[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 48 (Tuesday, March 20, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H2724-H2730]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       30-SOMETHING WORKING GROUP

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to address the House 
once again. I am glad to see you there in the Chair. Also, I am glad to 
be joined by Mr. Murphy and also Mr. Ryan. We are pleased Mr. Ryan can 
be here at the top of the 30-Something Working Group hour.
  We come to the floor every week, sometimes two or three times a week, 
to talk about the great things that are happening here in the House, 
talk about how we are getting better not only as to oversight but 
appropriations, and also budgeting, making sure that we budget so we no 
longer have to borrow money from foreign nations.
  The discussion here tonight is important because we have the 
emergency war supplemental that is coming to the floor on Thursday. The 
Appropriations Committee dealt with that today. To have such an 
important Member like Mr. Ryan who is a member of the Appropriations 
Committee, they have been doing quite a bit of work. I know he has a 
lot to share with us making sure that we sling-shot the troops in for a 
win, and also the folks who have served our country, the men and women 
who have served our country in the past.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to note there is $1.7 billion in 
this bill for health care; it is $1.7 billion more than the President 
has asked for. Also as relates to veterans health care, there is $1.7 
billion more than what the President requested.
  We had a chart on the floor last week that talked about Democrats 
when we were in the minority putting forth proposals to make sure that 
our veterans had what they needed once they left Afghanistan and Iraq, 
and even for those still in the service.
  We have also put additional dollars in as relates to readiness, and 
we will talk about that because we have some definitions we want to 
share with Members.
  But since Mr. Ryan has been spending a lot of time in the 
Appropriations Committee working on these very issues, I thought I 
would yield to my good friend and allow him to elaborate on the very 
work they have been doing over the last couple of weeks. I said before 
you came in, Mr. Ryan, that we are so happy you are here at the top of 
the 30-Something Working Group hour because you are an appropriator and 
that is an important position.

                              {time}  1930

  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate it, and no more important 
than the Ways and Means Committee, of which you serve on, and all your 
hard work over the past 4 years in the United States Congress, previous 
to that in the Florida Senate, previous to that in the Florida House, 
following in your mom's footsteps, who was also an appropriator in the 
United States Congress. So it is an honor to follow in her footsteps.
  I think there is a couple of very important points that we want to 
make in regards to this bill that we have before us on Thursday. It 
passed out of the Appropriations Committee last Thursday, and this, in 
essence, in fact, in reality, is the piece of legislation that will 
help change the course of our Iraq policy.
  The President has had free rein for the past 5 years from a 
Republican Congress that just went along with everything that he wanted 
to do, and I found it funny this weekend, as we were watching some of 
the weekend shows, and I was watching Meet the Press and former 
Congressman Tom DeLay was on, Richard Perle, one of the top, 
President's top defense advisers was on, and they were arguing that

[[Page H2725]]

