Whereas on December 1, 2009, President Barack Obama stood
before the cadets assembled at West Point’s Eisenhower Hall and made a solemn
promise to deploy additional members of the United States Armed Forces to
Afghanistan only in exchange for a phased withdrawal beginning in the summer of
2011;
Whereas individuals as diverse as former Secretary of
State Henry Kissinger, Former United States Senator Sam Nunn, and conservative
commentator George Will have called for a reassessment of the United States
mission in Afghanistan;
Whereas in particular, as former Reagan Administration
Assistant Secretary of Defense Bing West has said, the nation-building as a
counterinsurgency strategy is a failure and is burning billions of dollars
unnecessarily;
Whereas the United States Government is spending vast
amounts of money in Afghanistan, the biggest recipient of United States aid,
with nearly $19 billion spent from 2002 to 2010;
Whereas the Department of Defense spends nearly $10
billion each month for military operations, while the Department of State and
the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) spend about $320
million a month in Afghanistan;
Whereas military aid in Afghanistan, through the Afghan
Security Forces Fund, is used for training and equipping the Afghan military
and police forces;
Whereas President Obama requested $12.8 billion for this
fund in FY12, $5.7 billion of which is directed to the Afghan National
Police;
Whereas this amount is nearly twice as much as is
requested for all first responders in the United States;
Whereas USAID’s Office of Economic Growth is engaged in
nearly $1 billion of ongoing economic and business development activities in
Afghanistan;
Whereas under the President’s budget request, the
Department of Defense’s Commander’s Emergency Response Program (CERP) would
receive $1 billion for economic development projects, much of it without
oversight;
Whereas in contrast, the entire Small Business
Administration budget request is less than $1 billion for the United
States;
Whereas the United States Government spent approximately
$450 million on roads and power development in Afghanistan in FY10, while
shortchanging the need for infrastructure investment at home;
Whereas the American Society of Civil Engineers
consistently gives the United States’ infrastructure a failing grade, which is
unsurprising when infrastructure spending has not increased in real terms in
the past 40 years, despite the economy tripling;
Whereas according to a Senate Foreign Relations Committee
report, much of the money spent on aid in Afghanistan is not advancing United
States goals;
Whereas the staff report notes that aid may even be
fueling corruption, instability, and insecurity;
Whereas in a “Case Study”, the report notes that the
Performance-Based Governors Fund, which is authorized to distribute up to
$100,000 a month in United States funds to individual provincial leaders for
use on local expenses and development projects, “may not be ‘achievable’ or
‘sustainable’” because this “tidal wave of funding … could hamper the ability
of local officials to spend the money wisely.”;
Whereas the United States’ current commitment to
Afghanistan in troops and in dollars is neither proportional to its interest
nor sustainable;
Whereas the United States faces a growing budget deficit,
which requires cuts in spending and difficult choices in how taxpayer money is
allocated;
Whereas State and local officials in the United States
have demonstrated a consistent need for funding, and an ability to spend the
money that they receive wisely;
Whereas investments in infrastructure are particularly
good investments;
Whereas the Department of Transportation estimates that,
for every $1 billion invested in Federal highways, more than $6.2 billion in
economic activity is generated;
Whereas Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s
Economy.com, has calculated that every dollar of increased infrastructure
spending would generate a $1.59 increase in gross domestic product; and
Whereas cuts in FY11 funding for homeland security grants
and proposed cuts for FY12 put local communities at risk, and may result in
much greater costs in human lives, community devastation, and first responder
safety down the road: Now, therefore, be it
That it is the sense of the House of
Representatives that—
(1)the members of the United States Armed
Forces have served honorably in Afghanistan and should be commended for their
efforts, including the work to successfully bring Osama Bin Laden to
justice;
(2)President Barack Obama, in consultation
with his military, intelligence, and foreign affairs advisors, should
immediately reassess the mission in Afghanistan, clearly articulate the United
States’ goals and national interest, and develop a plan to swiftly and safely
bring the members of the United States Armed Forces home and reduce United
States investments in Afghan nation-building; and
(3)savings from this phased withdrawal and
reassessment of civilian assistance in Afghanistan should be redirected to
priorities and nation-building in the United States by investing in critical
homeland security needs including funding for first responders and by creating
jobs and rebuilding the economy through infrastructure redevelopment, support
for entrepreneurs, and efforts to reduce the Federal deficit and debt.