[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 160 (Thursday, November 6, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H10541-H10547]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
COMMEMORATING VETERANS' DAY 2003
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 to revise and extend their remarks on the
subject of my Special Order tonight.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, tonight I rise with fellow Members of the
Congressional Black Caucus and other Members of Congress to salute this
Nation's veterans in commemoration of Veterans' Day next Tuesday. Mr.
Speaker, it is a very special day for so many of our men and women who
have given their blood, their sweat, and their tears to defend the
lives that we live in this country. Many of them have given their lives
standing up for what America is all about.
And so it gives me great honor to yield 20 minutes to my
distinguished colleague from the great State of Missouri and the
ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Ike
Skelton, for his remarks.
Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, let me first thank my friend and colleague
from Maryland for the honor of addressing the House at this moment. I
much appreciate it.
Mr. Speaker, recent press reports have indicated that the
administration is planning to begin the withdrawal of American forces
from Iraq in the spring of 2004. Based on recent visits to my
congressional district in Missouri, I believe such a move would be very
politically popular. Overwhelmingly, the
[[Page H10542]]
people want our troops brought home as rapidly as possible. I, too,
want to bring them home.
However, if we have learned anything from recent history in Baghdad,
it is that poor planning for the occupation has contributed to the
dangerous and confused situation in which we find ourselves. I was
concerned about planning for the occupation last year. In fact, Mr.
Speaker, I wrote to the President on two occasions, first on September
4, 2002, and second, on the eve of the war, on March 18, 2003. My
letters detailed the potential problems our forces might encounter
during the postconflict occupation of Iraq, and I submit copies of
those letters for the Record.
Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, September 4, 2002.
The President,
The White House,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President: Thank you for inviting me to the
briefing this morning. I share your concern about the
continuing threat posed by Saddam Hussein and his efforts to
produce weapons of mass destruction (WMD). I would like to
offer my assistance as the administration considers how to
deal with this threat.
Before Congress can authorize any military action that
might be part of the administration's plan, we must have
answers to more questions than were about to be raised at
today's meeting. Our constitutional duty requires us to
ensure that all implications of such action are considered in
advance. The case has not yet been fully made as to what the
threat is, why military force is an appropriate way of
addressing the threat, and why action must occur now. In
short, Congress and the American people must be clear on your
strategic vision before we can authorize a specific course of
action. I believe, like Clausewitz, that in strategy there is
an ``imperative . . . not to take the first step without
considering the last.''
Your strategy for dealing with Iraq must address the
fundamental questions of the threat, the method of acting,
and the timing. Furthermore, any strategy to eliminate Iraqi
WMD must also address several component issues, each of which
raises critical questions.
How To Manage Iraq's Transition to a Stable Post-Saddam Regime
As I mentioned to you this morning, this is a critical
question for administration strategy to answer in advance of
any military action. I have no doubt that our military would
decisively defeat Iraq's forces and remove Saddam. But like
the proverbial dog chasing the car down the road, we must
consider what we would do after we caught it.
As Sun-Tzu said in the classic strategic treatise, The Art
of War, ``To win victory is easy; to preserve its fruits,
difficult,'' Military planners and political leaders alike
knew this in World War II. Planning for the occupation of
Germany and Japan--two economically viable, technologically
sophisticated nations--took place well in advance of the
end of the war. The extreme difficulty of occupying Iraq
with its history of autocratic rule, its balkanized ethnic
tensions, and its isolated economic system argues both for
careful consideration of the benefits and risks of
undertaking military action and for detailed advanced
occupation planning if such military action is approved.
Specifically, your strategy must consider the form of a
replacement regime and take seriously the possibility that
this regime might be rejected by the Iraqi people, leading to
civil unrest and even anarchy. The effort must be to craft a
stable regime that will be geopolitically preferable to
Saddam and will incorporate the disparate interests of all
groups within Iraq--Shi'a, Sunni, and Kurd. We must also plan
now for what to do with members of the Baath party that
continue to support Saddam and with the scientists and
engineers who have expertise born of the Iraqi WMD program.
All these efforts require careful planning and long-term
commitment of manpower and resources. The American people
must be clear about the amount of money and the number of
soldiers that will have to be devoted to this effort for many
years to come.
How to Ensure the Action in Iraq Does Not undermine International
Support for the Broader War on Terrorism
In planning for military operations in Iraq, we cannot
ignore the lack of international support to date. Pre-emptive
action against Iraq is currently vocally opposed by many of
our allies and friends throughout the world and particularly
in the Middle East.
When we are seen as acting against the concerns of large
numbers of our friends, it calls into question the ``humble''
approach to international relations you espoused during the
presidential campaign. More than that, it has several
potentially damaging long-term consequences. First, it risks
losing the large number of partners needed to prosecute the
global war on terrorism. To ferret terrorist groups out of
their many hiding places, we must have broad allied support.
