[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 128 (Wednesday, September 17, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H8372-H8378]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            IRAQ PRINCIPLES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.


                             General Leave

  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks on the subject of this Special Order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Maryland?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to begin the 
Congressional Black Caucus's Special Order to address the President's 
proposal to spend an additional $87 billion for the war in Iraq.
  Mr. Speaker, since the President addressed the Nation on September 7 
regarding the war in Iraq, the Congressional Black Caucus has carefully 
evaluated the current state of where we are in Iraq and established a 
set of principles that we believe should be our guide as we move 
forward.
  Before I get into the substance of our principles, I want to 
recognize the diligent work of the Congressman from North Carolina (Mr. 
Watt) for his leadership in drafting these principles and working very 
carefully with other members of the caucus to come to consensus. He 
willingly took on the task of synthesizing and framing the views of 39 
Members of Congress. That is not an easy task. The Congressman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Watt) handled it masterfully. I also want to thank 
all the members of the Congressional Black Caucus who helped us to get 
where we are today. It truly was a team effort.
  Mr. Speaker, in October of last year, the Congressional Black Caucus 
issued a statement of principles with respect to any decision to go to 
war with Iraq. Although most of us were prepared to support broad-based 
international action sanctioned by the United States National Security 
Council, we opposed the unilateral first strike by the United States 
without first receiving clearly demonstrated evidence of an imminent 
threat of attack upon the United States.
  At that time the Bush administration had not presented us with the 
evidence that we needed, both constitutionally and morally, to support 
its plan. It has not done so, I must note, to this day.
  We argued last year that absent clear evidence of an imminent threat 
to the people of the United States, a unilateral first strike against 
Iraq would undermine the international moral authority of the United 
States that is so critical in our struggle against terrorism.
  We were deeply apprehensive that the Middle East would be 
destabilized, that unilateral U.S. action would commit this Nation to a 
long-term and, perhaps, indefinite foreign engagement that would cost 
America dearly both in American lives and in national resources.
  Last year's concerns have now become this year's harsh realities, 
realities that we must face as a Nation and that we must overcome.

[[Page H8373]]

  On almost a daily basis we hear regretfully about American soldiers 
who are being killed or injured in Iraq. The Bush administration has 
been unable or unwilling to truly internationalize the process toward 
restoring control of Iraq to the Iraqi people. As a Nation, we are 
already scores of billions of dollars poorer than we were last October. 
Now the Bush administration has presented the Congress with another $87 
billion check that it is asking us to sign. There is no question that 
we, along with our other colleagues in the Congress, will do everything 
within our power to support and protect our troops and provide for 
their families. That is a paramount concern for us, always has been and 
always will be. Our duty in this regard is clear.
  Nevertheless, before the Congress of the United States provides the 
President with the authority to spend more of the American people's 
money on Iraq, we have a constitutional responsibility to demand a 
clear, comprehensive, and publicly articulated analysis of the Bush 
administration's management of our involvement both past and present.
  The administration does not even pretend that this $87 billion 
proposal will be its final request for funds. Before I proceed, I would 
like to make two points that I recently read in The Washington Post. In 
this particular piece it was noted that the $87 billion request by the 
President is three times the amount of money the Federal Government 
will spend on elementary and secondary education this year, and two 
times as much as the budget for homeland security. The article also 
noted research from Yale economic researcher William Nordhaus, which 
noted that the $166 billion that has been spent, or requested, exceeds 
the inflation-adjusted cost of the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, 
the Mexican War, the Civil War, the Spanish American War, and the first 
Persian Gulf War combined, and approaches the $191 billion inflation-
adjusted cost of World War I.

