senator flake, thank you. we see that self-regulation has been effect is and up to the and up to theive task giving control on the desk top environment and we're bringing it to the mobile environment. the desktop environment we have

been in for over three years and later this year we will be releasing the mobile choice app which has been a work in progress now for about a year. we released a mobile guidance and an industry code for how to display notice. earlier this year, it has been a four-step process that will actually make that guidance and forcible. >> do you share mr. atkinson's concern that some of these new are interactive and that there is no way even for best actresses or businesses to band together for notification if there is no interaction with the user. in your view, does that stifle innovation? >> one reason we think self-regulation works -- i want to limit my answer to the scope of the program that i run. reason we think that

innovation is better served by self-regulation is we can quickly adapt and quickly moved to new business models. not that many are simply thinking about apps, cross app data, precise location. we have not only a set of principles in place and guidance for companies to follow but we to beso putting out tools able to make choices. that has happened and they fairly quick amount of time. if there are challenges to the , that seemsd that to be a quick way to adapt to those changes. >> in your view, it could be far more nimble than perhaps government regulation in this regard. >> that's more eloquently than i could, but yes. >> they will share users

location information without consent of any third party that they wish. they have little power to stop them but in that scenario, doesn't the consumer have the ability to use the service or the app? certainly, that's true. there are many, many apps that consumers find very useful that they need to get from one place to another and i don't think that should mean that they sacrifice their privacy or their say what are you using this data for? don't i have the right to say? you need to let me know this information is being shared and with whom it is being shared. can bridge that gap without interfering with a companies ability to innovate and some of the statements that have been made here.

>> mr. atkinson, you noted that there were many beneficial uses of tracking apps and mention examples of the loved one locator, project lifesaver, if someone has autism, dementia, alzheimer's, family members are track and make sure there is a safe zone that they stay within. in the billceptions for that, but some concerns have been raised where there are situations where a sibling, a close family friend, or others who are not a parent or legal guardian might want to be involved in that. do you want to address that in more detail? it's important to understand that stalking is not a technological term. it's a behavioral term. the technological term. i do not believe, nor does the bill do this, but we should and

tracking applications. enormous benefits for families and others who want to know where their device is, where their family members are. we need to make sure that we can go forward with that. but i'm somewhat concerned about , i don't believe we will end up with a situation where companies will change their names and they will just be family trackers. fundamentally, i don't know how .e can solve the problem for example, on the notification, any person who installs a nap on the phone on ios or android, you can turn off notification. -- any person who installs an app. how do you monitor your phone? how do you look at the apps running list? all of those things. in both of those operating systems right now, you can just

turn off notifications. more complicated, i think, than simply taking some apps that are bad actors in use them for bad purposes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. exemption andcy safety exceptions are not limited to parents. i just wanted you to know that. thingsalk about a couple . both you and dr. atkinson referred to digital advertising alliance self-regulatory program for marketing as a model program. just so i'm clear, you issue this code in july 2013 but you are not enforcing it? code was issued in july 2013.

there had to be several operational steps put into place before it can become operational. there had tos that be a standardized way for companies to display notice to consumers. that happened in april. the next step is to have a nap so they can express their choices -- the next up is to have an app. choice,consumer makes a we want to make sure the choice is honored and that companies are held to honoring that choice. >> so it's a model program in theory. top version has been around for almost three and a half years. we have a great pedigree to show that in fact we do put the tools to market that we say we will. >> can i ask ms. greenberg about what your opinion is of the reality you see in best actresses? practices?

>> it seems the code is coming late in the game to us. players like the direct marketing association put codes in place years ago. with all due respect, we've looked at the code and it is full of holes. we would argue that it feels may bepr gesture and it driven in fact by the introduction of this legislation. that thelso take issue idea that self-regulation is working. i think there is monumental evidence that self-regulation is not working. from theeard witnesses ftc and the gao say as much.

the wall street journal did an article that you mentioned with 101 apps being tested and 47 of them disclosed users location to a third-party. we very much need this bill because self-regulation is not protecting consumers. >> there is the point that the ranking member made. has there been any evidence of harm? i think most americans believe that they have some right to privacy. do you think there is harm that individuals can feel if their privacy is not being protected? >> the notion that there is no real harm from tracking and using location data for consumers really strikes in the heart of our notions of consumer

protection and the idea that privacy is a bedrock american principal. justices of the supreme court, mayor, haved soto mayo articulated that it is a right. the vast majority do care about their location data not being shared without the consent and do want to know where that location data, to whom that location data is being shared and for what purpose. i think that flies in the face of what we know about how consumers feel about their privacy. like last year, your organization posted a blog post about my location bill. "the evidence for the use of stalking apps is somewhat thin." dr. atkinson, i can understand might economic think tank

think that but i'm curious what people in the field who have actually seen this. detective hill, are stalking app s common or is the prevalence of the evidence somewhat thin? 220%.has increased we are finding more and more that these do exist. >> one week does not go by where the national office was not set up for direct services but we get calls every single week from survivors who were trying to figure out if the gps devices on the car, the phone, and app. we just don't have enough effective hills -- detective hills out there to have things examined. >> i think after atkinson has stated his general approval of piece of thispp

so i don't want to send that wrong message. just in the execution of it in -- i go to you worth, thatsouth people have a reminder that this is happening. dr. atkinson talked about being able to suppress it. >> it is vital. the behavior is not new. there is general support around helping vic dumbs. offenders will do anything they can to control their victims. they would look at the odometer when the vic and went to the grocery store to see if she stopped to pick up a prescription because it was outside of the bounds of what she was allowed to do that day. there are crazy amounts of control. some offenders will tell the vic m, i am putting this on your phone and i will be tracking you. it's there and she

comes to file a report or a local advocate to talk about a protection order, she can accidentally let the battery run down, but if she does not know it was on the phone because the offender did not tell her, there is no arrow on the top, they cannot do anything to stay safe. resources.s to the someone who feels like they are that itapped saying must be in this thing. what happens when they go to a police station routinely? don't have the tools to look at it or they may only have one tool to look at it and don't see anything after a quick look and send the victim on the way which can be very frustrating. >> this is why we need and the bill gets resources to be able and get exactly with the

victims need. >> absolutely. >> i'm out of time. ranking member? is something i've been working on for a long time and you are just the ranking member. [laughter] the portions of the bill that deal with stalking, i applaud the chairman for his dedication on this and those that testified, groups and organizations whoever on this for a long time, i do think we definitely need action in those areas. the bill thats of we don't necessarily stifle innovation that can help with some of the same areas we are talking about. i think concerns have been raised about this legislation that may require notice be provided and consent be obtained