Second, it risks seriously damaging U.S. moral legitimacy,
potentially providing states like India and Pakistan with a
preemptive option that could drive long-standing conflicts
beyond containable bounds.
Finally and perhaps most dangerously, actions without broad
Arab support may inflame the sources of terrorism, causing
unrest and anger throughout the Muslim world. This dynamic
will be worse if Iraq attacks Israel--perhaps with weapons of
mass destruction--and draws them into the conflict. Iran,
which has the potential to seize a reformist path, may well
move away from the United States in the face of attacks that
could next be taken against them. Together, these dynamics
will make achieving peace in the Middle East more difficult
and may well provide the rationale for more terrorist attacks
against Americans.
These concerns do not make military action in Iraq
untenable. They do, however, highlight the depth and
importance of the issues to be addressed before we strike. We
need to ensure that in taking out Saddam, we don't win the
battle and lose the war.
How to Ensure That the United States Can Execute This Operation
Successfully as Well as its Other Military Missions
As you are well aware, Mr. President, the consideration of
military action against Iraq comes at a time when U.S. forces
are actively engaged throughout the world in a range of
missions. Given the operational pressures these forces
currently face, we must ask what the risks and trade-offs
will be of defeating Iraq, particularly if Iraqi forces mass
in Baghdad for urban operations. How many casualties must the
American people be prepared to take in a worst-case scenario?
What will the impact of sustained operations be on so-called
high-demand, low-density assets? What military operations
might we have to forego because of continued demands in Iraq?
Will we still be prepared for the range of other threats that
might emerge throughout the world? With little allied support
and contributions, will we still be able to maintain military
spending on transformational technologies and on sound
quality of life for our forces if we are bearing a huge
wartime cost alone? What will be the impact on the domestic
economy of these resource drains and of the long-term costs
of reconstructing Iraq? These questions must be answered
before any military action commences so that the American
people understand the risks and the sacrifices involved.
I ask these questions only to highlight the complexity of
the undertaking and the need for Congress, the American
people, and our friends around the world to understand
exactly what is at stake and why we must act now. Only such a
comprehensive strategic approach will ensure that we commit
U.S. troops consciously and with full knowledge of the range
of challenges we face--both in the initial campaign and in
the long aftermath to follow. Even a strategy that has
military action as its centerpiece will require great
diplomatic efforts to ensure its success. I look forward to
hearing the administration's answers and to working with you
to find the best course of action.
Sincerely,
Ike Skelton,
Ranking Democrat.
____
Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, March 18, 2003.
The President,
The White House,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President: This is a critical week for our nation
and for the world. As you prepare to make the most difficult
decision of sending our troops into combat, the thoughts and
prayers of all Americans are with you. My colleagues here in
Congress have many different views on the wisdom of action in
Iraq and the severity of its consequences. But we are united
in our support for all the men and women who serve this
nation.
There is no doubt that our forces will be victorious in any
conflict, but there is great potential for a ragged ending to
a war as we deal with the aftermath. I appreciate the efforts
that members of your administration have made to keep me
informed about plans for the administration and
reconstruction of Iraq following military conflict. Your team
has thought about many of the things that will need to be
done.
Secretary Rumsfeld frequently talks about the list he keeps
of things that could go wrong in an Iraq war. I have kept my
own list--of things that could go wrong after the war is
over. The list below is indicative of this broader list. My
hope is that this will be helpful to members of your
administration as you continue to plan for all possibilities.
These are not complete scenarios but rather a series of
possible problems that could occur in some combination.
Internal Divisions and External Influences in Iraq
Without access to Iraq through Turkey, U.S. troops are not
present in northern Iraq in large numbers. Turkey enters
northern Iraq to establish a buffer zone and fighting breaks
out between the Turks and Kurds. A significant U.S. military
force is needed to separate the groups, complicating the
governmental transition and international support.
An uprising in Kirkuk leaves the Kurds in control of areas
of the city and surrounding area. This triggers a large
Turkish invasion to protect the Turkmen minority and to
prevent Kurdish control of oil resources. Again this would
require U.S. military resources with all the attending
effects.
In the event that Turkey crosses into Iraq, Iran may do the
same, ostensibly to stem the
[[Page H10543]]
refugee flows from southern Iraq and to protect Shi'a
interests.
Shi'a populations in the south rebel and undertake attacks
against Sunnis. U.S. troops must step in to protect the
Sunnis and restore peace. These tensions resurface during
attempts to build a federal and representative government.