if we pull out of Iraq, that somehow the sky's going to fall, okay, and 
that this whole thing, that Iraq is going to turn into a catastrophe, 
and it is going to fall apart; it is going to spin out of control.
  I just could not help but to think that these people, Mr. Speaker, 
have absolutely no credibility to comment on what is going on in Iraq. 
They can talk and they can say what they need to say, but the bottom 
line is they have expressed their opinion over the past 5 years, and it 
is difficult to find any statements that they have made that have been 
either factual or predictions that they have made that came true.
  I want to say a couple of things about this bill that we are going to 
pass.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Please say it.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. We are saying basically and General Petraeus is 
saying this. Now they are saying that we are going to need until summer 
to figure out whether or not the surge is working. In our bill that we 
are passing, that we are going to pass on Thursday, it says by July 1, 
which is the summer, that if by July 1 there is no progress being made, 
that we immediately begin to withdraw our troops down in 180 days; and 
if by October 1 the President does not certify that the benchmarks that 
he came up with are met, we begin to get out of there; and at the 
absolute latest, we start withdrawing March of next year and have 
everybody home by August of 2008.
  Here is what I want to say, because here is the big argument that we 
had. We are saying that there are benchmarks that they need to meet, 
and if they do not meet them, they are deadlines, and we are coming 
home. What we are hearing from the other side is that you cannot have 
benchmarks, you cannot possibly have any benchmarks, you cannot tie the 
President's hands. Well, actually, it is funny.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. When did you pass this legislation? I mean, pass 
it out of Appropriations Committee, when did that happen?
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Thursday it passed out of committee.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. That just happened. That just happened.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. That is right.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. On Thursday?
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. That is right, and now all our friends on the other 
side are saying, you cannot possibly set a deadline, you cannot 
possibly tie the President's hands. Very interesting when you go back 
and do a little research.
  In June of 1997, when our troops were on their way to Bosnia under 
President Clinton, House Republicans brought to the floor an amendment 
that would, guess what, set a timeline and a date certain for 
withdrawal from the U.S. peacekeeping mission in Bosnia, a mission that 
was only 18 months old. So all of the Republicans who say that we 
cannot possibly be for a timeline were for a timeline 10 years ago in 
Bosnia.
  Now, our friend from Indiana Mr. Buyer, who we had a nice debate with 
over the resolution a few weeks ago, offered an amendment that by 
December 15, 1997, President Clinton was required to report to Congress 
on political and military conditions in Bosnia. By June 30 of 1998, all 
troops had to be withdrawn. That was an amendment that the now-ranking 
member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs offered in 1997, and you 
will never guess all of the Republicans, members of leadership today, 
who voted for that amendment, and now all of the sudden they are 
saying, you cannot possibly be for a timeline or a date certain, and on 
and on and on.
  We will continue to go through this debate. This will be the debate 
the next couple of weeks, but the Republicans in 1997, some of the top 
leaders in Congress today, supported a date certain that we would come 
out of Bosnia, withdraw the troops, and that was only 18 months into 
Bosnia and only $7 billion, and here we are today, 48 months, $379 
billion, and over 3,200 American lives.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. We are within our fifth year now, our fifth 
year, and Mr. Speaker, I always say there is nothing like the 
Congressional Record. That is the reason why the 30-something Working 
Group, we like third-party validators, and we love the Congressional 
Record because that is the reason why we meet. That is the reason why 
we make sure we have what we need to have to give good, accurate 
information to the Members.
  But we have a very important Member that is on the floor that is a 
member of not only the Financial Services Committee, but also 
Government Oversight, that has their work cut out as it relates to 
making sure that this government is efficient, and that is Mr. Murphy. 
I think that it is very important that we hear from him and some of the 
information that he has to share, because a lot of the information we 
have now is from Mr. Murphy's committee.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I understand the 
Appropriations Committee is a very important place, Ways and Means is 
very important.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. We are all important.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. We are all important in our own ways.
  Government Oversight and Reform, though, that was a committee that 
was a little sleepy here for the last few years. I have not been here 
with you for the last few years, but I was a watcher. I think I could 
see what was happening down here in C-SPAN. You did not see many 
oversight hearings. You did not see a lot from the Armed Services 
Committee, the Government Oversight Committee exercising what used to 
be the constitutional prerogative of the coequal branch, which is the 
legislative branch.
  Here is how things have changed. Let me put this where people can see 
it.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Nothing like a good chart.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. I want to display an important number 
here: 104. I will tell you why that number matters. That is the 
hearings on issues related to the Iraq War just this year; 104 
different hearings have been held.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Those just happened.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. That just happened.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Another thing that is so very, very important, 
is his name David Broder, the conservative writer? I was home reading a 
hometown paper. Some folks in this town admit that they do not read the 
paper, but I do, and he wrote an article saying no blank checks out of 
this Congress, and it talked about oversight hearings and talked about 
what is happening in Justice, Mr. Speaker, and it talked about what is 
happening in some of the other Federal agencies. But he ended the 
article by saying it really does not change government. It does. This 
is where he is wrong. It does.
  Half of the things that we know now about Walter Reed, most of the 
things that we know now about the Iraq war is that the Congress is now 
carrying out its constitutional responsibility, and that is to have 
oversight. So I just wanted to, just if we continue like Mr. Ryan was 
saying, listening to these voices of the past, saying let us stay in 
the same direction, oh, do not worry about having oversight hearings, 
where were these voices when folks were giving away millions of dollars 
in special interest tax cuts to the superwealthy and to the 
superconnected? So I think it is important we are on the right track.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. It used to be that, you are right, it was 
60 Minutes and New York Times and The New Yorker. That was the 
oversight branch in our Federal Government. It was the press. We are 
thankful that they actually brought some things to light.
  But what we have learned just in the first 2 months, what we have 
brought out in these oversight hearings are really stunning to the 
American people. Nine billion dollars put out in cash on wooden 
pallets, thrown out of SUVs in sacks as they drove down the street, 
unaccounted for, do not know where it went, have no idea where it went.
  We have got Blackwater, a contractor out there, keeping the diplomats 
and some American military personnel safe. Well, we find out that the 
government's role in overseeing Blackwater and a lot of these other 
contractors, you know what we did? We contracted that out, too. We 
contracted that out, too. Blackwater took its responsibility and 
contracted somebody else, and they contracted somebody else. Everybody 
made a dime along the way. These were things that you did not hear 
about in these halls until we got here.
  So the bill that you outlined, it does the right thing for our 
troops. It does

