Howard Berman: “I do not think supporting this resolution is standing up for human rights. I think well-intentioned people can disagree…”

“I do not think supporting this resolution is standing up for human rights. I think well-intentioned people can disagree about this, but for me this is the essence of meaningless symbolism over real substance. If Members do not think the President should go to China, bring forth a resolution saying that the President should not go to China. If Members do not believe in the policy of constructive engagement, then come out and speak against that particular policy. If Members want to do something that will hurt the Chinese and bear the consequences of it, then come out for MFN. If Members want to withhold imports and trade benefits because of the constant and continuous policy of proliferation of nuclear and missile technology, deal with that. But do not say, all this is fine, constructive engagement is good, going to China makes sense, renew MFN, but, Mr. Speaker, do not go to the place that for all of us symbolizes the most horrible, indescribable terror imaginable and the example of brute government force, do not go there, as your statement of protest. Mr. President, go there, speak against that horror, speak against what we do not want, push an agenda which is meaningful and real in terms of helping America's interest in stability and the interests of nonproliferation and the cause of human rights, but do not take the cheap symbolism of this kind of resolution as a substitute for a policy.”