. the family tablet, gps and the car, is there a concern among some members of your that notification may be given to those who use the same device? >> i can speak to but the program code is. if you are transferring location , you have to get consent. you have to get it download or on install. i would like to take this step address a point that ms. greenberg made. mentioning both participants in the development of our code. it will be enforceable later on this year. our program has announced more than 30 public actions against

participants and nonparticipants alike. that is not pr. it's not an easy discussion to have that a company is somehow noncompliant with our program. this is the mission we've set out to do. divertnt to transparency, control, and accountability. this is the program that we have and we think it serves industry and consumers well. >> to describe the program you to give some discipline about what you are talking about, you have given consent for investigation. how many did you say? been 33 public

compliance actions. i think the number is in the 60-70 individual companies named in there. of those, we get compliance eventually but one did get referred to a federal authority. for me and iit really appreciate this hearing. thank you for your testimony, everyone. >> i would like to thank all the witnesses very quickly because i don't want to have a long back and forth. would you like to respond, ms. greenberg? that weto take a moment are arguing with the idea that they may have pursued investigation. it's the code itself that is weak. to getdoes not need permission if they don't share the data and they keep it to themselves. if it does share precise location with totally different companies, they still do not need to get permission to share. if they are doing so for market saying it is full of

holes, that is what i am referring to. code does call for consent when there is a transfer of location information. the reason we do that is we focus on when information is being transferred to unrelated apps or sites. that is the code. >> is her characterization of the code not accurate? >> we focus on the transfer of information to unrelated apps and sites. we want to make consumers aware of that and give them control. that's the part of the code that thehe essential piece of daa program. >> we may follow-up on this. i want to do this forever.

to thank the want ranking member, senator flake. i want to say of the witnesses who appeared today. detective hill took time out of his job to travel here and testify. we heard a lot of valuable testimony today. i think our bill will protect and i will think about today's testimony though. we will work to address that feedback to make any needed improvements in the bill between theand by the time it is books. thank you. i mean that sincerely. thing thatre's one there is absolutely no question about. shut down.ps must it is unacceptable in this day and age that companies are making money off of stalking and

brazenly marketing themselves as talkers is equally on except the bulb of the laws have new polls -- marketing themselves as unacceptablequally . we have to stop these apps. i think there is agreement here. we will hold the record open for one week for submission of questions to the witnesses and other materials. thank you. thank you. thank you again. this hearing is adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

d to pay in cleanup costs. >> the house is not in session this week but the senate is. here are sheldon whitehouse can about climate change. they announced that they voted to confirm silvio berlusconi to burwell-- sylvia leading up to a confirmation vote which is expected sometime this week. watch the senate live on our companion network am a c-span 2.

for over 35 years, c-span brings public affairs and leinster washington directly to you putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings, and conferences offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house all as a public service of private industry. we are c-span created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by her local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd. like us on facebook. follow us on twitter. in force have been out today in central beijing to block any public observance of the 25th anniversary of the tiananmen square crackdown. that was the day that troops moved in on protesters killing hundreds of unarmed protesters.

he spoke about the violence going on in the spring of 1989. here is a brief look. as tiananmenf it square. the worst violence is where they and in from the west apartment in which senior party officials lived. mowed peoples just down with ak-47s, aiming at people watching on balconies. andad grand party officials his son was bicycling to work four miles from tiananmen square. some soldier shot him in the back. those things were happening not just around beijing but in many

parts of the country as well. >> today the 25th anniversary of the crackdown in china. we look at the impact of the protest had on china and the rest of the world with journalists who were there. president bush asked national security advisor at the time. right now, a look at how president george h.w. bush handled the issue in 1989 speaking to reporters about several of the measures in response including the suspension of sales to the chinese military. his comments ran about 20 minutes. >> during the past few days, elements of the chinese army have been brutally suppressing

popular and peaceful demonstrations in china. there has been widespread and continuing violence, many casualties and many deaths. we deplore the decision to use force and i now call in the chinese leadership publicly as i have in public channels to avoid violence and to return to their previous policy of restraint. the demonstrators in tiananmen square were advocating basic human rights, including the freedom of expression, freedom of the press, freedom of association. these are goals we support around the world. these are freedoms that are enshrined in both the u.s. constitution and the chinese constitution. throughout the world, we stand with those who seek greater freedom and democracy. this is a strongly felt review of my administration, of our congress, and the most important the american people. in recent weeks, we urged mutual restraint, nonviolence, and dialogue. instead, there has been a violent and bloody attack on the demonstrators. the united states cannot condone the violent attacks and cannot

ignore the consequences for our relationship with china which has been built on a foundation of broad support by the american people. this is not the time for an emotional response, but for a reasoned, careful action that takes into account both our long-term interests in recognition of the complex internal situation in china. there clearly is turmoil within the ranks of the political leadership as well as of the political, people's liberation army in now is the time to look beyond the moment to important and enduring aspects of this vital relationship for the united states. the budding of democracy which we have seen in recent weeks

bodes much than the relationship we have developed since 1972. it is important at this time to act in a way that will encourage the further development and the deepening of the positive elements of that relationship. the process of democratization. it would be a tragedy for all if china were to pull back to its pre-1972 era of isolation and repression. i am ordering the following actions -- all government to government sales and commercial exports of weapons. suspension of visits between u.s. and chinese military leaders. sympathetic review of request by chinese students in the united states to extend their stay. the offer of humanitarian and medical assistance through the red cross to those injured

during the assault and review of other aspects of our bilateral relationships as event in china continue to unfold. the process of democratization of communist societies will not be a smooth one. we must react to setbacks in a way which stimulates rather than stifles progress towards open and representative systems. i will be glad to take a few questions before our cabinet meeting which starts in a few minutes. tom? >> mr. president, you have said democracy cannot be put back in the bottle for china. you have said before that the actions of the past weekend --

do you still believe that and are there further steps the united states can take like economic sanctions? >> i still believe that. i still believe the forces of democracy are so powerful. when you see them as recently as this morning, i single student standing in front of a tank. then, i might add, seeing the tank driver exercising restraint. i'm convinced the forces of democracy are going to overcome these unfortunate events in tiananmen square. on the commercial side, i do not want to hurt the chinese people. i happen to believe the commercial contacts have led in

essence to this quest for more freedom. i think as people have commercial incentive, the move to democracy becomes more. i understand there are deep divisions inside the army. we are putting the emphasis on that side of it. helen? >> why do you think they moved in the way they did and why did you wait so long? >> i don't think we waited so long. i made very clear in a personal communication my views on this. we talk to the ambassador last night. we have been in touch constantly with the chinese officials. i cannot, i don't feel we have waited long when you have a force of this nature and when you have events of this nature unfolding. we are the united states and they are china. what i want to do is to continue to urge freedom, democracy,