[[Page H2726]]

the right thing for our veterans. There are some other pieces that we 
can talk about, how it does the right thing for kids, the right things 
for farmers, but also does the right thing for taxpayers because it 
finally gives some accountability in how we spend these dollars. We 
would like to see an end to these dollars. But while we are spending 
money, at least finally we are going to have some accountability for 
those dollars.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. The President has to deal with Congress now, and 
what is in this bill I think holds the President accountable. This bill 
does not just hold the Iraqis accountable, but it holds the President 
accountable.
  The benchmarks that are in this supplement that we are going to pass 
are the President's benchmarks that he outlined in January that we need 
to hit. Now, if we do not hit them, then what do we do? The President 
says, do not tie my hands. We are saying, these are your benchmarks. We 
have been there for a long time, and if they do not step up, the Iraqi 
troops do not step up, it is time for us to go.
  The bottom line is that there is no incentive for the Iraqis to step 
up because at this point they feel like we will stay there forever, and 
we are saying that we are not going to be there forever; get your act 
together.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. I think it is important, as we start to look at 
this, I cannot help but reflect on the fact that as of 10 a.m. today, 
and that is today, that we have lost 3,222 men and women in Iraq. I 
mean, that is not a small number when we look at the sacrifices that 
have been made. Also, we are looking at another 13,415 wounded that 
have returned to duty, and 10,722 wounded that cannot return to duty. 
Then we have folks that are whining about having some accountability in 
what we now call 5 years later emergency supplemental funding.
  I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, for the Members to understand 
because we want to come to the floor, we do not want a Member going 
back to their district saying they did not understand what was in the 
bill because we know it is on the other side of the aisle.
  Mr. Ryan pointed that out we have some folks that are just going to 
vote on principle; I am going to vote against this because it was not 
my idea. I am going to vote against it because I am a Republican. Well, 
guess what? The American people voted last November for leadership, not 
saying that I am going to send a Democrat or Republican. We had 
Republicans that were tenured in this House, served 10-, 15-year terms 
unelected because they were following partisan politics. It is very, 
very important that we look at the bipartisanship in this.
  I will yield because I was about to make a point on the readiness 
issue.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Because I have to take off a few minutes early, and 
I want to go through real quick, I want to talk about what these folks 
who say they are going to vote against this bill, what they are voting 
against from the veterans' standpoint, okay.
  Now, these are folks who consistently say, Mr. Speaker, we support 
the troops, work for the troops. We have got to get the troops back. I 
think we all believe that, but there will be an opportunity on Thursday 
to really put your voting card where all the rhetoric is.
  Defense health care, we add $1.7 billion of an increase to the 
President's request. Here is what you are voting against if you vote 
against the supplemental. You are voting against an additional $450 
million for post-traumatic stress disorder and counseling.
  You are going to vote against $450 million for traumatic brain injury 
care and research, and if you have been to Walter Reed, as we all have, 
you will see unbelievable brain injuries.
  You will be voting against $730 million to prevent health care fee 
increases for our troops.
  You are going to vote against $20 million to address the problem at 
Walter Reed, and you are going to vote against $14.8 million for burn 
care.
  Now, that is just defense health care. Now veterans health care. Now, 
we have got to support these veterans coming back; an additional $1.7 
billion above the President's request for veterans health care.
  If you vote against this supplemental, here is what you are voting 
against.