  Mr. Speaker, I note these facts and the professor's research to say 
if left unquestioned, approving this $87 billion would amount to 
another blank check. That cannot be allowed to happen.
  To state the matter gently, the administration has suffered serious 
damage to its credibility on the subject of Iraq. As a first step 
toward repairing this loss of trust, the American people and their 
elected representatives deserve to know in far greater detail the 
information that convinced the President to go to war.
  In addition, the President must provide us with a far more detailed 
game plan for the future. He should outline his reasoned predictions as 
to the personnel and funding that will be required to complete our 
involvement in Iraq and the manner in which these burdens and the 
authority to address them will be shared with the United Nations. The 
President should provide an accounting of the previously appropriated 
funds which this administration has expended in Iraq, including details 
of all Federal contracts. The President should explain to the Congress 
and the American people how the additional $87 billion in funding that 
he has now requested will be spent.
  The Bush administration should provide the Congress with the 
information that will allow us to evaluate and vote separately upon the 
funding requested for the protection and support of our troops as 
distinguished from the funding that the President wishes to apply to 
the rebuilding of Iraq. We also deserve a full accounting of the Iraqi 
resources, both recovered and anticipated, that properly can be 
utilized to reduce the U.S. burden.
  Above all, our troops and the American people as a whole deserve to 
know the President's exit strategy. We need to know the criteria for 
success that must be met before the President will agree to bring our 
men and women home.
  We ask these questions of the Bush administration with the respect 
that should exist between coequal branches of our government. Those in 
the world who oppose America should not underestimate either our 
national unity or our resolve. Nevertheless, both in Baghdad and in my 
hometown of Baltimore, these are hard times for the American people, 
times that demand hard answers to hard questions.
  Mr. Speaker, we who serve the people in the Congress of the United 
States would not be fulfilling our constitutional responsibility if we 
were to hand the President another blank check. We must have some 
accountability for the American people's money.
  Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to yield to the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson), chairman emeritus of the 
Congressional Black Caucus.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to voice my 
concerns about the President's request for $87 billion to pursue the 
administration's aims in Iraq. While I strongly support our troops and 
I stand here as a strong American, and I support the President when it 
is reasonable and I will continue to support those brave Americans who 
are getting themselves in harm's way to defend our Nation, I think we 
must ask ourselves some fundamental questions.
  To this end, the Congressional Black Caucus has issued a statement of 
principles as to the war in Iraq. I embrace these principles fully. I 
was Chair of the caucus when we adopted our principles concerning the 
war, and we still hold those principles dear. I am deeply concerned 
about the cost of the war and the cost of the psyche of the people of 
this Nation. I am also concerned about the economic price tag the war 
is exacting on the taxpayers. We are shifting the cost of engagement to 
our children and grandchildren. We are burdening ourselves with a debt 
that is not only mind boggling; it is also unconscionable.
  Mr. Speaker, keep in mind that the $87 billion in new funding that 
the President is requesting from Congress includes more than twice the 
2004 budget for the Department of Homeland Security. It is also roughly 
triple the proposed appropriations for highways and roads. Keep in mind 
that the combined projected costs of the theaters of operations in Iraq 
and Afghanistan through September 2004 is $166 billion. That includes 
the $87 billion.

                              {time}  1745

  The President has not provided Congress with sufficient details about 
how the proposed funding will be spent. The information we have been 
given is vague, perhaps purposely so. Therefore, we are not able to 
separately evaluate the proposed funding for the protection and 
maintenance of our troops and proposed funding for rebuilding Iraq. In 
my view, Congress should vote on these funding proposals separately.
  Back home, people think that the greatest attention we can give the 
troops is to bring them home. They really do not want more money spent 
in Iraq. Moreover, the administration has not articulated an exit 
strategy, nor has it given us a blueprint or a plan for bringing our 
troops home. That is what the people want. It was said in the days of 
old, ``My people perish for a lack of knowledge.'' We are left in that 
position. Without the information, we are groping in the dark. The 
American people deserve better and so does Congress. We should not give 
a blank check one more time for the President to spend with his 
friends.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Scott).
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to put some of the numbers in 
perspective. I serve on the Committee on the Budget and have looked at 
these numbers from the perspective of the budget. To put these in 
perspective, let us begin with the first Persian Gulf war, Desert 
Storm. The total cost of that war, $61.1 billion. Because we had 
international cooperation, we paid 12 percent of that cost, $7.4 
billion. 12 percent. The first supplemental that we have already spent 
in the current Iraqi conflict, $79 billion. We have been asked for $87 
billion more, a total of $166 billion. If we had had international 
cooperation, 12 percent of $166 billion is $20 billion. Because of the 
administration's decision to go it alone and attack unilaterally, a $20 
billion problem has become a $166 billion problem. And so I commend the 
chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus for asking what efforts will 
be made to develop the multilateral force that can share in this 
burden.
  In addition, because we are already into deficit spending, this 
administration should articulate how the costs of

[[Page H8374]]

