[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 136 (Tuesday, September 30, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12149-S12151]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST FOR IRAQ
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, obviously one of the issues before us and
the issue we will be grappling with for the remainder of the week--
perhaps longer--is the question of supporting our troops in Iraq and
continuing to deal with the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Certainly everyone agrees that these things have to be done. There are
different views as to how they should be done. All of us have to review
in our minds where we are, what the basic issues are that have us
there, and certainly what is necessary to succeed in our efforts in the
Middle East, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We have before us a request for $87 billion for the war on terror.
That will be dealt with this week, the division there between what is
required for the military aspect and then what is required to complete
our job in terms of leaving Iraq and Afghanistan in the condition in
which democracy and freedom and a lack of terrorism will be where we
are in the future.
It is good to go back and review some ideas. I would like to talk
about where we have been, where we need to go to complete the task we
undertook, and talk a little about what we are seeking to do in terms
of leaving Iraq in a position to govern itself and to support freedom
and peace, and about the fact that we hear all the time that there was
no plan after combat was over. That is not true. There is a plan. The
plan is in process. We certainly will continue to carry out that plan.
We need resources to do that.
All of us are concerned about spending. All of us are concerned about
the deficit. We find ourselves in a deficit situation for reasons that
are fairly apparent. It started, of course, with September 11, which
was something we had no control over, which increased special spending
we would not otherwise have had. Then we were faced with an economic
turndown which caused additional impacts on our deficit and the
economy. Then, of course, we continued to have more terrorism and our
troops in Iraq.
I guess probably no one in this body is more conservative than I am
in terms of spending, in terms of government's role and what we ought
to be doing, but I do recognize that when you have special things,
whether it is your business or your family or your government, then
spending is done in a different way. That is where we are.
The stakes are high in Iraq, certainly. It is the center front now
for the war on terrorism. Critical work remains to be done in
Afghanistan as well. Terrorists and regime remnants are making a
desperate attempt to maintain themselves and continue in these
countries. The U.S. and its allies are confronting them where they live
and where they seek refuge, rather than leaving the terrorists in the
safe havens where they would like to gather strength and resources and
come back as they did before.
Our troops--no one would disagree, I am sure--have to have the
necessary resources for the war on terror, and the spending requests
will give our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan the equipment they need to
increase their safety and security, which happens to be the most
important thing for us. This includes funding to replace equipment used
that was destroyed during combat operations, to protect our forces,
better housing for our troops deployed overseas, and enhanced pay,
reflected in the dangers that we face.
Of course, we have been through these things before. Stabilizing Iraq
and Afghanistan will increase our security at home and certainly help
win the war.
As we understand, the war was not just combat but to change things in
that part of the world. The costs of fighting terrorists are
significant, but they still are a relatively small percentage of the
overall economy compared to that of previous conflicts. According to an
analysis done by USA Today, the cost of fighting the war is 5 percent
of the GDP compared to 30 percent for World War II and 15 percent for
the Korean war. The $87 billion request is less than 4 percent of our
entire Federal budget next year. Yet it is a critical part of this
stabilization area we are in.
Initial estimates of Iraq's total need range from $50 billion to $75
billion. The administration believes $20 billion represents our
reasonable share as to what we ought to be doing to put the country
back in reasonable shape, and we expect the rest of the costs, of
course, to be filled by the international community, or by Iraq's own
reserves, which are potentially very large.
So these funds will be carefully targeted to the immediate security
needs, as well as the share of the critical infrastructure that has to
be replaced in order to get the kinds of support there that we are
looking for.
Iraq oil reserves are estimated at approximately $12 billion in 2004
and $19 billion for each of 2005 and 2006. So unlike many of the
countries in that part of the world, there are sizable resources that
we hope will be part of this rebuilding exercise, and indeed should be.
President Bush has held the line on nondefense spending growth. In
2001, the last budget before President Bush took office, nondefense
spending grew nearly 15 percent. He cut that growth to 6 percent in
2000, less than 5 percent in 2003, and 2 percent in 2004. Obviously,
there is always controversy and different views and things that we
would like to do in our home States and in our country. But, of course,
obviously, they have to be balanced with our ability to pay and our
willingness to tax.