                              {time}  1945

  You are voting against $550 million to address the backlog in 
maintaining VA health care facilities. You will vote against $250 
million for medical administration to ensure there is sufficient 
personnel to support the growing number of Iraqi and Afghanistan troops 
coming back. That was the major problem at Walter Reed because of the 
contracting issue, because some people had to make some money on the 
deal; $229 million for treating the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. It 
is a growing number, $100 million for contract mental health care and 
$62 million to help speed up the process.
  Now, there are other things in here. We are going to talk about 
readiness.
  But if you vote against this, that is what you are voting against. I 
would hate to see the political commercials that may be run if you are 
on the other end of this thing.
  I mean, that is just, I wouldn't want to be in that position, but 
that is what is in the bill. So rhetoric is rhetoric, action is action, 
and it is $1.7 billion more for defense health care, $1.7 billion more 
for veterans health care.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Before Mr. Meek talks about readiness, let 
me just make one more point on top of that. It seemed that for years 
this Congress, the Republicans who set the policy for this war, didn't 
view the cost of the war as including taking care of the soldiers when 
they came back from Iraq and Afghanistan, that the cost of the war was 
just the money for the Humvees and the salaries and the missiles and 
the rifles. No, the cost of the war is all of what it takes to actually 
conduct that war on the battlefield, but it also is about putting forth 
every single dollar that is necessary to take care of those brave men 
and women when they come back to the United States.
  Now, used to be in World War I, World War II, wars in the middle of 
the century that you would have about three injured soldiers for every 
soldier that was killed in action. Now, with improvements in technology 
in armor and medicine, we now have a 16-1 ratio. That is great news. 
That is great news, more people are coming back alive, but they are 
coming back with more difficult injuries, more complex medical issues. 
We haven't built into that war the cost of taking care of those 
veterans.
  That is what this bill does. That is what this bill does. It is going 
to fund the withdrawal. It will fund the redeployment of our forces to 
fights that we still can win. It will also for the first time, for the 
first time, recognize that the cost of the war includes taking care of 
the veterans, not just average health care. In fact, we found out in 
many cases, in Walter Reed substandard health care, but with gold 
standard health care. Our veterans system should be the best health 
care available in this country.
  With $1.7 billion in defense health care, $1.7 new dollars for 
veterans health care, we will finally live up to that commitment to our 
veterans and our soldiers when they get back here, like we should when 
they are over fighting for us.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Murphy, I think it is important for us to 
look at the following line. This bill puts also enforcement behind what 
is already out there. There is no policy risk here in this bill. We 
know that the Iraq Study Group says that we should have timelines. That 
is in this bill.
  We know that the military, as it relates to readiness, and we know 
that there are four basic components to readiness, you have, for 
instance, we have 100 Striker brigades that are in our military right 
now. We know in every Striker vehicle you have to have a commander, a 
gunner and a driver. We need to make sure that we have all three of 
those components before we send a Striker force into Iraq or 
Afghanistan. That is in this bill, and that is what the military calls 
for.
  I think it is important to also outline that there is not a National 
Guard unit that is right now in our National Guard force that is combat 
ready. Right now, I say that with great confidence. We don't have that 
right now. I am on the Armed Services Committee because I know this 
stuff. I mean, I know this stuff because we talk about it.
  We talk about the fact that we are not ready to do the things that we 
need