the war will be borne. If we are going to just borrow the money, then 
we have to recognize the context of borrowing additional money. In 
early 2001, budget projections were that within 10 years, we would run 
up a $5 trillion surplus, enough to pay off the entire national debt, 
meaning that we would have no interest on the national debt after about 
2013. Because we have gone back to deficit spending instead of paying 
off the national debt, we have increased the national debt such that 
the interest on the national debt that we will be paying by 2013, 
instead of zero, will be about as much as we are spending for national 
defense. In that context, if we are going to borrow the money, let us 
recognize that we are going to have to pay interest on $166 billion at 
around 4 percent interest. That equals to over $6.5 billion a year, 
over $100 million every week, just in interest, without paying off the 
principal, just in interest for as far as the eye can see.
  Let us put some of these numbers also in perspective as to what we 
spend on other priorities. $166 billion between the supplemental we 
have spent and the request that is before us. $166 billion. The 
Department of Education every year, we appropriate less than $60 
billion. Transportation, $51.5 billion. Homeland Security Department, 
$35.8 billion. Those three departments combined, Education, 
Transportation, Homeland Security, less than $166 billion.
  Let us put it into another perspective. In our budget, we expect this 
year to receive $790 billion in individual income tax. That is 
everybody's individual income tax, $790 billion. About 20 percent of 
the request and the supplemental, prior supplemental, amount to 20 
percent of the entire individual income tax revenue. With these numbers 
in hand, the CBC's request for a coherent accounting of the funds is 
appropriate. It is especially appropriate when you consider the prior 
claims by this administration, such as the cost of the war will be paid 
by the oil revenues. Those projections turned out to be false. 
Therefore, this request needs to be supported by specific plans and 
documentation detailing how the prior supplemental was spent, exactly 
how this request will be spent, how it will be paid for, including the 
question of whether we will get multilateral help, what likelihood 
there will be for future supplemental appropriations to support the war 
effort. Those questions need to be answered before we can intelligently 
consider the request before us.
  I want to thank the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus for 
bringing these questions to the forefront to make sure that we have 
this information before we vote.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Meek).
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am so glad that we have this hour 
to be able to let Americans know the things they need to know about 
their government. I think it is important since the gentleman from 
Virginia just finished talking about what this effort and what I call 
mismanagement has cost the American people and that it will cost the 
American people. We need to make sure that we understand that we are 
deficit spending. This is not surplus money. This is deficit spending 
money. It is like for some of us Americans that are receiving these 
credit cards through the mail saying that all you have to do is sign 
the back and call this 1-800 number, you are automatically qualified 
for $2,000 and you go out and you spend that $2,000 at a rate of like 
23 percent interest rate. That is the kind of deficit spending that we 
have right now. We need to continue to have a dialogue on this.
  I am very disturbed by some of the things that I am hearing out of 
this White House and out of the majority party as it relates to the 
efforts in Iraq. At the top of the week, we had the majority leader of 
this House on the Republican side saying that he is upset that the 
White House has not said more and the Defense Department has not said 
more about the accomplishments in Iraq. I would beg to differ. Yes, 
there have been some accomplishments in Iraq, but I would beg to differ 
by the fact that we have troops that do not even have armor in Iraq. I 
serve on the Committee on Armed Services. We authorize billions, $480 
something billion annually to the Department of Defense. I remember 
asking some of the individuals in the Department of Defense, Secretary 
Wolfowitz to be exact, do our troops have adequate body armor? I was 
told, yes, the front line troops will have adequate body armor. Right 
now we have troops that are at Walter Reed Hospital and at Bethesda 
Hospital with wounds that went through the body armor, bullets that 
went through the body armor that were supposed to protect them.
  I think it is also important for us to understand that if this 
Congress does not start asking the hard questions to this White House 
and to the Department of Defense we are going to continue to have these 
special appropriations. We just gave $78 billion 6 months ago. We are 
giving $87 plus billion very soon and it will be more to come. When I 
say that this is going on, this is just not a convenience issue, this 
is hurting Leave No Child Behind in education, this is hurting social 
services. I have seen people brought to the table and called out for 
mismanagement for far less than the billions of dollars that have been 
mishandled in this war as it relates to contract services. I think it 
is important that we have to ask the tough questions. I am so glad that 
the media and some Members of this Congress have called Vice President 
Cheney out on the fact that the connection he claimed in the Sunday 
show this past Sunday, saying that Saddam Hussein had something to do 
with 9/11. I am glad to hear that the President said that is not true 
today at a press conference before I came on the floor. The reason why 
that was corrected in a 3-day period or in a 4-day period is that this 
Congress questioned that. Democrats questioned what the Vice President 
said. That is why it is important that we have a democracy. That is why 
it is important no matter what party you are in if you are a Member of 
this Congress that you must speak out on issues that you know when that 
information is inaccurate. Intelligence in the past has been stated 
about chemical weapons, things of that nature. It has been several 
months now since we have been in Iraq and there are very little 
chemical weapons to show for our efforts. We have to ask the hard 
questions on what is the real rebuilding plan for Iraq. We have yet to 
see that. Our minority leader the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Pelosi), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), who is ranking 
member on the Committee on Appropriations, asked for that yesterday. As 
of right now, the last I checked, we still have not received it. That 
is the reason why we have to continue to push for these questions so 
that it is not a rubber stamp.
  The reason why this administration went to the U.N. before they took 
their preemptive strike or before we took our preemptive strike on Iraq 
is because the American people said that they wanted them to go to the 
U.N. Even though they went to the U.N. and we danced and we changed the 
name of French fries here in the Capitol to freedom fries and did all 
of these peripheral things, we still went in by ourselves and now we 
are paying the price. We are now having to go back and say, oh, we like 
the French. Oh, we feel that Germany and others, we feel that you are 
good people. We need your help.
  If we do not replace diplomacy on the executive branch, then we are 
in for a costly, costly, long stay in Iraq. It is no longer good 
enough, Mr. President, for you to say, we're going to be in Iraq as 
long as we have to be in Iraq. That is not an appropriate answer. An 
appropriate answer is saying, we are having real negotiations with the 
Security Council at the U.N., that I am instructing the Secretary of 
State that we are going to do everything in our power to continue to 
get more troops in our coalition. You may ask and there are, give or 
take, 115,000, 125,000 U.S. troops right now on the soil in Iraq. Some 
13,000 coalition forces. But last night I saw Secretary Rumsfeld said, 
oh, we have 60,000 Iraqi police officers that are a part of our 
security force now. We have to make sure that we are clear. We cannot 
use metaphors. We cannot allow the Department of Defense nor this White 
House nor the leadership of this Congress to wiggle out of the tough 
questions.

