[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 161 (Thursday, December 15, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H11870-H11871]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            IRAQI ELECTIONS

  Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of 
order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, with the holidays upon us, some Members 
of this body have been working really hard to divert attention from 
much of the pressing issues that we should be working on in this 
Congress. They have been doing this by complaining about some kind of 
war on Christmas.
  You can always tell when their poll numbers are down. That is when 
they reach into their bag of culture war tricks and gin up a divisive 
controversy that has nothing to do with Americans' real challenges and 
Americans' real aspirations. It is really interesting, my colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle are very interested in preserving the 
symbols of Christmas. But the war they are supporting and the budgets 
they are passing, more Scrooge than Santa, demonstrate that they have 
forgotten the true meaning of Christmas, particularly the part about 
peace on Earth and goodwill towards all.
  Besides, how many casualties have there been in this so-called war on 
Christmas? Here is a hint. Several thousand less than the war on Iraq. 
Today, without a doubt, we should congratulate the Iraqi people for 
what appears to be a successful, high turnout election. For the third 
time this year, courageous Iraqi citizens have enthusiastically 
exercised their democratic rights.
  But successful elections do not, and cannot, obscure the devastating 
national tragedy that is the Iraq war. It does not change the fact that 
over 2,100 Americans have died for weapons of mass destruction that 
never existed. It does not change the fact that this war has turned 
Iraq into a hotbed of terrorist activity. It does not change the fact 
that our troops are sitting ducks for the insurgents who have been 
emboldened, not deterred, by our military presence in Iraq.
  Now that the elections are over, the question is, What now? What next 
in terms of U.S. policy towards Iraq? Aside from trying to spin it and 
take credit for it, what is the President's reaction to this Iraqi 
election? All indications are that even with a modest reduction in 
troops, he will insist that we must stay the course. That means 
continuing with this bloody occupation that has killed or maimed 
thousands of our people, has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars 
and turned the entire world against us. Furthermore, he will not see 
the irony in celebrating Iraqi democracy while we use United States 
taxpayer money to manufacture propaganda and spread it in the Iraqi 
press. He will ignore the contradiction in praising Iraqi freedom while 
violating civil liberties at home by pushing for a more heavy-handed 
and invasive sequel to the PATRIOT Act.
  Here is the bottom line: a successful Iraqi election should, at the 
very least, reinforce the imperative of bringing our troops home. If 
Iraq is truly able to self-govern, then we have no business occupying 
their country and meddling in their affairs.
  I have argued all year long that it is time to restore Iraqi 
sovereignty and give Iraq back to the Iraqi people. If the election is 
a watershed moment, as the White House claims, then what is the 
continued justification for having our troops over there in harm's way?
  Now is the time to enlist the support of the international community 
to establish an interim security force for Iraq. But that is just the 
first step. As I have written to the President in a letter signed by 61 
other Members of the House, the United States must also launch a 
diplomatic offensive recasting our role in Iraq as a reconstruction 
partner, rather than a military occupier.
  We must also lead the way in establishing an international peace 
commission to oversee the post-war reconciliation and coordinate peace 
talks between Iraq's various factions.
  Madam Speaker, sometimes it seems like the only people who still 
support this war work in the big white building down Pennsylvania 
Avenue. There is barely any constituency left for our Iraq policy. The 
majority of the American people are not behind it; our global allies 
are not behind it. The Iraqi people are not behind it. Even Iraqi 
leaders, Sunnis, Shiite and Kurdish alike, who agree on practically 
nothing, have united around the call for the United States military to 
leave. With the Iraqi people having voted once

[[Page H11871]]

again, let us offer the ultimate vote of confidence in their democracy. 
Let us reward the self-sufficiency they have demonstrated by giving 
them their country back and bringing our American soldiers home.

                          ____________________