respect, nonviolence. and, with great admiration in my heart for the student. i do not think we waited long. >> the chinese government waited a long time, more than we expected. what do you think -- >> i am glad you read that point. we were and have been continuing to urge restraint. they did show restraint when he was here. this is very chinese the way he expressed it. the army loves the chinese people. they showed restraint for a long time and i cannot begin to

fathom exactly what led to the order to use force because even as recently as a couple of days ago there was evidence that the military were under orders not to use force. i think we have to wait until that unfolds. >> give us your best assessment of the political situation there. which leaders are up, which are down. >> it is too obscure to say. i would remind you of the history. in the cultural revolution days, the right hand was put out. in 1976, he was put out again. then he came back in and to his credit he moved china towards openness, towards democracy, towards reform. suddenly, we see a reversal and

i don't think there is anybody in this country that can answer your question with authority at this point. it does not work that way. >> he was behind the move -- other reports are that he is in the hospital. >> we don't know for sure on either end. i spoke to the ambassador on that last night and we cannot confirm one way or another. >> you spoke of the need for the u.s. to maintain relations with china. given the brutality of thes attacks, can the u.s. ever return to business as usual with the current regime? >> i don't want to see a total break in this relationship. i will not encourage a total break in the relationship. this relationship -- when you see these kids struggling for democracy and freedom, this would be a bad time for united states to withdraw and pull back and leave them to the devices of their leadership that might decide to crack down further. some have suggested i take the

ambassador out and that would be 180 degrees wrong. our ambassador provide some of the best listening post we have in china. he is thoroughly experienced so make others make proposals. i want to see us stay involved and continue to work for restraint and for human rights and for democracy. down the road, we have enormous commonality interests. i stop short of suggesting that what we ought to do was break relations with china. >> a couple of weeks ago, students continue to stand by. what message do you want for them? >> we support their quest for democracy, for reform, and for freedom. there should be no doubt about that. then, in sending this message to

the military, i would encourage them to go back to the posture of a few days ago that did show restraint and that didn't recognize the rights of the people and that did that minimize that the army loves the people. there are examples of that. i cannot dictate to the students what they should do from halfway around the world. we support the quest for democracy and reform. i just have to repeat that. >> i would like to ask you about the other development in iran. what is your assessment of who is in charge and what opportunities the changes in iran could mean for the u.s.? >> we are not sure yet. the will having been read by his son. again, in the society of that

nature, i would repeat what i said. there is a way for relationship with the united states to improve and that is for a release of the american hostages. i cannot give you an answer on that one. no expert can either. >> do you plan any overture? is there any other opening towards iran? >> no. they know what they need to do. they have been a terrorist state. as soon as we see some move away from oppression and extremism of that nature, we will review our relationship. we are working our way back. >> on the question of economic sanctions -- did you consider economic sanctions? what would we do if the violence escalates? >> i reserve the right to take a

whole new look at things of the violence escalates. i indicated to you why i think the suspension of certain military relationships is better than moving against the economic side. >> do you feel the chinese leadership cares what the united states does or thinks right now? >> i think they are in the sense of contradiction themselves right now. china has historic lee been less than totally interested in what other countries think about their performance. you have to look at the middle kingdom syndrome. you look back in history when outsiders, including the united states, were viewed as "barbarians." historically, china with its immense pride and cultural background and enormous history

of conflict, internal and external, has been fairly independent. i have the feeling china wants to be a more acceptable in the family of nations. i think any observer would agree that indeed they have moved in that direction. i would like to encourage them to move further in that direction by recognizing the rights of these young people and by rebuking any use of force. >> most americans do not understand the chinese. how do you account for the excessive violence? >> it is hard to explain because there was that restraint that was properly being showed for a while on the part of the military. challenge to come in and restore what i'm sure they've been told they are ordered to a situation which i expect they were told was an archaic. i cannot explain it. i can explain it unless they were under orders and then you get into the argument about what orders you follow? i condemn it.

let me take these next two rows. >> would you be able to accommodate congress for sanctions? many lawmakers believe you were slow to condemn china. >> i told you what i'm going to do. i set the foreign-policy objectives and actions taken by the executive branch. i think they know that i am not only having a keen personal interest in china but i understand it reasonably well. i will reiterate to the leaders of my conviction that this is not a time for anything other than a prudent reasoned response. it is a time to assert our commitment to democracy. emphasize the strength that we give to democracy in situations of this nature. i come back to the front line

question here. i do think this change may go a couple steps forward and may take a couple steps back but it is on the move. the genie will not be put back in the bottle. i am trying to take steps that will encourage a peaceful change and yet recognize the fact that china does have great pride in its own history. my recommendations are based on my knowledge of chinese history. i would argue with those to want to do something more flamboyant because i happen to feel this relationship is vital to the united states of america and so was our adherence to democracy and our encouragement for those who are willing to hold high the banner of democracy. yes? >> do you think the events in china can have a chilling effect on democratic reforms occurring

in other communist countries, particularly in the soviet union and eastern europe? when they look at that in china. >> i think the move we are seeing in a tenure of today and the soviet union are going to go forward. i think people are watching more with horror and saying how given this movement to democracy can the chinese leadership react in the way they have. i think this may be a sign to others around the world that people are heroic when it comes to their commitment to democratic change. i would just urge the chinese leaders to recognize that. last row here. >> there are reports of the

chinese military -- they brought in some -- how does sending these military relationship encourage any kind of change? can you explain what that is? >> i explained it because i want to keep it on the military side. i have expressed here rhetorically the indignation we feel. i recognize the history of china moving into its own middle kingdom syndrome as it is done in various times and it's past. i want to encourage the things that helps the chinese people. i think now the suspension is going to send a strong signal. i am not saying it is going to cure the short-range problem in china. i am not sure any outside country can cure the short-range. i think it is very important that chinese leaders know it is not going to be business as

usual. i think it is important that the army knows that we want to see restraint and this is the best way to signal that. any others? >> you talked about the divisions within the chinese army. through your advisors fear there could be a civil conflict between army commanders? >> i don't want to speculate on that. there are differences clearly within the army in terms of use of force. otherwise they wouldn't be doing what david pointed out is happening. units coming in from outside. it is not incidentally tiananmen square that this problem exists. it is in shanghai, wenzhou. they brought the troops in from outside because the beijing troops apparently demonstrated a great sensitivity to the cause of the young people.