[[Page H2727]]

to do as it relates to equipment maintenance. In many parts of the 
theater we don't have what we need to keep heavy vehicles moving. We 
look at the reason why we don't have up-armored vehicles, in some 
instance, going out on patrol. If you ask some here in Washington DC, 
that is every time, but not all the time.
  In Baghdad, this is very, very important, the training and making 
sure that everyone is trained and have what they need to have to carry 
out the task within a brigade is very, very important.
  In this supplemental we are meeting the needs of the Army as it 
relates to what they need. I think it's 36,000 troops, additional 
troops. They need an Army, and we are also increasing the Marines by 
three brigades, if Members want to vote against this piece of 
legislation.
  I think it's also good to outline in 2001, we were at 80 percent of 
readiness. When we say ``readiness,'' everyone was trained and 
equipment was in place to be able to deal with it. We haven't been down 
at the numbers or the level we are now as it relates to readiness or a 
lack thereof since the end of the Vietnam War.
  In this day and time when we have Iran and we have Syria and we have 
North Korea and we have other countries of interest to the United 
States as it relates to a threat, now more than ever we need to make 
sure that we are there not only for the troops but also for the 
American people.
  I think it is also important to shed light on the fact that there are 
several other great things that are in this bill, $2.6 billion to deal 
with Homeland Security issues that were not dealt with, Hurricane 
Katrina relief, $2.9 billion, also as it relates to urgent State 
children's health care and insurance needs at $750 million, urgent 
needs for pandemic flu preparedness at $1 billion.
  As we start to look at and uncover in these hearings, as some talk 
about, that are a waste of time, we start looking at the gaps of the 
lack of oversight and a lack of execution on behalf of programs and 
initiatives that will make our troops' lives better, those that are 
enlisted, those that are Reservists, to be able to secure our troops 
that are in theater at this time, many of whom are in the areas of 
great danger and constant fire, and also looking at the needs of the 
country, of the everyday American people.
  Now, it is interesting because the minority side, the Republicans 
over there, when we start looking at some of them, when we start 
looking at some of these votes that have taken place, many of the 
Members of the leadership, if not all, have voted against commonsense 
legislation that we passed on a bipartisan basis.
  I mean, we had a number of Republicans voting for bills that were 
brought up by this Democratic Congress. You look at implementing the 
9/11 Commission recommendations, we had 299 votes, Democrats voted in 
the affirmative, we had 299 overall votes, 86 of those individuals were 
Republicans. Minimum wage, to be able to raise minimum wage, 315 with 
82 Republicans joining us.
  Also, you have funding enhancement for stem cell research, 253, and a 
majority of Members voted for that bill. Thirty-seven Republicans 
joined us making prescription drugs affordable for seniors. H.R. 4, 
255, it passed with 24 Republicans joining us. Cutting the student loan 
interest rates in half, H.R. 5, 356, with 124 Republicans joining us.
  Again, creating long-term energy initiatives, H.R. 6 passed, 264, 
with 36 Republicans joining us.
  Now, I can tell you tomorrow or Thursday, there will be a number of 
individuals thinking about how they are going to vote. But I can tell 
you this, there are several things that we can say about this emergency 
supplemental that is really, really good for the country, and there are 
also eight or nine points that I can point out that are leadership 
calls. You have to be a leader to take a position on anything, and I 
think we have some Members on the minority side that don't want to take 
a position.
  Let me go back to David Broder's article that he wrote, and the 
Members can get it at miamiherald.com; it was March 18. It should still 
be on, you can get it for free on the World Wide Web: ``Congress won't 
sign any more blank checks,'' but it goes on down to paragraph 6 and 
talks about the fact that for 6 years the Bush administration and the 
aids that they are talking about earlier in the bill would have free 
rein on carrying out whatever political policy or assignment they 
wished, and also the President. Let's just say hypothetically, that the 
President wanted this done.
  A Congress, under a firm Republican control, was solemn when it came 
down to oversight of the executive branch. No Republican committee 
chairman wanted to turn rocks over as it relates to the Republican 
administration.
  I think it's important that we have the kind of forward lean that we 
have now, because that is what the American people have called for. 
They asked for accountability. They asked for oversight. They asked for 
Members of Congress to come here and be Members of Congress, not just 
say Mr. Murphy is my friend, and we all get along and I see him in the 
hall, he wears nice ties, what have you, is a member of Financial 
Services and also Government Oversight.
  They didn't send us here to have great relationships and to slap each 
other in the back. They sent us here to provide the kind of leadership 
that they deserve. The bottom line is, when that bill and this 
emergency supplemental bill comes up, war supplemental comes up on the 
floor, we will have to take a position. We have to answer for the fact 
that we have put benchmarks in this bill saying that the Iraqi 
Government, their feet have to be held to the fire, because, guess 
what, back in my district there are mayors and there are county 
commissioners and there are city commissioners and there are school 
board commissioners and there are constituents of mine that want health 
care, and their feet are being held to the fire. Mayors have to fill 
out more paperwork. I guarantee you the mayor of Baghdad has to fill 
them out too as it relates to Federal dollars.
  You talked about in the early days of voting money on the back of a 
truck and passing out cash money to pay government workers in Iraq and 
to do other things that we know very little about now. We also know 
that weapons that we bought are unaccounted for at this time.
  To say that we are the so-called board of the United States of 
America, and the President is the chief CEO, the chief executive 
officer, we are not carrying out our responsibilities, making sure that 
the President does exactly what he said he would do, making sure that 
Iraqi government does what they said they would do. We need to make 
sure that our men and women don't have to speak under their breath as 
it relates to readiness, as they board a plane to go to Kuwait to then 
be shipped to Iraq, that they don't have what they need in a Striker 
brigade, that they don't have what they need as it relates to the 
training or the equipment or the down time that they deserve, not a 
rotation based on some bureaucrat in Washington DC saying, well, we 
need three more brigades in Iraq.
  Oh, well, I know they have only been home for 120 days, but we need 
them there to keep up our troop level there at over 147,000. I must 
add, where other countries have announced or have withdrawn, we have 
replaced them with American troops. Yes, this is a leadership vote, 
and, yes, some of us are going to have to go to the wizard and get some 
courage and come here and vote on behalf of the supplemental.
  Now, I respect folks having different opinions, but this is a far 
better supplemental bill than Members in this Congress have voted on in 
the past. We have voted on at least two of them since I have been here. 
I can remember two of them, and they did not have benchmarks. They just 
had money in the bill saying trust the President and trust the 
Department of Defense, they know what they are doing.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Blank checks.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Guess what, the American people have said, I 
don't like that. I don't want to do that any more.
  So now we have the opportunity to put the language in the bill that 
would hopefully get us to the point where the Iraqi Government will 
say, wow, the U.S. Government is no longer playing around with us. The 
American people are no longer playing around with us.