Urban fighting in the south brings Shi'a into conflict with
Sunnis. The resulting devastation causes a refugee crisis as
Shi'a make for the Iranian border. The results of Saddam's
policy of forced Arabization of areas like Kirkuk yield
dangerous consequences. Groups like the Kurds flow back into
these areas seeking to reclaim their former homes and land,
sparking conflict with Iraqi Arabs.
Attempts to fashion a federal government in Baghdad prove
difficult. Iran is able to establish proxies for its
influence among the Shi'a representatives. Once in Iraq,
infighting breaks out among members of the former Iraqi
opposition in exile. The United States is unable to
transition the administration of Iraq effectively and has to
remain in place, with significant military backing.
The war involves lengthy urban combat, particularly in
Baghdad. Most infrastructure is destroyed resulting in
massive humanitarian problems. The emphasis on humanitarian
aid distracts from efforts to establish a new government.
Once established the government faces massive political
pressure from the sustained humanitarian crisis.
weapons of mass destruction
Saddam uses biological and chemical weapons against
advancing U.S. troops, but also inflicts substantial civilian
casualties. Efforts to stabilize cities and to establish a
government are complicated by the need to deal with the large
number of dead and to decontaminate affected areas.
Saddam uses biological and chemical weapons directly
against civilian populations or against another Arab country
and seeks to affix blame for civilian suffering to the United
States. Over the period of occupation, this resentment
complicates U.S. efforts to maintain support for
reconstruction efforts.
U.S. troops are unable to quickly find all of Saddam's
capabilities, requiring a long, labor-intensive search and
anxiety as to when the task is complete.
Regional leaders, for money or to gain influence, retain
caches of WMD and transfer some to terrorist groups.
Saddam attacks Israel with missiles containing weapons of
mass destruction. Israel retaliates. Arab countries, notably
Saudi Arabia and Jordan, come under intense political
pressure to withdraw their support from the U.S. war effort.
U.S. forces are forced to reposition operational centers into
Iraq and Kuwait, complicating reconstruction and transition
efforts.
oil resources
Saddam sabotages a significant number of wells before his
defeat. Current estimates indicate he may already have wired
up to 1,500 of these wells. The damage takes years to contain
at great economic and environmental cost and removes a major
source of reconstruction funding.
Internal groups, such as the Kurds, seize oil-rich land
before American troops reach the area, causing internal
clashes over these resources. Militant Shi'as seize other
wells in the South.
international support
The United States takes immediate control of Iraq's
administration and of reconstruction. The United Nations
can't agree on how involved to get given the divisions among
the Security Council about the need for conflict. The lack of
UN involvement in the administration makes the European Union
and others less likely to give. This situation delays
reconstruction and puts more of the cost on the United States
and a smaller number of partners.
U.S. reconstruction efforts that give U.S. corporations a
great role at the expense of multilateral organizations and
other participation--as was detailed in yesterday's Wall
Street Journal--spur resentment and again limit the
willingness of others to participate.
american commitment
Stabilization and reconstruction prove more difficult than
expected. U.S. troop requirements approach 200,000--the
figure General Shinseki has mentioned--for a sustained
period. This puts pressure on troop rotations, reservists,
their families, and employers and requires a dramatic
increase in end-strength.
Required funding reaches the figure suggested by a recent
Council on Foreign Relations assessment--$20 billion annually
for several years. During a period of economic difficulty,
the American public calls for greater burdensharing.
It is my hope that none of these eventualities comes to
pass. But as you and all military leaders know, good planning
requires considering the range of possibilities. It also
requires advance preparation of the American people. You have
regularly outlined the reasons for why the United States must
disarm Iraq. I urge you to do the same in explaining why we
must stay with Iraq for the long haul, even with the economic
and military burdens this will entail.
As always, I am willing to help in any way I can to make
this case to my colleagues and the American people.
Sincerely,
Ike Skelton,
Ranking Democrat.
Mr. Speaker, I regret that my advice went unheeded. I believe that
the poor planning for the occupation of Iraq approaches dereliction of
duty. The looting and political chaos that resulted in the wake of the
war was not adequately anticipated. The terrible shape of the utilities
and of the Iraqi oil industry was misjudged. Our allies were not
brought along adequately. Because of the rolling start of the war, not
enough forces were on the ground. All in all, a painful lesson was
learned, a lesson that many young military officers learn early in
their careers: proper planning prevents poor performance.
It is imperative that any plans to withdraw our forces from Baghdad
be properly planned. We must have a clear strategic goal, and specific
steps must be identified that we must follow in order to achieve that
goal. Moreover, those steps must be objective and must be measurable.
An early exit means retreat or defeat.