  I am just as patriotic as the next person. And just because we ask 
the question of this government that every last

[[Page H8375]]

one of us have been voted on to be here to represent our constituents, 
individuals should not be called out. General Shinseki had to resign 
because he said this war would cost anywhere from $120 billion to $130 
billion. Others who have said of an accurate account if we went into 
this thing by ourselves of what it would cost had to resign. We in this 
Congress are the only individuals who cannot be fired. We only can be 
fired by the people, by the American people, and not by an executive 
action.
  So I ask you, and I implore, and I am so glad that the Congressional 
Black Caucus has taken this stand to be the conscience of this Congress 
once again. It may not be the appropriate thing in the light of those 
individuals who consider themselves self-appointed patriots on behalf 
of our men and women in uniform, but it was this caucus, Democratic 
Caucus, that are fighting for those individuals who make under $26,000 
to be able to receive a child tax credit, including those individuals 
that are over there fighting, their children. Republicans said no and 
are still saying no and say that the bill will not come up. We are 
saying that we are willing to put the facts and figures here.
  I almost feel like a member of the other party who always talked 
about deficit spending, or used to talk about it. We no longer talk 
about it now because it is not important. I think it is important that 
we continue to raise the tough questions, that we continue to be able 
to ask for an accounting as it relates to private contracts that are 
being let. This peripheral, this information that is generic about 
maintenance and reconstruction and turning on the power and making sure 
they have water and schools, without defining it, can no longer be 
accepted by this Congress. So it is important that we focus on the fine 
details. I am so glad that we are here.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I am glad the gentleman raised the issue of the 
opportunity, that we must take the opportunities that we have to speak 
out with regard to what is happening in our country.

                              {time}  1800

  And the fact is that he is right. Before the war the Congressional 
Black Caucus raised some very crucial questions, some folks were 
hollering the word ``unpatriotic,'' and we made it very clear, as we 
make it clear today that we support our troops 1 million percent. We 
want them to be at their very best. We want them to be well-equipped. 
At the same time, we want to make sure that the crucial questions are 
asked because after all, the people that we represent are the ones who 
will end up paying the bill. But not only them but their children and 
their children's children and their children's children's children will 
be paying this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. 
Kilpatrick).
  Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, to our distinguished chairman, who 
continues to keep us focus in speaking to the needs our constituents, I 
thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).
  I rise as one of the 39 members of the Congressional Black Caucus. We 
represent over 26 million Americans all over this country. The 
majorities of our districts are not African American. Some are. Most 
are not. And collectively we call ourselves the conscience of the 
Congress and the conscience of these United States.
  Over the last 10 days after the President's announcement, my office 
has been inundated with my constituents asking me, What are you going 
to say? What are you going to do? Are you going to give them a blank 
check? You already did that. Will you speak up?
  And I am so proud of my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus 
for organizing this action tonight because it us who have been charged 
by God to speak out, to work in a bipartisan way in the interests of 
the people of this great country. I represent over 680,000 people, as 
many of my colleagues do, and 11 different communities in the State of 
Michigan. Some of God's finest. Some have served in the Armed Forces. 
Some have families who have died in the Armed Forces. All of them want 
us to fight to protect our right of democracy that so many have fought 
and died for in this country. We come here today and I as a member of 
the Committee on Appropriations where I hope much of this discussion 
will be had, and I want to say just from the outset the President 
proposes and the Congress disposes, and that is our constitutional 
right; that we as Members of this House, 435 of us, must demand that 
the committees of jurisdiction receive the supplemental request, that 
we are able to hold hearings on this request, and that we be able to 
get information so that we can make those intelligent decisions that 
our constituents sent us here to do. We have the time. We must act, as 
the Constitution allows us to, that the appropriate committees, the 
Select Committee on Homeland Security, that the appropriate committees, 
the Committee on Appropriations, Defense Subcommittee, authorization, 
all those committees that are involved, the members, and some of those 
committees have 60 or 70 people on them, must have an opportunity to 
hear and see and act on this supplemental request. I implore our 
leadership to make sure that that happens. Eighty-seven billion dollars 
now. Less than 6 months ago we gave them $79 billion because we said we 
had to do that. The President requested it and we were at war. 
Unilaterally first striking a country. We have never done that in the 
history of our country. We call it the Department of Defense because we 
defend our country. We do not strike a country. Somebody said we ought 
to change that to the War Department. I am not quite there yet. We must 
solve this crisis. And it is an international crisis. It was then and 
it still is. That, as my colleague has mentioned, is why we are footing 
much of the bill, and we know this will not be the last supplemental 
unless we are able to bring in the international community.
  There was no intelligence given to this Member and others before our 
unilateral first strike that said Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein 
were connected. Osama bin Laden, we already know we must find and rid 
out the terrorists and the terrorism that he has perpetuated on the 
world, which is why this is an international crisis that we find 
ourselves in. Osama bin Laden on the one hand, Saddam Hussein on the 
other, never at all before this unilateral first strike was there any 
connection, intelligence-wise, that connected the two together. Now, 
5\1/2\, 6 months later, we are not sure.
  The President says that Iraq is the epicenter of terrorism now. The 
way that we have disrespected the Muslim religion and any religion in 
this country, we have to think about that. To them it is a religious 
war. There is something different about a religious war. They think 
they are in jihad as we read and discuss.
  It is so critical at this time that we, as the world leaders, sit 
down and try to work out in an international way the problems of the 
world. Terrorism has to stop. No one in the world is safe as long as 
terrorism is allowed to rear its ugly head wherever it must strike. We 
already heard $166 billion should they be successful in getting this. 
As was mentioned, that is three times more than we spend on education 
for our children. It is two times more than the Department of Homeland 
Security has today, and it is nearly three times more than we spend on 
our transportation budget today.