disciplined as they were, they opted for the side of democracy. i certainly don't want to speculate on something i don't -- i cannot reach that conclusion. >> some of the soldiers units burn their own trucks. did you receive the same type of intelligence? >> i don't believe the intelligence said that. there are reports that it is very difficult for some of these in the military who are much more sympathetic to the openness, to the demonstrators. i go back to the original question here that tom asked. i think with the change that is taking place so far, we are beyond a cultural revolution

response. i think the depths of the feeling towards democracy is so great that you cannot put the genie back in the bottle and return to total repression. what we're seeing is a manifestation of that in the divisions within the pla. i certainly want to stop short of predicting a civil war between units of the people's liberation army. thank you all very much. >> what did you think of the election? >> i think it was very interesting. i haven't seen the final results, but communist bureaucrats beware. it was quite a move moving towards freedom and democracy. james fellows, longtime

correspondent for the atlantic, joins us. he's written a great deal about china. we mark the 25th anniversary of the crackdown in tiananmen square, tell us how the u.s. government react to. >> the initial reaction was fairly cautious and measured. two years later when bill clinton was running against the incumbent first order bush, he going for the butchers of beijing. had been the first u.s. representative in beijing as relations normalized. the u.s. government haven't gotten the clear signals from the chinese and they were taking this very seriously as a matter of internal politics and cautioning the united states from doing anything too intrusive. >> chris smith said a lot about this and characterize the reaction by president george

h.w. bush as "tepid." history, youeep of can understand why the first president bush responded the way he did. he had a personal stake with many of the chinese leaders at that time. this is only 10 years under the normalization under president carter, for whom i worked. there was a sense that the united states had to register its displeasure without entirely rough ring relationships with china. people now recognize that there is only so much even the united states can do to shift the internal calculations of the government in china. embargoesad various condemning the chinese and they try to organize protests but it did not go further than that because the calculation was what finally the u.s. could do that wey were going to ignore did. >> how did the massacre change u.s. policy towards china overall in the long term, if at

all? we are showing viewers video that we shot back in 1998. a permanent shadow, more than an asterisk and how they view the chinese government. since the time of china ask going to develop and it's better if the united states is part of that than not. on the other hand, the united states recognizes that as a democracy movement seemed to be gathering force in china 25 years ago, the government very brute averlly squashed it. so i think the knowledge of that and where the government's priorities lay then and now has been a permanent complicating factor in how the rest of the world views china. >> just as a point of reference, the number killed in tiananmen square, a report this

week said it's sail inookted for. what's your best guess? >> i've been cautious to -- in saying. there have been plausible estimates that range from a couple hundreds to a couple thousand. i think the truth is we will probably never know for sure, but it was a large-scale killing of chinese citizens by the chinese military. whether it was a couple hundred or a couple thoun it's significant either way. >> we have seen mass profse in the ukraine and elsewhere since then. how does the government response to those compare? >> i think the only real comparison is with events in the former soviet union and now in the former soviet territory of ukraine. of th the chase -- case

china 25 years other, the united states feels on the one hand there are events it must con del. on the other hand, there is a decades-long sweep of history and complicated relations and another power that is not entirely within our ability to control. my view, having lived in china for a number of years, is the united states cannot dictate what the chinese government is going to do, similar in the case of russia around ukraine. in the case of syria, egypt, there is a different sort of calculation as to what is the right sort of commitment for the united states to make. james fallows is joining us to look at the 25th anniversary of tiananmen square. thank you for being here. >> thank you. >> today marks the 25th anniversary of the tiananmen square crackdown. united states -- u.s. senators took to the floor just days after the event to do not -- condemn the actions and support

protesters. speakers included george mitchell of maine and bob dole of kansas. this portion is about a half hour. >> mr. president, people the world over watched with admiration for weeks as millions of chinese people, led by a group of brave young students, staged the largest peaceful demonstration in all of human history. but people the world over watched with disbelief and horror over the past few days as the chinese people's liberate. -- liberation army brutally suppressed the demonstration, killing, wounding, and beating their unarmed fellow citizens. this cruel suppression has been the chinese government's answer to the modest demands of the chinese people for a voice in

their own future. the chinese people have provided a dramatic demonstration of the human freedom. it is a universal desire, not limited in time, place, or people. it is a desire for which thousands of courage u.s.a. chinese students and workers, men and women, have over the past few days been willing to die. it is a desire which tanks, bullets, bayonets and c freedom it is alubs and will not crush. the courage of the chinese students has inspired the world and galvanized their nation behind their call for democracy and reform. people everywhere want freedom and economic opportunity. communism has failed to provide either. he tanks in tiananmen square

stand as mute but moving testimony of the moral bankruptcy of a government that can maintain itself in power only by killing and will not cr last week by a vote of 89-0 the senate approved a resolution urging the government of the people's republic of china to take all necessary steps to establish a just and democratic society with a free and open political system that would protect the essential human rights of all the chinese people. at the same time we asked the secretary of state to communecate to the chinese leadership that official violence or repression directed at peaceful demonstrators seeking democracy and workers' rights would seriously damage relations with the united states. the chinese government's answer has been the imposition of martial law and the murder of

thousands of unarmed, peaceful demonstrators. such callous disregard for human rights and basic freedoms, which are the foundations of our own society and which the american people strongly support, can only have an adverse efekt on relations -- effect on relations between the two countries. the united states cannot and should not attempt to dictate the course of internal event from -- in china but we can and should state clearly our strong support for those placing their lives and futures on the line in support of democracy and freedom in china. we can and should demand that the leaders in china respect the rights of their people and be responsive to the legitimate democratic desires of the people of china. we can and should send a clear signal to the chinese people that the united states stands

for and in support of freedom. here, there, and everywhere. the president has called on the chinese leadership to avoid further violence and to exercise restraints. he has expressed american do not -- condemnation of the brutal repression which has been unleashed on the chinese people by suspending all commercial government sales and exports of arms to china, and taking other actions including offers of humanitarian and medical assistance to those civilians injured in the people's liberation army's recent unprovoked attack. i join about -- with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in supporting the president's response to the events in china. i commend him for speaking out for the people who are fighting and dying for freedom from the

tyranny of a totalitarian government. but in yue -- view of the rapidly changing situation in carolina i hope additional steps will be taken to further impress on the chinese authority the serious concerns we have regarding the violence and blodshed they are inflicting on the chinese people. according think, mr. president, the distinguished republican leader, senator dole and i are working today on reaching an agreement on a resolution suggesting certain other actions that should be taken at this time. theory threefold. i believe first that the 40,000 chinese students currently studying in the united states granted mediately be permission to extend their stay in the united states until the its ment of china ceases persecution of students in china. all politicians to