For the administration to pull our forces out early for the wrong
reasons, let us say for the sake of the upcoming Presidential
elections, before we have achieved our objectives is irresponsible in
the extreme. It risks creating a political vacuum with its resulting
chaos. And into that vacuum, I assure you forces of terrorism and
radical Islam will step. Our objective in going into Iraq was not only
to eliminate weapons of mass destruction and to combat terrorism but
also to plant the seeds for democracy and real change in the region.
Mr. Speaker, that is a worthy goal; but if we pull out early before
Iraq is well launched toward democracy, we will have sown the seeds of
chaos and defeat far worse than we can imagine. No one can predict the
consequences of that chaos, except those consequences will not be good.
We have not seen the President's plans that will enable the military
to begin to withdraw its forces. All we have seen are leaks about the
Pentagon's plans to begin the withdrawal. We have, however, seen a
series of statements by Ambassador Bremer with respect to the seven
steps necessary for the return of ``sovereignty'' to the Iraqi people.
Those are good steps, but in my opinion they do not go nearly far
enough. First, they are directed only to the handoff of full
governmental responsibility to the Iraqi people. Second, they do not
address the conditions to make a successful handoff necessary. And
third, they do not address a much wider range of deeper, long-term
problems.
Here are the six steps that I believe the President should adopt as
necessary measures to be achieved before our forces are withdrawn:
One, there must be a secure environment. Basic public services must
be reestablished. For example, there must be adequate Iraqi police and
courts to deal with public safety concerns and criminal acts. Another
key element is that there should be no appreciable presence of al Qaeda
in Iraq. Saddam Hussein, remember him?, must be captured or we must
know he is dead. If he is captured, we must be confident that the
Iraqis have an adequate judicial system to deal with him and that he is
no longer a threat to us or to the Iraqi people.
The Iraqi army must be reconstituted, at least insofar as necessary
to provide for basic security needs and to secure Iraq's borders. Iraq
must make certain that neither terrorists nor weapons of mass
destruction come across its borders.
All weapons of mass destruction must be accounted for and the basic
production facilities for weapons of mass destruction must be
destroyed. In addition, the vast arsenal of conventional munitions,
mortar and artillery rounds, small arms, rockets and missiles must be
accounted for and either destroyed or secured.
Two, basic services. Much progress has been made in getting the
lights and electricity back on, but much more remains to be done.
Water, roads, sewers, bridges, indeed, the whole transportation
network, needs to be repaired or well on its way to being repaired. The
education system must be modernized, the universities reinvigorated.
This does not need to be accomplished prior to our withdrawal, but we
and the Iraqi people must be confident that progress is being made
because in the absence of progress, there can be no confidence that
democracy will take root and will succeed.
[[Page H10544]]
Three, the establishment of a new constitution. I agree with the
procedures laid out by Ambassador Bremer. We must move as rapidly as
possible to sponsor the drafting of a constitution that reflects the
genuine aspirations of the Iraqi people. In that regard, I note that
Ambassador Bremer did not call for the Bill of Rights for the Iraqi
people. He did not call for essential internationally recognized human
rights to be adopted as part of the constitution. Mr. Speaker, I
believe nothing is more important than the adoption of these basic
human rights, including respect for the individual, due process in
courts, full political and economic rights for women, and freedom of
the press.
Four, the basic elements of a government must be in place. The Iraqi
Governing Council is a start, but the members of that body have been
selected by us. We need to move rapidly to put in place a government
that is respected by the people. I worry greatly that if we do not
rapidly begin to give the Iraqis greater authority over their day-to-
day affairs, hard-liner Islamic fundamentalists like Sadr with private
militias of their own will try to take power. These militia are willing
to use violence to pursue their political objectives to establish an
Islamic state. We cannot let chaos reign and these Islamic
fundamentalists take power.
In that regard, it is imperative that the new government be one that
respects democratic institutions. For example, the army, police and
security services must be ones that are accountable to their democratic
leaders. Any former members of the Baath Party who take positions of
responsibility must be properly vetted and be individuals in whom we
and the Iraqis have confidence that they will respect democratic
institutions.
Five, the economy. It is also imperative that major steps be made
toward getting the economy going again. We did not adequately
anticipate the terrible shape of the Iraqi oil industry, and oil
revenues have been a disappointment. Progress is being made, but more
needs to be made before we can be confident that the Iraqis can take
over. Other areas of the economy are also in shambles, and much work
must be done. Entrepreneurs in Iraq, in this country, and among Iraq's
neighbors and our allies must be given the opportunity to move in as
rapidly as possible and get the economy going again. An essential
element of that, of course, is a secure environment and a functioning
judicial system that is regarded as sufficiently open and fair as to
encourage and support foreign investment.