  We have got to protect our troops. We have got to make sure that they 
are safe. And the parents are saying bring their children home, 18 to 
25 years old. Some not properly trained. Some do not have the proper 
equipment. We are a better Nation than that. That is why the 
Congressional Black Caucus have come together tonight to talk to 
America about what we think must happen, and we want the people to fax, 
write, call, and e-mail their Congresspeople and let them know how they 
feel. We want the people to fax, call, e-mail and write the White 
House, let them know how they feel. The power is in the people of 
America. It always has been and always will be.
  So I want to put in the Record at this time the principles, the 
principles that the Congressional Black Caucus adopted on March 18, 
2003, and the reassuring of the principles we adopted today and present 
to the people today. These are the principles that the Congressional 
Black Caucus must see as we talk about this $87 billion of the people's 
tax dollars.

[[Page H8376]]

  We affirm our stated principles from March of this year. We also 
affirm our principles from October of 2002. Despite the President's 
failure to follow our original statement of principles in his decisions 
leading to the war, we express our full resolve to support and protect 
our troops and their families. We, the members of the Congressional 
Black Caucus, believe that the administration should provide an 
accounting of all funds expended to date that were provided previously 
appropriated by the Congress, which is the $79 million for Iraq and 
Afghanistan, including details about all contracts for work related to 
Iraq and Afghanistan. We know that there is a problem with many no-bid 
contracts given out right now, billions of dollars. We want an 
accounting of that money.
  We believe that the President should provide sufficient details about 
how the proposed funding will be spent to enable Congress and its 
committees to evaluate separately funding proposed for the protections 
and maintenance of our troops and funding proposed for rebuilding Iraq. 
We, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, as was mentioned, 
believe our troops should be protected and secure. We also believe that 
the humanitarian assistance that we are contemplating, some $20 
billion, needs further scrutiny. The investment in their infrastructure 
when our electric grids are breaking down, we need that here. We need 
it for our schools. We need it for our health centers.
  We, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, believe that the 
President should provide full details about how the efforts will be 
paid for, including a full accounting of Iraqi resources, recovered and 
anticipated, and how the President proposes to use those resources to 
reduce or to reimburse the U.S. obligation.
  We, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, believe the 
President should provide full details about the future obligations of 
the United States personnel, funding, and decision-making and about how 
responsibility and authority for these obligations will be shared with 
the United Nations and/or other nations going forward.
  We, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, believe the 
administration should provide to Congress full details of information 
relied on by the President in his decision to go to war in that first 
unilateral strike earlier this year.
  We believe the President should provide details of the criteria he 
will expect to be met before bringing U.S. troops home and what the 
exit strategy must be.
  Those are the principles that 39 members of the Congressional Black 
Caucus today present to the President and to our American citizens 
across this country. They are simple. We want a response. We want it 
timely. And the 26 million people that we represent want to hear from 
him.
  I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) for his 
leadership.

