[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 158 (Tuesday, November 4, 2003)]
[House]
[Page H10323]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       BUSH ADMINISTRATION SHOULD REEVALUATE SPENDING PRIORITIES

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, tonight, several Members on the Republican 
side of the aisle gave 5-minute Special Orders on government waste, 
while today's New York Times talks about the war in Iraq and the 
difficulty that the Bush administration is facing in managing that war 
and in restoring Iraq's economy. Now, I do not think most Americans 
thought when we went into Iraq that we were supposed to restore the 
economy, but there has been a great deal of mission creep, obviously, 
and with no stability there and, with no security, investment does not 
happen. Of course, it is not a free-enterprise economy, and a lot of 
their former businesses and State-owned companies are in trouble.
  This particular article talks about a shoe company that would fashion 
leather and finish shoes. Thousands of people there are without work as 
a result of the war and the bad conditions. So the Bush administration 
is taking cash and paying over 2,000 workers in just that company; 
imagine how many companies there are in Iraq, just to kind of ``buy the 
peace'' so that there is not more unrest.
  Meanwhile, here in Congress, about a week ago, we tried to get a bill 
passed that would give $1,500 to each of our soldiers' families who are 
in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. Guess what? The very same Republican 
party that is handing out $100 bills in Iraq forced the defeat of that 
measure offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) here in the 
House. Very interesting priorities, in my opinion, and absolutely 
wrong.
  Now, last Friday, President Bush came to Ohio, our State, and I 
thought he might be coming to stop the loss of jobs, because that 
particular day there had been an announcement of another 525 jobs, this 
time Federal jobs, that had to do with the Department of Defense that 
were being taken out of Cleveland, Ohio. The President did not say 
anything about those jobs when he came. He probably did not want to 
because his own Department of Defense made a big mistake. They took 
these Federal jobs that had been with the Defense Finance Accounting 
Service at the Department of Defense through the Cleveland office, and 
they decided they were going to move them to Texas. They said, we are 
going to contract these jobs out. Now, did they provide the workers in 
Cleveland with the same kind of money they are providing to the workers 
in Iraq? No.
  What they did was they moved the jobs to Dallas, Texas because they 
contracted out the jobs to a company, and I want to get the name of the 
private company correctly here; oh, Dallas-based Affiliated Computer 
Services. The President said he was going to save money by contracting 
out these Federal jobs. But do my colleagues know what? They made a big 
mistake, because the government workers actually saved the taxpayers 
$20 million. The subcontractors that the President hired in Texas and, 
gee, is that a coincidence, is going to cost the taxpayers of our 
country 20 million more dollars, not less dollars. It is funny that it 
was in Texas. While the President was in Ohio, while our jobs were 
leaving for Texas and costing the taxpayers of our country $20 million 
more, the President took down a cool $1.2 billion in Columbus, Ohio for 
his campaign. He bagged a cool million in Ohio, a little bit over $1 
million. Then he went to Texas and took $1.4 million down there in a 
big fund-raiser. Very interesting.
  Now, he was in California, I think it was yesterday, and he stood in 
front of people's homes that have had their properties burned to the 
ground. Unlike Iraq, he did not hand out any money; he just 
sympathized, empathized with the people and said they would get FEMA 
loans. Give them loans in California. And then he proceeded, while 
these people have just lost everything and they are getting loans from 
FEMA, to talk about Iraq and the $87 billion that he is going to spend 
in Iraq.
  What I really want to know from President Bush is, how are we going 
to know, as the American people, when we have won in Iraq?
  Now, back in May, I think the President got on a ship and it said, 
``mission accomplished.'' So the American people thought things were 
winding down. Well, they were just beginning. We have now lost more 
troops in Iraq than before the President stood in front of the sign 
that said ``mission accomplished,'' and I want to know how will we know 
when we have won? When we have trained 200,000 Iraqi police to keep the 
security in the country? At what level will we have to have their force 
in order to know that we have to leave? Will we have won when we 
finally find Saddam Hussein? Will we have won when Iraq holds their own 
elections next year? Will we have won when we assure ourselves that 
there are no weapons of mass destruction? The President already said 
when Hurricane Isabel hit the East Coast here and captured all the 
headlines, there was a story that was buried in the paper where he 
said: Well, there were not any weapons of mass destruction. But that is 
why we went in.
  So I would like to ask the President, please, tell us what the exit 
strategy is. How will we know when we win in Iraq, and how much is it 
going to cost us?

                          ____________________