Today's deficits are larger than anybody wants. No one wants
deficits, but they are certainly still less than 5 percent of the GDP
and are manageable if we put them into a steady downward path by strong
economic growth and spending restraints. These are the issues with
which we have to deal.
Certainly, the war on terrorism has to be funded. Freeing Iraq is the
key to winning the terrorism war and vital to America. President Bush
has asked for $87 billion in emergency funding--a large amount, of
course. The majority--$65 billion--will go to directly support troops
in Iraq and Afghanistan, give them more resources that they need.
Again, no one would argue against giving our troops what is necessary
for them to go forward. And $21 billion would go to create a secure
environment. It is high, but as I mentioned, things have changed and we
need to do the job right and continue to work at doing it.
From time to time we hear that there really wasn't a plan or there is
not a plan. There is a plan and we are following it. One of the issues,
of course, is time. I don't know how you could plan that anybody would
have a definite timeframe in terms of a plan for a place such as Iraq.
But I think Secretary Rumsfeld covered it well when he commented some
time back, a few days ago. These are some of his comments that I think
are correct. He said the coalition has certainly, in less than 5
months, racked up a series of achievements in both countries and civil
reconstruction that may be without precedent. Today in Iraq virtually
all major hospitals and universities have been reopened; hundreds of
secondary schools--until a few months ago many were used for weapons
storage--have been rebuilt and are ready for the start of the fall
semester. This is part of the plan to put these entities, of course,
back into place.
Fifty-six thousand Iraqis have been armed and trained in just a few
months. They are contributing to the security and defense of the
country. Today a new Iraqi army is being trained, and 40,000 Iraq
police will join with that army to conduct joint controls with the
coalition. Contrast that to the 14 months it took to establish a police
force in postwar Germany and
[[Page S12150]]
the 10 years it took to begin training a new German army.
Again, this is part of the plan to add stability and provide the
opportunity for Iraqis to be able to control their own country and
their own people and move forward. As security improves, so does
commerce. Five thousand small businesses have opened since the
liberation on May 1. An independent Iraqi central bank was established
and new currency was announced in just 2 months. These are
accomplishments which took years before in Germany. The Iraq governing
council has been formed and they appointed a cabinet of ministers--
again, something that took years to do in other times.
So this is the plan and the movement to get government back into
place there, to have security for themselves, to have people trained to
do what has to be done in a country that is independent and standing
alone. In major cities and most of the towns, villages, and
municipalities, councils have been formed to make the decisions on
local matters. That is something that it took a great deal of time to
do before, and you would imagine that it would.
But all this has taken place in just 5 months. Again, I don't think
anybody can specifically say we are going to be done by the 14th of
March in 2005, or whatever, but we are moving very quickly. There is a
plan as to what needs to be in place. The Iraqi people are providing
intelligence now for our forces every day. Division commanders
consistently report an increased numbers of Iraqis coming forward with
intelligence that makes it more likely that we can find the terrorists
and get them out of positions, and so on. So there has been a great
deal of advancement.
There has been great talk about the need for more troops. Those in
the military have declared that is not necessary. If we are going to
have more, they need to come from other countries that are involved.
The commander of the Marine division in the south area decided to send
home 15,000 troops and explained if there is a point when he needs
them, he can get them. So there hasn't been the shortage that is felt
by the military.
Again, we are moving forward and making some progress in that area.
That is what it is all about--to continue to reach the visions that we
have for Iraq and against terrorism.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Wyoming. We
are beginning a very important week. We are going to be talking about
what is happening in Iraq and the President's request for $87 billion
and added funding.
A lot of people are saying: Wow, $87 billion. But it is important for
us to look at what that $87 billion is going to do.
First of all, $66 billion is for our troops. That is for our troop
protection, equipment, making sure they have everything they need to do
the job we are asking them to do over the next year. I don't think
there is anyone in this Congress who would deny the President a dime of
the money that is going to our troops to make sure they have everything
they need to do one of the toughest jobs I have ever seen.