the overseas private investment corporation and the export-import bank to finance trade with china should be reviewed all carefully in the lighted of existing legal requirements for add kuwait human rights treatment. and third, that the president should immediately begin consultation with our nage allies -- major allies to termine collectively whether additional sanctions are necessary. i will urge my colleagues to support this resolution. it's my hope and intention tore able to offer this resolution later today as soon as the senate completes action on the supplemental appropriateations bill to encourage a debate and discussion among senators on hat subject and to have an overwhelmingly, indeed

hopefully unanimous vote to send a strong signal to the government of chineta -- china that the united states government condemns the actions they have taken and strongly urges the exercise of restraint in dealing with the peaceful demonstrations now occurring there. i yeemed to the distinguished republican leader. >> the remember 2k the republican leader is recognized. >> mr. president, i listened with interest to the majority leader and i certainly share his view. as he has indicated we are working on a nonpartisan, bi partisan, whatever, resolution that i think there -- will be supported by the majority of

senators. the intelligence committee, foreign relations committee, leaders, and others it would seem to me it's in our interest to speak with one voice. i think the president is exactly right. by supporting the president and indicating other areas where we have additional concerns, and there are all tinds -- kinds of options. i had my staff put together a list of options, things we might do. it's a pretty good list. so there are a number of options and if the matter continues those can be ratcheted up. you can add things, do serp things next week you might not do this week. no doubt about it, it's time that there is a clear understanding that we're united on this issue, that we're concerned about human life, yes, we're concerned about our relationship with china, it's also a recognition that we don't really know what's

happening in beijing or other cities in china. we don't know a lot of reports, a lot of rumors, the premiere may have been shot, not seriously, there are all kinds of rumors, army fighting army, we're not certain of that so i would hope that there is not any radical efforts to do certainly things that we might regret. i'm certain if we follow the leadership of the majority leader we'll be speaking with one voice and acting in concert with the president of the united states. in the past 72 hours weaver witnessed a great leap backward in china, backward towards an ra of savage repression of human rights, backward toward a brutal distane -- disdain for human life. toward a situation boreding on chaos. no one in even the inner circles of the chinese government, no one knows where it will end.

but some things are clear. the chinese government's actions today have been utterly unjustified and inexcuse avenl the civilized world is repulsed by what we have witnessed and we have the right and obligation to speak out. as the majority leader indicated we are determined the leader will speak out today just as the president did yesterday. the damage to the relations between our two nations has already been serious and the potential for far more profound damage is very real. the american people have seen what has sapped -- happened in beijing these last days and the american people will not long tolerate business as usual with a regime that mows down its own citizens in the streets of its capital. as the president said yesterday, we have a vital interest in good relations with is p.r.c., but we also have a profound and historic commitment to human freedom and

dignity. the chinese government must understand that. while we have no zir to shoot ourselves in the foose, neither we going to snailt our principles or turn or back on people who want only to be free. the president has spoken strongly and wisely. he has s we going toent a clear mental and i am convinced it is exactly the right message, true to our ideals, and i am also convinced that the congress and the american people will overwhelmingly support what the president has done and agree with what he so far has not done. you have to keep the communications open. things may happen. we get more information, more facts, additional action may be flezz. but let the chinese authorities understand this, too -- the spasm of blood and brutality must end now. they must again accept their

own people as the end of the starktse not their enemy. on that basis we have resume the relationship that has so well served our countries. so i would urge delay on the supplemental, that we will have a dipietro and have a discussion, that we will come together on a resolution that will pass overwhelmingly, hopefully unanimously and we will send, yes, a clear message supporting the president, supporting the american people, and even more important the support of the american people. if you watch television, as the president said, you saw that one young man holding back all the tanks culling at him. it's an inspiration. an act of courage. and it's one that i hope the chinese leaders, whoever they may be today, understand and they should understand that we're p going to back away --

not going to back away. we're not trying to disrupt relations. i agree with the senate majority leader with reference to students in this country and the protection of their rights and interests much the president acknowledged that yesterday. as i said, there are a number of things we can do as far as the p.r.c. is concerned with investments and credits and p.l. 480 and a whole host of things, a whole host of options. and i'm certain the administration has even a longer list. the distinguished chairman of the foreign relations committee, senator pell, we saw the list of options he was looking at yesterday. so i would suggest there are all kinds of things that can be done and we will all come up with different ideas but the dom. -- bottom line today is we should today speak with one voice supporting the president supporting the people of the united states expressing our

outrage. >> under the previous order there will now be a period for the transaction of morning business not to exceed jond the hour of 10:30. senators are permitted to speak therein. the senator from oklahoma is recognized. >> i think the chair. i thank the distinguished democratic and republican leaders who would just spoken and for the words which they have spoken shall the emphasis they have placed on the need for our country to speak at this particular moment, united with one voice in a bipartisan spirit. only when we speak with a single voice in a situation like this can the united states have maximum impact. when we speak with many voices, when we are confused, when we send different signals from different areas in our own government, when we have too many people trying to speak for this country al aught once and speaking in different ways, the message simply does not get

through. i have been watching the dispatches from china, reading the intelligence reports, as is my institutional responsibility. that situation there remains very, very uncertain. there is a clear division of opinion among the top military leadership going all the way down to the unit level. no one knows how that will sort itself out. there are strong differences of opinion among the top leadership of the quite -- country, even into the politburo itself the which faction will ultimately triumph at this moment is unknown and therefore we must act in a very careful and measured way. it is my view that at moment like this the person who should speak for the united states of america to assure that we do

speak clearly and whatever we ask a is based on the best information we can possibly get is the president of the ut, our commander in chief. i'll very pleased at the leadership given to the senate by senator mitchen -- mitchell and senator dole, to come to a sones resolution, i'm sure also working with the white house in the preparation of this particular -- particular resolution. this senator will serve notice now that i do not intend to vote for any prigs that would be inconsistent or show a lack of support for what the president is doing. that would be a terrible mistake. who could not be touched by the the spirit and the

immense dignity with which young poom in china have been pushing for democracy, which they have been riving the spiri very lives -- risking their very lives and some of them tragically laying down their lives and seeking what human beings all around the world seek most, the spiritual value of democracy and freedom to develop for potential to the fullest. our president has been our ambassador to china. there are few people in this country who understand the situation as well as he. he is not only our president, he is an expert this this particular area of policy. the action he has taken is absolutely appropriate. we have sent a strong signal that we deplore the use of force. we deplore the mindless and needless killing of these brave young people. we have stopped the sale of military equipment. we have terminated contact with