 The Congressional Black Caucus Principles Regarding President Bush's 
                    $87 Billion Supplemental Request

       We reaffirm our Statement of Principles issued in October 
     2002.
       Despite the President's failure to follow our original 
     Statement of Principles in his decisions leading to the war, 
     we express our full resolve to support and protect our troops 
     and their families.
       The Administration should provide an accounting of all 
     funds expended to date that were previously appropriated by 
     the Congress, including details about all contracts for work 
     in or related to Iraq.
       The President should provide sufficient details about how 
     the proposed funding will be spent to enable Congress and its 
     Committees to evaluate separately funding proposed for the 
     protection and maintenance of our troops and funding proposed 
     for rebuilding Iraq. Congress should vote on these funding 
     proposals separately.
       The President should provide full details about how the 
     efforts will be paid for, including a full accounting of 
     Iraqi resources (recovered and anticipated) and how the 
     President proposes to use those resources to reduce or 
     reimburse the U.S. obligation.
       The President should provide full details about the future 
     obligations of the United States (personnel, funding and 
     decisions making) and about how responsibility and authority 
     for these obligations will be shared with the United Nations 
     and/or other nations going forward.
       The Administration should provide to Congress full details 
     of information relied on by the President in his decision to 
     go to war.
       The President should provide details of the criteria he 
     will expect to be met before bringing US troops home and of 
     his exit strategy.

    Congressional Black Caucus Principles on Military Action in Iraq

       1. We oppose a unilateral first-strike action by the United 
     States without a clearly demonstrated and imminent threat of 
     attack on the United States.
       2. Only Congress has the authority to declare war.
       3. Every diplomatic option must be exhausted.
       4. A unilateral first-strike would undermine the moral 
     authority of the United States, result in substantial loss of 
     life, destabilize the Mideast region and undermine the 
     ability of our nation to address unmet domestic priorities.
       5. Further, any post-strike plan for maintaining stability 
     in the region would be costly and would require a long-term 
     commitment.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her statement. 
And we reiterate that these questions that have been raised are basic 
questions that if anybody were dealing with a family issue, a serious 
family issue, these are the kinds of questions, Mr. Speaker, that 
anybody, any reasonable person would ask, and we reiterate that we hope 
the President will answer these questions as soon as possible.
  Speaking of common sense, I yield to the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Clyburn) who hails from South Carolina and also is a 
previous chair of the Congressional Black Caucus and now serves as a 
vice chairman of our Democratic Caucus.
  Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want 
to thank the chairman for the tremendous leadership he has given to the 
Congressional Black Caucus on this and other issues.
  Earlier today, I joined the House Democratic leadership in sending a 
letter to the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert) requesting a 
detailed accounting of the money being spent on the Iraq War effort. 
The public disclosure that we are requesting must include shining the 
light on closed-door lucrative contracts being awarded to Halliburton, 
Bechtel and other friends of this administration.
  In today's Washington Post, there is an article that says that $1.7 
billion has already been awarded to Bechtel, and they stand to receive 
millions more in no-bid contracts.
  Mr. Speaker, I think that this is outrageous. Outrageous not just 
because of the issue itself but because there are two underlying issues 
that I think that this administration must confront before we send any 
additional money to conduct this effort in Iraq. And I want to share 
with the public those two concerns of mine.
  First of all, I do not know if the public realizes it or not, but a 
law that we authorized last April provides for imminent danger pay of 
$75 a month and $150 a month in family separation allowances for our 
soldiers serving in Afghanistan and Iraq. That law expires on September 
30. I do not believe that we ought to give one moment of consideration 
to any additional funding to conduct this war in Iraq until we extend 
this law so that those men and women who are putting their lives on the 
line, who are in imminent danger, who have been separated from their 
families receive compensation for doing so.

                              {time}  1815

  The Defense Department is saying that we cannot afford to continue 
this pay. I believe that the troops serving overseas ought to be our 
top priority, and we ought not talk about any additional expenditures 
until we make sure that they are taken care of.
  The second thing I want us to consider before we start discussing any 
additional funds for Iraq is this issue involving disability pay for 
our veterans.
  Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to me that if you were to look at a 
20-year veteran who may have served 1 year in Iraq or Afghanistan and 
comes home unharmed, that veteran will receive retirement benefits. But 
the 20-year veteran who serves for 20 years and gets injured in Iraq, 
comes home with a missing limb and becomes eligible for disability pay, 
that disability pay is deducted from his or her retirement pay; and, 
therefore, he or she stands in the same light as a person who never got 
injured in the first place, though that person's ability to make a 
living for himself or herself and his or her family diminishes greatly 
because of that injury.