I was in Iraq and I was in Afghanistan in August. In Iraq and
Afghanistan, our troops are in harm's way every day--every moment,
really. I just woke up this morning to the news that two of our
wonderful military personnel have been assassinated in Afghanistan. It
is a very tough place. We are having to deal with a Taliban that has
rejuvenated its efforts, and they are now into drug dealing. They are
preying on the police in Afghanistan. If somebody doesn't deal with
them, they are murdering them, assassinating them because they want the
drug trade.
Why do they want the drug trade? They want the drug trade because
that is how they are going to finance the terrorist operations around
the world. That is why they are trying to raise money in this illicit
way. What could be more important to the security of our people than to
stop the drug trafficking in Afghanistan and stop the resurrection of
the Taliban?
In Iraq, we see on a daily and weekly basis the harm our young men
and women are in. We need to make sure they have the capability to do
the job we are asking them to do. That is what the President is asking
for, and that is what we will give him.
The other $20 billion is what most people are talking about. How much
should we be giving to rebuild Iraq and how should it be done? Those
are the questions we are going to hear on the floor. The Appropriations
Committee right now is marking up the bill that will come to the floor,
hopefully tomorrow.
This is a legitimate area of disagreement. Most certainly people can
reasonably ask the question: Why are we putting $20 billion into Iraq?
There are things we need in America.
The first responsibility of the Congress of the United States and the
President is to provide for the security of our people, to provide for
a national defense. This is national defense. If we can stabilize Iraq
and stop Iraq from being a breeding ground for terrorism, that is a
United States security interest. That is why putting the money into the
rebuilding of Iraq so that the people will be able to start having an
economy, and if they have electricity, water, and basic living
conditions, we also will begin to see the startup of business. We hope
the oilfield infrastructure will be repaired or rebuilt. It is in much
worse shape than we ever thought it would be. We want to rebuild the
oil infrastructure so when the Iraqis get the oil out of the ground, it
will give jobs to the Iraqi people. They will be able to use it and
export it, but it also means other businesses will crop up to service
those oil wells and the delivery of that oil.
We are talking about the beginning of an economy for Iraq. If we
don't put $20 billion into the rebuilding of Iraq, what will those
people have to do? How can they start their economy from scratch? How
can they start the creation of jobs if the oil pipelines are being held
together with rags and cannot deliver the oil?
It is a package of $87 billion that will be for the security and
support of our troops, and for the rebuilding of Iraq which, in turn,
will allow our troops to leave earlier but with the knowledge that the
people of Iraq will have stability, that Iraq will not be a breeding
ground for terrorism, and that they will have a justice system and a
security system in place with their own policemen and their own army to
protect their borders from the terrorists who are infiltrating their
borders from Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Iran.
This is a very important bill, it is a very important request from
the President, and it is important that we give to the President what
he needs to do the job Congress has given him the authority to do.
Congress gave the President the right to declare war on terrorism.
Congress declared the war. The President is implementing that war, and
we are going to have to give him the support he asks us to give. It
would be unthinkable to walk away with the job not yet completed.
I am very pleased to be supportive of the President and this effort,
even though it is a difficult situation and a lot of questions have
been raised.
Mr. President, we have had a good beginning. We have had the
beginning of 6,000 individual reconstruction projects. Schools,
universities, and hospitals have been opened. They are not up to the
standards we hope they will be, but it was important for the Iraqi
children to start school; it was important they have health care
services. We have gone in to augment the opening of those facilities.
Iraq is also in the process of transitioning to a governing council.
We hope they will be able to form their own government, create their
own constitution, have representatives of their people for whom they
can vote. That is what we hope to leave them.
We have made a very strong beginning. If we look at where we started,
which was absolutely a deteriorating infrastructure, we are making
progress. What we hear about in the news is very disconcerting. We hear
about a terrorist putting a landmine in a road and it blows up one of
our people or one of their people. We hear of terrorists tearing down
the electricity grids and cutting the water supply. This shows, if
nothing else does, that this is the terrorists' last stand. They do not
want the United States to succeed. They do not want the Iraqi people to
have a stable lifestyle. They want there to be foment and unrest. They
[[Page S12151]]
want people who are desperate for change. We are not going to let them
win. That is why this bill is so important.