[[Page H2728]]

We will actually have to perform. We will actually have to turn out the 
troops and keep the retention as it relates to our security forces and 
to secure our own country. We are not going to be there forever. We are 
going to make sure of that.
  For those that are saying we have to be there as long as we have to 
be there, I am saying that there has to be benchmarks. I am saying $500 
billion has been spent in this war thus far and will continue to be 
spent unless someone stands up and takes the responsibility on.
  I commend the Speaker, commend the leadership, commend every Member 
that has put their shoulder to the wheel and said this must be done 
now, not next year, not 3 years from now, not maybe we will think about 
it one day. The bottom line is there are folks here saying we don't 
want to let down Iraqi people but, guess what, I don't want to let down 
a U.S. taxpayer.
  I don't want to let down that individual that is sitting in a 
veterans hospital now hoping and wishing they could get the kind of 
good care if the Congress was to stand behind them. It's not a gift 
issue as it relates to the majority here in this House. It is when we 
vote on this bill Thursday the they will be able to see the 
accountability they deserve. We have a process, get it through to the 
President.
  This President can go on and on about how he will veto it, but I 
remember all of the tough talk. I have gone to the White House; I have 
spoken to the President. I don't have to talk in third party. I have 
done that. I don't have to have someone tell me what the President 
said.