military representatives of the chinese government. at the same time, at this moment it is important that we keep our ambassador in beijing so that we can in beijing be heard, so that we can have a clear channel of communication with the leaders of the various factions that are contending for power as they debate among themselves the policies that should be followed. it is important that we withhold further action until we see how the situation evolves. and so the president has done the right thing. he's sent a clear signal on behalf of the american people, of our feelings of rerullings as -- at what has gone on in terms of the bloodletting. he has sent a strong signal that continued action along these lines could imperil the close relationship and friendly relationship that has developed between ourselves and the

current government of china and at the same time he has left the door open to those who are working for change and reform to say this is an important relationship and one that we hope will continue in the future because we hope their efforts will succeed. and he has left the channels of communication open at a time in which it is very important for us to communicate. so i think it is very important for us today to do two things in the congress of the united states. first, to express the deep admiration of the american people for the courage of those in china who have risked their lives in the cause of democracy and to express our repulsion at the use of force against these brave young people. and second, it is extremely important that we expression our support for the actions taken by the president of the united states and that we

establish the precedent that at these moments of crisis the united states will speak with a single voice and that the congress has the ability to provide important bipartisan support for the president of the united states in situations that demand it. politics pluft stop at the water's edge. we muste be united as we face a situation like that, and my hope is that what evolves today in the course of the debate in the senate and house will prove that we are capable of that kind of bipartisan uney. >> mr. president? >> the senator from employees is recognized. >> let me say how heatened i am -- heartened i am by what i have heard on the floor of the senate this morning. senator boren and i have been

working for i guess about two years now to try to re-establish a bipartisan foreign policy for this country. we have pointed out own -- over and over again the seeming irresistible impulse for the congress of the united states to want to weigh in on every oreign policy issue with microscopic detail. we have pointed that when that happens the country does not speak with one voice, it tends to be a message of confusion, a cacophony of confusion to the rest of the world. now we have a major event in china, and a universal revulsion at what is happening in china, the beating of tudents, the use of military weaponry against unarmed civilians. i would venture to say that 100% of the people of the

united states and 100% of members of congress are united in their revulsion at what's going on within china. the question is whether we are going to speak in unity, whether we are going to speak with one voice against the happenings in china, or whether we are going to do what we so often do in washington and that is disinvolve into a game of tuning nship, of fine the resolutions, and offering a variety of proposals. senator dole said in his remarks that there is a long list of options that are available. while all of us agree in our sven -- general view of what is happening in china, my guess is that if 100 feel looked at a -- people looked another -- at a

long list of options we would ome up with about 100 views of what should be used. we could debate forever and maybe vote 51-49 that one alternative is better than another alternative. but that should be -- should not be the position of the congress of the united states. we should support the president at this time. we should plaque an effort to reach a consensus. -- make an effort to reach a consensus. that is why i welcome the stadium -- statement that there is going to be an effort to put ogether a leadership resolution, hopefully one that s drafted in close consultation with the administration. mr. president, we are of one mind in the united states. let's act as though we are of one mind. let's support the president of addressing tates in

major issue of foreign foils. -- policy. major issue of foreign foils. -- policy. >> the chair recognizes the senator from indiana. >> the images of -- this weekend of china's chaotic suffering leaves many of us with the kind of helpless outrage that defies words. we are witnessing the desperate efforts of a failed, aging leader championship -- lead -- leadership to maintain power. we have seen the avenue of eternal peace litdered with the corpses of political protesters, we have watched students on barricades crushed under the treads of advancing tanks. we have -- we saw soldiers fire on those who attempted to treat

the woundnd and saw and learned that some bodies were covered with gasoline and set aflame to try to destroy the evidence of this repression. reports now put the numbers of dead in the thousands. somehow, given china's apparent moderation of the past few ars we convinced ourselves that totalitarian violence was consigned to lift, a madness. madness. but the recent sven reer -- recent veneer of civility has only heightened the revulsion at this. i'm convinced that in the coming days we will find ways to support the chinese people in their trials and i am heartened by the discussion this morning with the imagine rt leader, minority leader and

others in terms of our resolve to move unanimously forward as a body to support chinese people. but even as we are sobered by the chinese suffering, there is a deeper cause for encouragement. for the mind now knows something new -- the first tremor of fear. if it recalls words spoken nearly 400 years ago while england waited in 1588 for a spanish invasion. queen elizabeth addressed her army with three wards -- words, "let tyrants fear." well, this morning they do fear all over the world, in poland, ngary, china, and the soviet union. they fear passionate intensity of the young, they fear the hard experience of the old embittered by decades of

political brutality but they fear most of all when men burdened by oppression stand up and shout their defensive yans. they fear above all the chanted refrains of "freedom." here was a time when china's secular ideology was ringed inevitablity. but these claims have turned to ashes in the mouth as socialism has failed amid mountains of innocent dead. t promised to move the world but could only manage to sustain it with blood. today the place of that discredited creed has been taken by justice, by but could freedom, liberty that the vision of the disaffected. tanks may dip their treads in blood, but the weight of the iron force can no longer

outbalance the sum of china's human pains. there are memory of past wounds appeal to hapes anguished principle assures there will be no return to docile suffering. we cannot see how delivery will come or when but nothing is plorspern -- certain because freedom has an inevitability of its own in the highest hopes much common men. chinese freedom will not be stillborn, for the count of tanks and troops is not the final measure of life. we trust in a providence that gives strength to the weary and increases the power of the week -- weak and we hear the echoing ring of determined voices. let tyrants fear. le the souped of freedom -- let the sound of freedom ling. >> on this the 25th philadelphia of the tiananmen square appeal to

principle crackdown in china we showing portions of the events from 1989. in china today, police have been out in force in central beijing to block any bub -- public observance of the anniversary. at the time the house of representatives voted overwhelmingly in favor of a esolution condemning the chinese government. this portion is about 45 minutes. >> what we take care of in these amendments as i say are recent events on which this house needs to speak. mr. speaker, if it's appropriate can i ask unanimous consent at this time for revise to extend and eir remarks on these

amendments which we are considering now? >> without objection. >> and i say again, mr. speaker, that i daresay in all of the dark history of man regardless of which side of the , oking glass one is looking that eaching -- of us either has in memory or has learned of and that stain humanity, would se that each be us have a candidate for man's reatest inhumanity to man. i'm always amazed, mr. speaker, in the consideration of matters of human rights on which this

country fortunately has always that in so strongly a philosophical sense man has so much difficulty with the problem of being human. and humane. and that we are constantly confronted with acts of . humanity i don't know what my candidate would be for an event that would be more repugnant, revolting, or would be met with greater reinvestigation -- revulsion, by -- but i daresay one's ting people of assembled who were