Six, international support. We must ensure that there is wide support
in the United Nations, among our allies, and with Iraq's neighbors for
the rebuilding measures we have taken. They must be willing to commit
forces where necessary and resources when available to help rebuild
Iraq's infrastructure, support its government, and grow its economy.
They must be committed to supporting democratic institutions as they
emerge.
Mr. Speaker, if the President does not adopt a strategy of
incorporating these six points, I believe a premature withdrawal of
American forces would lead to a disaster. I want all the forces to come
home as rapidly as possible, but I also want the mission to succeed.
Americans are fond of saying, ``These colors don't run.'' Well, Mr.
Speaker, I do not want to run before we have done our job. The
sacrifices of all of our brave men and women who have died or have been
wounded must not be in vain. The losses and sacrifices made by the
Iraqi people must not be in vain. The stakes are just too great. We
must accomplish our mission, and the President must lay out a strategy
to achieve those objectives before he begins the withdrawal of American
forces. To do otherwise is to sacrifice national security for political
survival.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I want to take a moment to thank the
gentleman from Missouri for his service and the position that he holds.
We in the Congress, of course, look up to him as our ranking member of
the House Armed Services Committee for his advice on our veterans and
on military matters, and I appreciate his service.
Mr. Speaker, given that our country is currently engaged in a war in
both Iraq and Afghanistan, the members of the Congressional Black
Caucus feel compelled to pay homage to our soldiers at home and abroad.
{time} 2045
Our brave men and women continue to risk their lives in order that
others may enjoy freedom. In fact, we have come to the House floor on
numerous occasions to express our appreciation for the dedication,
courage, and sacrifice of our Armed Forces. Tonight Mr. Speaker, the
Congressional Black Caucus again stands before this House to honor
those currently serving in the over 100 nations around the globe where
the United States military has operations, and we especially pause to
remember those who laid the foundation for our freedom.
Mr. Speaker, the United States military is among the most diverse
institutions in our country; and it is this diversity in gender,
ethnicity, skill, and talent that contributes most to our military's
awesome strength. Throughout history, heroic citizens of our great
Nation have transcended individual prejudice and intolerance to unite
in the pursuit of liberty and in their valiant protection of our
borders.
However, many of these same individuals have too often been
unrecognized and forgotten once the final shot has been fired and the
last drop of blood has been shed. So as my favorite theologian Charles
Swindoll, who has penned these words that are imbedded in the DNA of
every cell of my brain, Swindoll says ``The greatest deeds often
performed are those that are performed by those who are unknown,
unseen, unappreciated, and unapplauded.'' And we want to make sure that
our veterans do not fall into any of those categories.
And it was the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), my good friend,
the ranking Democrat on our House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, who
penned these words, and they are just so brilliant, I just wanted to
repeat the gentleman from Illinois' (Mr. Evans) words. He said, ``50
million have held the venerable title of veteran. More than 1 million
have died while wearing the uniform. It is this generation's
responsibility, and that of every subsequent generation, to make sure
the numbers have faces, lives that connect to them. We are losing 1,500
veterans a day. Each death represents a life, another rich, colorful,
dynamic, dramatic, brutal, or heartening story. The gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Evans) goes on to say: ``The only way this and future
generations can hold dear to what our veterans have done, can
understand the sacrifice, is to record and share their stories and to
continue the traditions of honoring their service such as those
observed on November 11. We must not lose their deeds to time or
neglect. The greatest gift in return for what these extraordinary
individuals have given us is to make certain their lives and
experiences are perpetuated, to recount their sacrifices to every
generation.'' Finally, he goes on to say: ``War may begin over real
estate, mineral rights, religion, or boundaries, but ultimately it is
about people and lives. It is about one man or woman seeking to make
certain that the next one can live freely and have a say in his or her
own destiny. It is about sacrifices to ensure our Nation and world in
which the rights of the individual are acknowledged, respected, and
cherished.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the wonderful gentlewoman from the great
State of California (Ms. Lee), the daughter of a veteran.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, first let me thank the gentleman from Maryland,
our chairman, for once again organizing this very important special
order tonight recognizing the service of Americans veterans. Once
again, let me just commend the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings)
for his leadership and for ensuring that our country understands and
recognizes that the Congressional Black Caucus stands tall here in this
Congress on each and every issue with which our country is faced.
Yes, I am a very proud daughter of a veteran, and I represent a State
which boasts the highest veteran population, ensuring that veterans
receive their benefits of course, and recognition for their
contributions is, therefore, a major priority for me. We owe every
veteran around this country an enormous debt of gratitude. And we here
in Congress really do have the opportunity and the obligation to honor
that
[[Page H10545]]
debt by providing veterans with the benefits that they were guaranteed,
including adequate benefits for veterans, surviving spouses and
families, burial rights, health care, disabled tax credits, and home
loan assistance. This issue, as my colleagues know, is not a partisan
issue but a fundamental issue of fairness.