                              {time}  2000

  The President said, even in his speech as it relates to the 
escalation of troops, well, we know that the people know that, yes, 
they are passing a nonbinding resolution now. It is nonbinding, but 
there will be a binding resolution as it relates to the emergency 
supplemental. And I agree with the President; yes, it was nonbinding, 
and, yes, we had a vote. And I told the President that bill will pass 
overwhelmingly against your initiative and escalation of troops in 
Iraq. He said, yes, Kendrick, I do know that will happen, but there 
will be a binding resolution. And this is the binding resolution. And 
if the President wants a blank check, he is just not going to get it. 
And he has to come through this House of Representatives, he has to go 
through the Senate. And it is something we have to hold this 
government's feet to the fire, the Iraqi Government's feet to the fire, 
or you might as well start going back home, Members, and sharing with 
your constituents, how old is your son? Oh, he's 12? Well, he is going 
to be going to Iraq one day, and he is going to do it because it is 
going to continue to go on and on and on if we keep following the Bush 
philosophy.
  And there is nothing wrong with our volunteer force. We have some 
individuals that graduated from high school and want to go into the 
Army. I am all for that. I help recruit on behalf of armed services. 
But I think it is important that we do not give our men and women a 
fixed deck because we weren't man enough and woman enough and leader 
enough to vote on their behalf for their accountability measures so 
they will have what they need when they go into theater.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Meek, I can't match your level of 
articulateness, but I think you are saying what people feel out there. 
I mean, this election had to mean something. I mean, people spoke, they 
went out there in numbers in parts of the country that we haven't seen 
in a long time. And they spoke with a pretty loud voice that they 
wanted a different course of direction in Iraq.
  Now let me read something somebody said a few years ago in 1997. Mr. 
Ryan, when he was joining us here, talked about the fact that there is 
a little bit of double talk this week from folks on the other side of 
the aisle, this idea that Congress really needs to back off and let the 
President do his business. Well, that wasn't the line coming out of 
here in 1997, when Congress thought something very different about the 
oversight responsibility of this body when it came to the effort in 
Bosnia.
  The chairman of the Armed Services Committee at that time was a 
gentleman named Floyd Spence from South Carolina. Here is what he said. 
This is his floor statement supporting the bill that was going to 
withdraw funding essentially from the President's intervention in 
Bosnia. He said, today's vote will call for the withdrawal of U.S. 
ground troops from a peacekeeping operation of growing expense and 
seeming unending duration. Mr. Ryan already told us that if that was 
unending duration, well, then you haven't seen unending duration 
compared to this effort. He went on to say, the time is long overdue 
for Congress to express its will on behalf of the American people. It 
is important that the Clinton administration be held accountable for 
the Nation's foreign policy and, in this case, for Bosnia policy. Let 
me say it again. It is long overdue for Congress to express its will on 
behalf of the American people.
  You know what? I agree. That is what we are sent here to do. We are 
sent to invoke on this floor the will of the American people. That is 
why we get elected every 2 years instead of every 6 years, because we 
are the body here, the House of Representatives, and I have only been 
here for a couple of months, but I have studied enough history to 
understand that my responsibility when I came here was to speak on 
behalf of my constituents. And my constituents and the constituents of 
those that sent new Members here in droves from all over the country, 
from the Midwest to South, the Sun Belt, the West and the Northeast, 
said, set a new course. Stand up to the President. Redeploy our forces 
for fights that still matter. Protect us at home. That is the will of 
the American people. That is what we are going to be talking about this 
week.
  Mr. Meek, I think elections mean something. And I think what we are 
going to engage in on Thursday is an effort to put the will of the 
American people into practice here.
  Now, it is not just the American people. We just saw a poll the other 
day that came out and asked specifically whether the American people 
would support Congress' plan to bring American forces back home and 
redeploy them to other fights across the globe that we can still win by 
the fall of 2008, the bill that we are about to vote on this week, and 
it wasn't even close. A margin of over 20 percent, 59 percent to 34 
percent of Americans support that plan. The American people said what 
they wanted on election day. And when pollsters went to just double-
check the temperature and make sure they still thought that, well, they 
still think that, in fact, probably in greater numbers than they did on 
election day, seeing that things have only gotten worse on the ground 
and the President's policy has only become more meandering.
  But we don't just have to listen to the American people, because we 
can also listen to our foreign policy community. We put on that Iraq 
Study Group some of the brightest minds in American foreign policy. The 
folks that have set the direction for foreign policy coming out of 
Washington for years all got together, Republicans and Democrats, folks 
that probably hadn't agreed on much of anything if you were to poll 
them on other foreign conflicts. Well, they all came to an agreement, 
and they sent a report to us saying it is time to set a new direction, 
it is time to start redeploying forces in 2008.
  We can also listen to our military leaders as well. And we have read 
a lot of quotes on this floor, so we won't belabor it, but just take 
one. The Deputy Commander of Multinational Forces in Iraq said it very 
simply: It's clear, you cannot solve this problem militarily. You have 
to do it with a combination of military, economic and diplomatic things 
that we have to do.
  The American public, our foreign policy community, military leaders 
on the ground who see this on a day-to-day basis say the same thing: We 
have put our men and women in the middle of a civil war. We have done 
virtually nothing to address the underlying causes of that religious 
conflict. And to simply allow them to continue to be the referee in an 
increasingly bloody battle, that is not the right policy for our 
troops, it is not the right policy for this country, and it is time to 
start focusing on real security issues again.
  Let me bring up one last thing, Mr. Meek, before I yield back, what 
is included in this bill. This isn't just about, you hear this word 
withdrawal,