[[Page H8377]]

  We in this Congress need to correct that issue before we send one 
additional soldier to fight in Iraq or Afghanistan, and this Congress 
is refusing to deal with that. Yet we hear that those of us who 
disapprove spending additional expenditures until we do this do not 
support our troops.
  This is not supporting our troops, when we put them in harm's way and 
we bring them back home and do not adequately support their life's 
existence. Something about this is bad wrong. I get the phone calls in 
my office. I have a young lady spending almost full time dealing with 
this issue. We believe that until it is resolved, we ought not be 
talking about any additional funds for Iraq.
  So until this administration faces up to these three issues, gives us 
a light shining on these contracts, does something about extending 
eminent pay allowances and family separation for our men and women, and 
does something about this disabled American veterans tax that we are 
putting on these people returning home with their injuries, I am not 
going to support any additional expenditures in Iraq.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished 
gentleman, the chairperson of the Congressional Black Caucus. I am 
honored to join my colleagues in a very thoughtful presentation and 
edification of our principles.
  I rise to say two things, that Congress has to be, if you will, the 
arbiter, the moral compass, the standard by which we make 
determinations to save lives in America. It is imperative before we 
vote for the $87 billion that we have full congressional hearings, that 
we separate the vote on the support for the troops as well as 
distinguishing that from the rebuild on Iraq.
  We are truly committed to our troops and saving lives, protecting 
them and responding to their family needs; but we cannot give a blank 
check of $87 billion to this administration without a detailed plan and 
exit strategy, as well as an understanding of who our allies will be.
  Lastly, I believe it is imperative that we not give up on 
understanding where the weapons of mass destruction are and what was 
the nuclear capacity or threat at the time that we all made a conscious 
decision or one of conscience to protect this land in voting for the 
resolution in 2002. The American people have to have hearings on the 
understanding of the weapons of mass destruction.
  So I support my colleagues and thank them very much for giving me the 
opportunity to share in support of this Special Order on very important 
decisions that this Congress will make over the next weeks and days. I 
look forward to a town hall meeting in my community on this very issue.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to 
the distinguished gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. 
Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Chair of the Congressional Black 
Caucus for yielding. We all owe him particular gratitude for the way in 
which this entire session he has brought this caucus together on this 
floor on important issues, none more important than the issue before us 
today.
  If I were to summarize what I have to say today, it would be that the 
troops have become an abstract concept. I want to deconstruct the 
concept. The proposition that I want to put forward is that two 
inexcusable errors by the administration are endangering our troops in 
Iraq: first, the rush to war without allies, and, secondly, the 
inexcusable failure to plan for the peace.
  The context of what I want to speak about further is a young man 
whose funeral I went to a couple of weeks ago, Darryl Dent, 21 years 
old, due home several times, extended each time. Dead.
  I believe that the Darryl Dents, who are mounting up every day, are 
unnecessarily mounting up; and I want to make that case today.
  I want to congratulate the Chair once again on his ``Statement of 
Principles as to War against Iraq'' that the caucus issued before that 
war. The most important principle has been vindicated, that a 
unilateral first strike action by the United States without a clearly 
demonstrated and indicated threat of attack on the United States, that 
notion that you do not do that kind of strike unless you know you are 
in imminent danger, has been fully vindicated by multiple failures of 
the administration.
  I want to spell out what those failures are. First, the failure to 
form a pre-war and a post-war alliance to provide adequate civilian and 
military assistance to our troops in the field and to the people of 
Iraq after the war; the failure to secure the peace; the failure to 
prepare for the probability of an Iraqi resistance. What did we think 
they were going to do, just melt into the woodwork? Or, finally, to 
understand that once there was the chaos of war, we would draw in 
terrorist elements following the war, the failure to prepare for what 
U.S. commanders now themselves now call a guerilla war in Iraq. Was all 
of this necessary, Mr. Speaker? I think not.
  It comes up now in the context of an astonishing request. Nobody 
expected $87 billion more. What is that, for this year alone?
  I want to talk about the troops through Darryl Dent, because I think 
the words need to be humanized. The only people who have been asked to 
sacrifice for this war are the military. We certainly have not been 
asked to sacrifice a thing, whether we are rich or poor, since we are 
getting tax cuts thrown at us.
  The greatest hardship has been on the people we call the Weekend 
Warriors. You will notice that the Congressional Black Caucus does not 
feel defensive at all about indicating that we support the troops. We 
do not need to come forward and let everybody make sure you know we 
support the troops. That is a truism, particularly since the troops are 
disproportionately African American.
  Mr. Speaker. Yes, we do support them. That is a given as well.
  We also believe that once you destroy somebody's country, you invade 
somebody's country, you ought to fix it up and not simply leave it in 
chaos. That is the obligation that comes once you invade somebody's 
country. That is an obligation, by the way, under the U.N. charter.
  Winning the war in Iraq was a virtual given. But we had a special 
obligation not to engage in a war of choice unless we were in imminent 
danger the moment we decided to have a volunteer Army, because that 
Army we knew from the outset would be composed disproportionately of 
Weekend Warriors.
  We were under a particular obligation to make sure that we did not 
call people who we gave to understand that, yes, in the event of a war 
of last resort you will be called up, but basically there was not much 
chance that you would be called up. We had no right to go into a war of 
choice unless we had no other choice. They were prepared to fight a 
defensive war, they were prepared to fight this war of choice, but it 
is unfair that we have asked them to do that. They are all surprised. 
They are as astonished as anybody is. And we are having a snowball 
effect.
  We are having a snowball effect on the troops, on their families, on 
small businesses, and on employers. We know it, because employers and 
families are beginning to escalate their use of the mechanism in the 
Defense Department that allows you to ask for particular troops to come 
home because of emergency or hardship. Businesses are using that as 
well. We know it because families are organizing to bring the troops 
home, for goodness' sake.