peacefully to ask for nothing more than dialogue and reasonable extensions of freedom already been granted in terms of the right of assembly or the right to speak or participation in the political system, and then to have the uthorities in power respond by unprovoked action -- >> the time of the gentleman has expired. >> i yield myself two more minutes. >> the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. >> in which it was is -- it was the indiscriminate slaughtering of civilians firing into the crowds, running over people of tanks, i can't think

any action that requires the -- , d needs greater condemnation and the amendments that we are considering here today express those feelings. but they go further than that. we support fully the president n his reaction to what has occurred and we demonstrate to the world that we the people of the united states are speaking with a unified voice on our that on, and we point out t's hoped this matter can be resolved peacefully, but if it we ought to be and

might very well have to proceed with further activities in response to what is clearly an inhuman act. mr. chairman, mr. speaker, let us hope that the progress that has been made up until just recently in china would have continued it was amazing to me as an outside observer to see what and what - occurred was possible the it is now just as inconceivable to me that the flush of that excitement brought on by, quote, the uthorities of the people's republic themselves, has now sunken into an abyss of inhuman action. it is so sad and so tragic. we commend the courage of those who stood up until just recently in china would have

continued. to this kind of repression. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from michigan? >> mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. >> the gentleman is recognized. >> i am happy to rise in pport of the and he that mr. fascell and i are offering to this resolution. anybody who has sat before a television set this past week must now know that there are two mainland carolinas. the people's republican and the tyrant republic. with this resolution we're putting the united states congress squarely on the side of the people the transition from communism to democracy will not be smooth in all places at all times but it does not have to be as brutal as the unfolding drama in beijing. america cannot stand ideally by -- idlely by while thousands of

people are risking their lives in the street. that's why the actions announced yesterday by president bush are so important, mr. speaker and what we do is also so important. it is not correct to say as if -- some that suggested that the united states will have no influence in what is going on in china. the more i listen to the chinese students being interviewed beeth -- both here in america and on the streets of beijing, 9 more i realize what a powerful influence america's freedoms are having on events in china. ere are 35,000 students from china studying in america right now. twice that many have studied here and returned home and america has clearly captured the imagination of a whole generation of chinese. takes actions america in china it should speak with one voice. this is not the time for wildcat policy making.

the chinese students, elements within the army, government officials and the chinese people are clearly listening to voices from the outside world. in a fast-movinging situation, president bush has chosen wisely among the options for responding to events in china. his suspension of weapons sales is a have i concrete message that america cannot ignore the brutal actions of the chinese officials. his decision to maintain our ambassador in china means we will keep the lines of communication open, whatever leverage we have to influence moderation within the chinese government. this carrot and stick policy is, in my opinion, the best way to handle this problem. however, events transpire -- however events transpire, the united states government should be talking with one voice. president bush has made a good start in developing a wise

policy response. this resolution, mr. speaker, demonstrates to the chinese leadership that america is united in its opposition to their brutal methods and also demonstrates to the chinese students that america is fully on the side of their struggle for human rights and political freedom. this resolution calls on the chinese leader chip to leadership to demonstrate. adoption.i urge >> i rise in strong support of this resolution of which i'm an ask nal co-sponsor and i to revise and stepped my remarks. >> mr. speaker? >> the gentleman from florida.

>> i yield five minutes to the diminished -- to the distinguished gentleman from peaceful, the chairman of the committee on human rights. >> i thank the distinguished chairman for yielding to me. i strongly support and am a author of of -- co- this resolution. congress must denounce the actions of the chinese government. what occurred saturday in tiananmen square was an unprovoked and vicious military attack on peaceful demonstrate overs and innocent bystanders. hconres as amended condemns in the strongest possible terms the slaughter that took place. by some estimates the chinese government killed hundreds if not thousands of their own people. i don't think we will ever have

a full accounting. what has happened in china is hard to comrend. it's even worse to imagine the extremes the chinese government is capable of going to in order to suppress the pro-democracy movement. this is -- there is no mistaking the resolve with which the government set out to annihilate the demonstrators. people. -- people's lib escheation army did not go to tiananmen square to salute to warn. they went to salute to kill. it is reported the p.l.a. made isperse the crowd but marched in, shooting anyone in their way. the pro-democracy prest -- protesters sought recognition s a patriotic body, an assembly already being called important for the future of china and it's -- its people.

all the students were asking for was political reforms that would keep pace with the economic reforms. the premiere could have easily made a statement supporting the principles of the students' demands. this rigid totalitarianism does not bode well for china and is not good for our relationship with china. i don't see how we can continue to give our hard-earned technological know-how to a government such as the people's republic of china such as they have shown themselves to be today. i am sure many of us thought that the china of mao with his campaigns of devastating repression, bleeding the people of china, was gone. it appears that this -- appeared that this element of chinese rule had become obsolete the clearly we were wrong. there is no stability in china

and aser vents saturday have proved, there never reallies with. i applaud president bush for suspending military sales to china as well as the export of military weapons. the response puts the united states on the side of democracy and against political repression. it should now be clear to the chinese government that the murder of its people is not taken lightly or seen as only an internal matter. the taking of human life is never just an internal matter and it never will be business as usual between our two countries. the united states us -- u.s. must ask that the chinese government act with restraint. as we have learned from the past, our pro-democracy protesters were imprisoned without benefit of due process and still sit in chinese prisonses 10 years later. i cannot say strongly enough

that i hope this tragedy will not be exacerbated by imprisonment. there have been alarming reports that the bodies of those killed were quickly taken from tiananmen square and cremated in order to conceal the true extent of the carnage that took place. if this is true the families of the victims will never know the fate of their loved ones and will further underscore the heinous nature of the chinese regime. i urge the quick adoption of the resolution so we can make our views known to the chinese government and chinese people. i commend the chairman for this resolution and i express my thanks to the congressmen solarz, leach, and others for their contributions to the writing of this resolution. >> i'm happy to yield four

minutes to the gentleman from iowa, mr. leach. >> the bravery of the students of china has utterly destroyed the hoary canard that democracy and aspirations are the privilege of a few. the only basis for government is the consent of the governed. i stress the question of legitimacy because legitimacy is what is at stake in china today. a government of, by, and for the people cannot be one that turns on the people. a people's army defevpbds the country from outside invaders, it does not shoot unarmed protesters. we appear to be on one of the great turning points in mist -- lift. communeism is retreating pell medical. it is retreating faster than

the tanks in russia and beijing from an plern perspective we have to make difficult choices between real -- real-pointilic, geopolitical ncerns, and morality and philosophy. when president bush made it clear our relations with china would be suspended he chose morality. when the government opened fire on innocent civilians, when they toppled the replica of the statue of liberity in tiananmen square, america had no choice but to take a stand. this we do in unity, in pride, and most of all with the greatest respect for the people of china. i yield back the balance of my time. >> gentleman from florida? >> i yield five minutes to the distinguished gentleman from