In July, during consideration of the fiscal year 2004 VA-HUD
appropriations bill, my colleagues on both sides of the aisle were
really, quite frankly, embarrassed by the Republicans' leadership
attempt to shortchange to the tune of $1.4 billion those who sacrificed
the most for our Nation. So yesterday this body unanimously voted to
increase a host of veterans' benefits. But it has yet to deal with the
most pressing veterans' issues like concurrent receipt legislation
which would extend full retirement and health care benefits and end the
practice of unjustly subtracting disability payments from veterans'
pensions, creating, in effect, a special disabled veterans' tax. So
that is why we have filed a discharge petition to bring H.R. 2569, the
Salute to Veterans and the Armed Forces Act of 2003, to the floor. And
tonight I call upon my Republican colleagues to join us in eliminating
this unfair and very outrageous tax on our Nation's veterans.
Mr. Speaker, on November 11 we will remember our veterans, as we
should really do each and every day. Injustice in housing must end. It
is shameful that veterans are twice as likely to become homeless as
nonveterans, and female veterans are about four times as likely to
become homeless as their counterparts. It is also shameful that despite
the fact that 76 percent of these veterans are on the street in large
part due to alcohol, drug, or mental health problems, or a combination,
quite frankly, of all three, that we here in Congress fail to provide
the necessary resources to help them get back on their feet.
Looking back on the plight of so many of our Nation's homeless
veterans, I cannot help but think and remember that so many are the
victims of the 1980's and ``Reaganomics'' and today's struggling
economy, and I am outraged that we are allowing their numbers to grow.
Finally, when we talk about the veterans and the failures of this
country to fulfill its promises to them, we must also discuss and
recognize the racial disparities and discriminations that affect every
aspect of American society including, yes, veterans. People of color
have served this country in numbers far out of proportion to their
percentages within population.
How is this the case? The harsh truth is that economic forces
oftentimes compel minorities to assume the risks of service, yet
historically they have not received its rewards in equal measure. The
truth is African American veterans were denied employment
opportunities, education, housing, and, of course, jobs returning to
America after fighting for America. I remember this very well. They are
truly heroes. They are real patriots.
The creation of the Bureau of Colored Troops during the Civil War,
the famous Buffalo Soldiers of the Indian Campaigns, the 92nd Division
and the 761st Tank Battalion and African American women, who served in
the Women's Army Corps and the Waves during World War II, and the 24th
Regiment of the Korean War are only a few examples of the famous and
forgotten African Americans who defended this Nation.
In many ways our military has become the most integrated institution
in this country. Despite its advancements, however, in the treatment of
blacks and minorities in the military, there remains issues that really
do need to be addressed, legacies of biased drafting procedures,
advancement, honors, distribution of benefits, and really back to it,
the treatment upon coming back home after returning from active duty.
We must honor the legacy of all veterans as members of the
Congressional Black Caucus tonight are doing. We choose to highlight
the service of African American and other minority veterans. We respect
their service and their role really as leaders. And I would like to
just thank all of those who have contributed to American history for
their service and for their sacrifice. This Congress must step up to
the plate and put our money where our mouth is in a very real way, and
that is to support our veterans.
In a note from the Veterans for Peace organization, I was reminded
that Veterans Day was once called Armistice Day, the anniversary of the
end of World War I, of course, the ``War to end all Wars.'' Tragically,
that war has been followed by many others. Let us honor our veterans by
working each and every day for freedom, for peace, and for justice.
Once again, I want to thank the chairman of the Congressional Black
Caucus for his unbelievable leadership, focus, and for his commitment
to honor in a real way our veterans.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman for her
comments, and I just want to talk to her for just a moment.
She said something that really touched me, and I think that many
people who have moved throughout our neighborhoods know this, but there
are so many veterans who are homeless, and it is so painful. When I go
to our drug treatment centers, it is not unusual for me to just sit
down and talk to the people there and just find out a little bit about
their history. And I notice that it is interesting that when people who
are a little bit older, I would say maybe one out of every six or seven
that I talk to is a veteran, and a lot of them are, of course,
complaining about various things, but the fact is a lot of them link a
lot of their problems to their service.
When a person serves, when they volunteer and they go in or they are
drafted or whatever the case may have been, they go in to serve their
country. But I also think our country, and I think this is what the
gentlewoman was talking about too, has a duty to take care of them when
they get back, because after all, I mean it is very nice for us to
stand here and say all those wonderful things about our soldiers with
the ongoing conflict we have certainly in Iraq, but the fact is there
is that duty, and just as we lift them up and applaud them as they go
off to war and just as we pray for them and we hold them in high esteem
when they go off to fight our battles and defend our freedom, when they
come back, they should come back to a situation that makes them whole.