I am pleased to talk about the important accomplishments and the
importance of what we are doing in Iraq. The President and Congress
must come together and do what is right for the security of the
American people, and doing what is right means we will give the
President the money which he has asked for the rebuilding of Iraq and
for the protection and support of our troops in the field.
I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Texas. She
certainly expresses the view of at least all of us on this side of the
aisle in terms of the challenge we have before us and our willingness
to take on that challenge and to complete this task we have begun in
the protection of our country.
There are probably a number of questions that are frequently asked
with regard to this issue. They should be discussed, and indeed they
have been discussed. So, frankly, I hope we do not string this issue
out any longer than it needs to be. We should have a reasonable debate
and get on with what we need to do. I am very hopeful, as well, that
the idea of some of the discussion is not designed to be political.
Unfortunately, many issues do that. These are genuine issues. They are
not political issues.
Some of the questions that are asked: Why can we not provide the
resources for the troops and let the Iraqis do their own thing with
their infrastructure? I think one of the differences we have, that we
might not have with some other place, is Iraq has suffered from decades
of corruption and mismanagement from Saddam, where he built dozens of
lavish palaces for himself and his family and funded destruction
programs. He involved himself in war in Kuwait, and he failed to invest
in the country's critical infrastructure. As a result, more than $100
billion in debt is unable to be tapped for their own resources. The
stability of Iraq and Afghanistan is what is important so that they are
no longer the breeding grounds for terrorism.
So it is important that we are helpful in restructuring the things
that have not been done for many years prior to our involvement there.
Some ask: Why is rebuilding Iraq costing more than the administration
said it would? Has the administration been honest about their analysis
of the costs?
Again, that is a legitimate question. Under Saddam, Iraq was one of
the most tightly controlled and secretive societies in the world. Until
the country was liberated, it was hard to know exactly how much
internal damage or neglect had been suffered in everything from the
electrical grid to water and sewage. In addition, rebuilding efforts
have been hampered, of course, by the remnants of the regime and
foreign terror groups that are there. It has been very difficult, in
the long term, to understand what these costs would be.
What are other countries realistically going to contribute to the
reconstruction effort, and what are the expectations for the Madrid
donor conference? It seems as if there is now more support for doing
something in terms of restructuring than we had in the combat stage. We
expect that many members of the community will participate, as well as
some international financial institutions and organizations, such as
the United Nations. Quite frankly, when we start doing this I believe
we will see some of the European economic interests there. Some of them
were there before in a business sense, and they will return again. We
have had discussions with these donors individually, and they are
planned for the conference. We also need to review the assessments
being done by the U.N.
What is our exit strategy? Again, that is a very difficult issue,
particularly on timing. We know what we want to accomplish, but it is
not always easy to know how long it will take to achieve those kinds of
things.
After 9/11, the President told the American people that he would
confront the threats to our Nation before they reached our shores. Our
troops are performing a vital task right now, and that is what they are
doing. They are liberators, not occupiers. We bring freedom to those
oppressed people and help the Iraqi people. It is interesting that all
we hear about are the difficult times--and there are difficult times,
and I understand that. The media, or whoever it is, speaks of those
difficult and tragic things at the top of the news. The improvements
that are being made and the support that is there is not always as well
understood as are the difficulties.
So I think we are making good progress. As we have pointed out, in
just 5 months many things have happened that need to be done. The more
that happens, the more support we will have from the Iraqi people, and
we can begin to move rather soon.
We have enough forces in the region. That is always a question that
is being asked. I mentioned it before, but in the professional judgment
of the military commanders, who are the ones who really know, the
130,000 troops recently in Iraq can carry out the mission. Some of the
marines have been sent back to the United States, knowing that if they
are needed, of course, they could go there.
One of the last figures I heard was about 25,000 troops from other
countries are there, and that is a good thing. Of course, we are
dealing with an action at the United Nations, so there will be more
input from the United Nations into what we are doing, and I think that
is good.
So these are some of the questions that are asked, and I think they
are indeed legitimate questions.
No one wishes we were there. We all wish the whole terrorism thing
had not happened, but it has, and the Senator from Texas mentioned why
we do not want it to happen in our country. We need to deal with
terrorism where it exists and not to let it happen here. I am hopeful
that this is an issue we can deal with, and deal with it in a timely
way.
____________________