  And we know one other thing: we had better not get up ever again and 
declare that we can fight a war on two fronts. We now know we cannot 
fight a war on two fronts without substantial aid from substantial 
allies using a military force composed so disproportionately of Weekend 
Warriors, of people in the Reserves, of people in the National Guard. 
Nobody can fail to understand that now, particularly when the 
commanders are calling for troops. They call them ``foreign troops,'' 
but what they mean is they need reinforcements.
  We know they need reinforcements because of the horror stories we are 
hearing, for example, of people coming home after a year of service and 
being called back after a few weeks on the job. How long do you think 
you will have a volunteer Army when you are

[[Page H8378]]

treating troops this way? How long? Not long.
  In particular, we ought to remember who the National Guard is. They 
perform triple duty: homeland defense now in the age of domestic 
terrorism, which is what Americans are truly afraid of; natural 
disasters, like the hurricane that is bearing down upon us; and, of 
course, the regular military duty that so many of them are engaged in 
now. We had better hope and pray we do not need the National Guard at 
home, because they simply are unavailable to us at the moment.
  The administration changed the rules of the game once these young 
people were signed up and in the field. Now they find that commanders 
can decide when and if they will go home. They are getting extension 
after extension of duty, and they are getting back-to-back service, all 
of which they were promised would almost never happen.
  Where does this spring from? From the go-it-alone attack on Iraq that 
this administration did, against all of the advice of our allies, 
indeed, of the whole world. The way in which we have handled Iraq has 
already wrecked American foreign policy and its relations with its 
allies.
  Yes, I support the Congressional Black Caucus statement of 
principles. I also believe it is time to do more than ask tough 
questions. It is time to do more than talk about the troops, as if they 
were some inanimate body. It is time to come to grips with our duty to 
protect the troops, not only in the field, but here at home, against 
policies that could wreck the volunteer forces on which we have become 
so dependent in an age when we do not use the draft.
  Mr. Speaker, I again thank the chairman for his leadership.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman and all of 
the members of the Congressional Black Caucus for participating in this 
discussion this evening.

                              {time}  1830

  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I believe that history will be the judge, 
and I think it will shine a very favorable light on the Congressional 
Black Caucus for raising the questions that have been raised. These are 
basic, fundamental questions.
  It is interesting that the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia 
(Ms. Norton) raised the issue of our troops. It just reminded me that 
one of the first soldiers to die in the war just so happened to live a 
few blocks from me, a young man who simply wanted to be the best that 
he could be; and he joined the Marines, and the reason why he joined 
the Marines was because he could not get scholarship money to go to 
college. But he joined the Marines and gave the best that he had, and 
he became one of the best helicopter specialists in the entire Marine 
Corps.
  So we must never forget the young people who are suffering in 120 
degree-plus weather. We must never forget those who have given the 
ultimate sacrifice, their lives, for this country. We must never forget 
them, ever. We must never separate them from what is going on here 
today, for they are the people that we care so much about and we love 
so dearly.
  At the same time, I think we owe them a certain level of support, the 
highest level of support. We must do that. At the same time, we must 
be, this country, that is the President, must answer crucial basic 
questions about the taxes that are paid. I have often said, Mr. 
Speaker, that one can get Republicans and Democrats to agree on one 
thing, and that is for sure, and that is that the tax dollars of our 
citizens must be spent in an effective and efficient manner. I do 
believe that it is our duty. It is not only our duty; it is our 
responsibility to ask the questions of how those dollars are spent. It 
is the duty of every citizen to require of us in town hall meetings, 
and when they meet us at the supermarket, to be able to ask us the 
question of how are our dollars being spent.
  And as we stand here today and as we look at this total $166 billion, 
I promise my colleagues that I do not think that one of us can truly 
say how they are being spent, because our President has not told us. 
This Chamber should be packed with Members trying to get answers to 
those very crucial questions.

                          ____________________