Just this evening, as a matter of fact, on one of the national news
shows, there was a just a very painful story of a young man who just
came back from Iraq, and I know he is not a veteran yet, but when he
got back, his bills had amounted up to so much between him and his
family. He was a National Guardsman, and they had some kind of a
furniture repair business or something of that nature, but in the
course of his being gone for the period he was gone, his income from
the business went down 80 percent, and now he finds himself in a
position where his wife and he have decided for whatever reasons to go
their separate ways.
{time} 2100
But the thing that really touched me was he had apparently an
opportunity to now get out of the military, but he said he wanted to
stay. He said that he was an Honor Guard, one of the men who go to the
funerals and fold up the flag and deliver it to the family. He said
that he wanted to stay because he felt that that was so important.
When I heard that, I said to myself, we really ought to make sure
that we do right by our veterans. It is not enough for us to come and
applaud them. It is not enough for us to come and thank them. We have
really got to support them.
Ms. LEE. The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) is absolutely
correct. I agonize every time I walk down the streets in my community
and see veterans who are homeless, and then find that hospitals are
closing and that they cannot get their medication and they do not have
anyplace to sleep.
I think it is a shame and disgrace that we have allowed that to
happen to our veterans, because here they are, proudly serving our
country. We should roll out the red carpet upon their return, and we
should have every program, every provision for them returning to either
civilian life or life here in the military. That should be made easy,
that transition.
Instead, what do we have? We have cuts in their funding, we have lack
of medical care for them, and we have many of our veterans coming back
[[Page H10546]]
from different parts of the world with unknown diseases, and we cannot
get them in for treatment or diagnosis or for any kind of medical care.
It is mind-boggling to me.
I will tell the gentleman, I think we need to really look at what we
mean when we say we support our troops, because, in supporting our
troops, for me, that means, yes, protecting them and keeping them from
harm's way, but also upon their return making sure that their families
and their lives are not only made whole, but that they receive the type
of incentives and the type of real action, affirmative action, that we
should provide for them, because they have done such a job for this
country.
Mr. CUMMINGS. When the gentlewoman talks about disabilities, I want
her to go back a moment and talk about concurrent receipt. It seems to
be just an unfair situation, when you are injured and you go leave the
military on a disability and then your disability payments are then
deducted from the funds that you are supposed to be getting. Can the
gentlewoman explain that to us?
Ms. LEE. That, in essence, is taxing disabled veterans for
disabilities that they unfortunately acquired while serving this
country.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Basically what is happening is they are taking away
money.
Ms. LEE. They are taking away money from them after they have been
hurt. That is mean. That is mean, and I think it immoral. Somehow, the
entire country needs to wake up to that and say how unjust this is and
correct this. That is why H.R. 2569 has got to come to the floor.
Mr. CUMMINGS. I agree. I get letters all the time from our veterans
on that issue of concurrent receipt. As a matter of fact, I just got
something today where a gentleman from Oklahoma was just very upset. He
said, ``I wish you all would address that, because it is just so unfair
to me.'' He is extremely angry.
Ms. LEE. He should be. What we are doing is making veterans pay for
their disabilities, which are no fault of their own. It should be just
the reverse. We should pay them a stipend, an additional benefit, for
what they have done.
Mr. CUMMINGS. I want to thank the gentlewoman for her support. I
really appreciate it.
Mr. Speaker, as I conclude, I just want to go on and say that
although the U.S. military has traditionally been, as my colleague has
said, a diverse institution, it has not always been an integrated
institution. From Crispus Attucks, who suffered the first shot during
the Revolutionary War, to the Tuskegee Airmen, who never lost a single
bomber under their escort during World War II, African Americans have
answered the call to service whenever our country was in need. Yet
these same soldiers have not always been treated fairly by their
country.
Even today, our veterans, all of our veterans, are not treated, as
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) has said, with dignity and
the honor that they deserve. How else can we explain the things that
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) just talked about, cutting
the veterans budget in this year's budget resolution? How else can we
explain proposing to close veterans hospitals around the country when
they are in dire need of care? We must change this course and honor our
veterans in word and in deed.
So, Mr. Speaker, I stand on the floor of the House tonight feeling a
sense of pride; pride for the ultimate sacrifice that our men and women
have made throughout our history, so that I and my colleagues might
stand on this floor tonight.
I want to just yield back to the gentlewoman from California (Ms.
Lee) with regard to some issues that she wants to discuss.