new york, chairman of the subcommittee on asian pacific. >> i this afternoon the distinguished chairman for yielding the time. the amend mentd -- the amendment before us this afternoon first of all expresses the profound sympathy of the congress for the victims of the violence in beijing. it also strongly con dements the decision -- condemns the decision on the part of the authorities in the people's republic of china to use machine guns and bayonets to wantonly slaughter their own people. it also expresses the strong support of the congress for the steps which have already been taken by president bush to determine -- terminate all additional american arms sales to the people's republic of china on the grounds that it

will be utterly unconscionable for our country to continue supporting a military establishment which hasn't hesitated to murder and massacre its own people. finally, the amendment also makes it very clear that if the butchery in beijing should continue, that the united states in consultation with our alleys, should attempt to impose additional appropriate measures designed to make it clear to the leadership in beijing that the united states and its friends and allies around the world will not continue to do business as usual with a government which does not hesitate to murder and massacre its own people.

and what are some of those additional steps which we might take? e could first of all temporarily recall our ambassador to beijing for consultation here in washington. i know that under the present circumstances the president thinks that would be a mistake, but i think it should be clear that no one is suggesting that -- situation should require if the situation should require it that we sever diplomatic relations with the people's republic of china. no one is talking about closing our embassy, no one has proposed we withdraw all our diplomats. even if the ambassador is summoned to washington, we would still have other diplomats there would could convey whatever diplomatic representations we needed to make to the chinese leaders in beijing. but if it should become

necessary, temporarily recalling our ambassador would send a very strong signal of the deep dispay with which we view the course of events now unfolding in china. but there are other steps of a more cron -- concrete nature we could take. we could, for example, suspend all additional transfers and sales of high technology equipment to the p.r.c. particularly if we could induce our allies to join with us in such a step, it would impose a heavy price on the people's republic of china. and the mere threat of such an action will hopefully induce a measure of restraint on the leadership in beijing which they have not heretofore displayed. we could also, as my very good friend from new york, mr. weiss, suggested earlier today in the foreign affairs

committee, suspend any additional guarantees to attempting to establish enterprises in the people's republic of china, and he time may yet come when that appears to be a senseable step to take. we could if we chose to do so also instruct our representatives in the multilateral development banks appears to be a senseable step to take. we could if we chose to do so also instruct our representatives in the multilateral development banks to use their voice and appears to be a senseable step to their vote about additional loans to the people's republic of china. these are the kinds of steps we could take and which we may have to take if the killlings in china continue. we do not look forward with equanimity to having to take such measures, but they may be morally necessary and politically prudent if the situation continues to deteriorate. we clearly have a stake in a

good relationship with china. but we also have an interest in reaffirming fundamental american vallss. -- values. and we could not credibly -- >> the time of the gentleman has expired. >> i appear to have run out of time. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. >> without exception. the gentleman from michigan? >> i yield three minutes to the gentleman from new york. >> i thank the gentleman and mr. speaker i want to commend the gentleman from nebraska, the chairman of the subcommittee, the distinguished pennsylvania -- and mr. leach and the gentleman from new york, mr. solarz, chairman of the subcommittee for bringing before us this timely, important resolution.

i am speas -- pleased to rise stong support of 136, commending the extraordinary courage of the students and citizens of the people's republic of china, most vividly depicted by the lone student who confronted the advancing tanks in tiananmen square and by the students who erected the statue of liberty in that square. these brave chinese students and citizens have demonstrated their profound respect for human rights, for freedom of expression, for workers' rights in a disciplined, nonviolent, peaceful manner. the carnage carried out by a portion of the people's liberation army has disgusted and angered all decent people. accounts of the slaughter are emerging.

one particular description, that of soldiers bayonetting young women who were pleading for the lives of for friends, appropriately sets forth the lue that this dictatorship places on human life. let no one doubt any more who when we arm with and trade with such a political system especially when ideologues are in charge. i think it's incumbent on the congress to focus attention on system especially when ideologues are in charge. i think it's incumbent on the and condemn the excessive, indiscriminate use of force bit civil authorities and by the military of the people's republic of china against its own citizenry as we express our profound sympathy for the victims' families. our nation's executive and legislative branches are virtually united in calling for a swift resolution to the political crisis in china without any further violence. the chinese government must be motivated to enter into a dialogue with the protesters, to demonstrate a willingness to

consider political reform consistent with the growing tide of democracy throughout the world. most of us in the congress as well as governments through the the world are supporting the president's measured and strong response to the chinese authorities' repression and atrocities. mr. speaker, the congress and the people of our nation wish to express their support for the the acks of the chinese demonstrators. it's our sincere hope that their quest for democracy play not go unrecognized. >> i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from new york. >> i thank the distinguished chairman for yielding to me. mr. speaker, the huge demonstrations and nonviolent protests throughout china the past several weeks have proven that the people of china have a passion for democracy that is strong and widespread.

even the boston -- government's brutal slaughter of unarmed students and others this past weekend cannot squelch that passion. now even tanks and armored personnel carriers will not be able to insulate the repressive government from the will of the people. we add our voices to the outcry throughout the international community over the massacre of hundreds if not thousands of innocent civilians in tiananmen square last weekend and i'm privileged to be a co-response of it. the chinese government's attempt to brutally crush the reform movement requires a strong response in the -- from the united states. the violence must end and the democracy movement pluft be addressed. i am pleased to support, too, mr. speaker the actions of president bush but i know none of us believe that either his actions or this resolution will suffice as a full expression of

the moral outrage of the american people. further action is clearly called for and i'm certain will be forthcoming. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from michigan? >> mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from norge -- new jersey, mr. 134i78ing9 >> thank you, mr. speaker. it is with deep concern over the wanton loss of life in beijing and the future of democracy in the p.r.c. that i rise in support of 136. today the's -- the people's house goes on record deflor -- deploring the brutal acts of repression and premeditated murder perpetrated on the people in china. they have once again demonstrated that the health and well-being of the individual is of no sequence to the state.

people have little value, they don't count for much in the eyes of the hard-liners. they are only important in the blind obedience to their they demand straited their callousness in the cultural revolution and continue to demonstrate that callousness toward women and children in a policy that relies on coercive abortions to obtain its objectives. they continue to show this ka louseness in their treatment of the people of tibet and the p.l.a. have been slaughtering the pro-democracy citizens in bay jipping. the world again looks on in utter revulsion as soldier, armed to the teeth, machine gun and bayonet students. mr. speaker, the pro-democracy