[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 131 (Tuesday, September 23, 2003)]
[House]
[Page H8471]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      THE COST OF THE WAR IN IRAQ

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Murphy). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson) is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, it has been a year since the President began 
pressing to invade Iraq. At the time, many of us pressed the President 
to fully account for the cost of his planned war. Most Americans would 
agree that if the issue of Iraq was important enough to start a war 
over, it was important enough to pay for.
  For a year, Congress has asked for hard numbers on the cost of 
occupying and rebuilding Iraq, and for a year the President has given 
us nothing but blandishments and pie-in-the-sky forecasts. At the time, 
experts, including the President's own chief economist, predicted the 
war and reconstruction would cost as much as $200 billion. But the 
President and his aides actively downplayed those numbers, saying it 
would only cost around $50 billion.
  Well, guess what? Last week the President finally admitted that he 
had low-balled the cost of the war when selling it to Congress a year 
ago. The President is now asking for an additional $87 billion, billion 
with a B, to extricate our troops from what is beginning to look like a 
quagmire.
  Let me be perfectly clear: The current situation in Iraq should not 
have come as any surprise to anyone in this administration or in this 
Congress. Last fall, the Chief of Staff of the United States Army, 
General Eric Shinseki, told Congress that it would require close to 
300,000 troops to secure Iraq after toppling Saddam. Today, only about 
half that number are in Iraq. As the toll of American soldiers killed 
in the occupation of Iraq rises, our young men and women in uniform are 
paying the price of trying to wage war on the cheap.
  I was just reading a news report referring to a young man from 
Micronesia, Hilario Bermanis, II, and how he was injured in Iraq. He 
has lost an eye, an arm and both legs. He is being honored by being 
made an American citizen. And a few weeks earlier, the proposal was 
made to reduce veterans' services. I cannot understand that.
  This additional $87 billion comes on top of the $78.5 billion 
Congress gave the President just 5 months ago, bringing the grand total 
so far to $165 billion, and we would cut the cost of veterans' 
services.
  If that sounds like a lot of money, hold on to your hat for this 
piece of information: A recent analysis by the Committee on the Budget 
shows that the entire cost for rebuilding Iraq could rise to as much as 
$400 billion over the next 5 years.
  Now, this new $87 billion alone is a big number by itself. That is a 
number most people will never encounter at any point in their lives. So 
it is important to put these numbers into context.
  Eighty-seven billion dollars is more than twice what the President 
requested to protect the United States from the terrorist attack that 
might come at any time. Eighty-seven billion dollars is about three 
times what the request was for highway and road construction across the 
country next year. Eighty-seven billion dollars is about twice the net 
worth, not annual income, but total net worth of America's wealthiest 
man, Bill Gates. Eighty-seven billion dollars is almost six times the 
profits of America's largest corporation, General Electric. Eighty-
seven billion dollars is more than $300 for every man, woman and child 
in the United States of America. That is a lot of money to spend on a 
country halfway around the world, when our local schools, hospitals, 
fire and police departments are struggling to make ends meet.

                          ____________________