Ms. LEE. Just very briefly. As the gentleman was talking, I am
reminded of my childhood now. I can remember very vividly men in
uniform, black men in uniform, being denied entrance to a restaurant or
to a movie theater, or being forced to go to a water fountain that said
``Colored Only,'' in uniform. I can remember this.
I have so many unfortunate memories of proud African American men in
their uniforms being turned away, being discriminated against for one
reason, and that is because they were black. I think that they are true
heroes, they are true patriots; and I hope that history will record
their service to this great country. But also I think we need to make
sure that history is accurate in its writing and in its history and not
cloud over the fact that men in uniform did not have equal access to
basic kinds of services, such as a water fountain.
Mr. CUMMINGS. It is very interesting, in my district we just had an
opportunity for some African American students to talk to the
superintendent of schools. This is one of the best school systems in
the country, Howard County, outside of Baltimore. The African American
students were talking to the school board, talking about the difference
in the disparity between their achievement and those of white children.
One of the things that they said that just was so profound is they
said it is so important that we know our history. I chimed in and said,
``It is not just important that you know it. That is not enough. It is
very important that all of your classmates know it too, because then I
think the world can appreciate all that has been contributed, not only
by African Americans, but by this whole melting pot in making this
country what it is.''
I cannot forget as you were talking, Jessie Jackson, Sr., talking
about when he came back from war. He had to sit in the back of the
train, and a lot of the white German prisoners were allowed to sit in
the front of the train.
The reason I understand why you raised these issues is we want to
make sure on the one hand that we honor our veterans, but we realize
that honoring our veterans is giving the total story, or, as somebody
used to say in one of the movies, ``giving the rest of the picture.''
Ms. LEE. The gentleman is right. History must be recorded accurately.
I think only by telling the truth, by putting forth the true history of
any group of people, but especially our veterans, whom we are
discussing tonight, that has got to be a priority for our young people,
because how will they know what to do in the future? How will they know
how to live? What kind of values will they embrace, if they do not know
of the struggles and of the challenges and of the fights that many
people in this country have waged?
So history must be recorded, and it must be recorded accurately.
Mr. CUMMINGS. As we conclude, I think when one looks at the stories
that the gentlewoman told about when she was a little girl and would
see what the veterans would return to, and the water fountain that said
``Whites Only,'' the fact is that so many of these soldiers, think
about the Buffalo Soldiers and many others. Although they knew that
this country was not necessarily treating them fairly, they still stood
up. As a matter of fact, many of them were beating down the doors
trying to stand up for this country.
Not only do we pause here tonight to thank the living veterans, but
we thank those and their spirits who may have gone on who were fighting
for a country that they knew was not necessarily treating them right,
but they were always fighting for their future. They were fighting for
generations yet unborn.
Let me say that when one thinks about somebody putting their life on
the line and knowing that they would return to a situation in this
country where they were not treated fairly, but puts their life on the
line today so that, not only their offspring, but even the offspring of
those that might not have treated them right could have freedom and
could have opportunity and could have convenience, that is a powerful
statement. It really is.
So we come here not only to honor the veterans who can hear us
tonight, but we come here also to honor those who have gone on and who
dreamed a dream that the world would be better that they were fighting
for.
Ms. LEE. There are many veterans who are still with us who are
getting older now who I have the privilege to know and work with, and
those are the Tuskegee Airmen. What a wonderful legacy they have left.
I will never forget when I was working for our great statesman,
Congressman Ron Dellums. I was on his staff and we worked very hard to
get a display in the museum, I believe it was in the NASA museum, of
the Tuskegee
[[Page H10547]]
Airmen. That was a real fight, but we got it there. Millions of people
were able to read about, see and honor the Tuskegee Airmen because of
Ron Dellums and because of the work we did to make sure that they
received a prominent place in the museum here.
Mr. CUMMINGS. So many people here hear the Congressional Black Caucus
stand up over and over again and talk about the war and talk about our
objections to the war; but one thing they always hear from us over and
over again is that we support our troops, that we support our men and
women who are out there fighting. But we have come here tonight to say
not only do we support our troops, but we also support our veterans
with everything we have got. I used to say we support them 100 percent.
I change that to 1 million percent.
Ms. LEE. That is right. My final comment is, as I said earlier, I
think we need to put our money where our mouth is now and try to fight
like we know how to fight to make sure that each and every nickel that
they deserve they receive.
Mr. CUMMINGS. So, Mr. Speaker, again as I have said before, there are
so many deeds that go unnoticed, and the ones who perform them are
often unseen, unnoticed, unappreciated, and unapplauded. Tonight we in
the Congressional Black Caucus take a moment to salute those who have
given so much so that we might live the lives that we live.
____________________