[[Page H2729]]

this isn't about withdrawal. This is about focusing our efforts as a 
Nation on the fights that matter. We still have a real important 
conflict in Afghanistan. If we redirect some efforts there, we can 
still make a difference on the ground. Remember, that is where the 
people that attacked this country trained. That is where they base 
their operations. And if we are not careful, Afghanistan is going to 
fall right back into the hands of the folks who provided cover for so 
long to Osama bin Laden and his henchmen.

  We also have to do a lot more here on the ground in our own country, 
Mr. Meek. Now, you voted for efforts on the Democratic minority for 
years to try to bring light upon the fact that we have been spending 
billions of dollars over in Iraq. We haven't been spending money here 
at home to do the things we need to do to protect this Nation.
  So this bill is going to put $2.6 billion into homeland security 
needs, make sure that you and me and our families and our friends are 
protected here; $2.6 billion, Mr. Meek; $1.25 billion for aviation 
security, including 1 billion for a new explosive detection system, $90 
million to deploy advanced checkpoint explosive detection equipment and 
screening techniques, $160 million to do better when we are screening 
air cargo, $1.25 billion for new port and transit and border security 
features, $150 million for nuclear security, including, at the 
President's request, $67 million to secure the nuclear material in the 
former Soviet Union.
  Here is where the fight is; it is in places like Afghanistan, it is 
at our ports, it is on our borders. That is the fight that we are going 
to engage in. That is where we are going to refocus our efforts.
  This vote that is coming up this week is about doing just what the 
Republicans told us we were supposed to do in 1997; that is, expressing 
the will of the American people on this floor. This vote is about 
putting our forces, putting our money where the fights matter most.
  Mr. Meek, I am going to be proud to be part of that this week when we 
finally get that chance to make the will of the American people the law 
of this country.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. You know, Mr. Murphy, it is so refreshing to 
hear you speak about this legislation, especially being fresh off the 
campaign trail, especially being a new Member of Congress. And I can 
tell you that as long as you continue to keep that spirit, and Members 
of this House and the majority continue to keep the spirit of wanting 
to do everything that you said you would do on the night that you were 
elected.
  You know, many of us gave these great speeches, Mr. Speaker, talking 
about when we get to Washington, this is what we will do, and that I am 
going to be there for you, and that I am going to make sure that you 
get the kind of accountability that you deserve. I am going to make 
sure that your tax dollars are being spent in an appropriate way. I am 
going to make sure that we take care of the troops. I am going to make 
sure that we hold this administration accountable. And then many times 
in the past, not this time fortunately, but many times in the past, a 
Member gets here to Washington, DC, starts walking around the Halls of 
Congress; a couple of folks call you Congressman or Congresswoman, you 
have a parking space downstairs. You know, folks, military folks, 
salute you when you get off a plane. You travel over into a foreign 
land, and in a motorcade going down the street, and then you forget 
about all those things. And I am so glad, Mr. Murphy, that you have 
that spirit still in your heart. And there are a number of Members of 
Congress who still have that spirit.
  And, Mr. Speaker, the reason why sometimes I get a little animated 
and a little excited about the fact that we have some Members here in 
the House who are willing to be followers when it is time for them to 
be leaders, and to take a position on anything, it doesn't matter what 
it may be; if it is changing, you know, the color of the paint in your 
office, it takes leadership to be able to do that because you have to 
stand behind that decision.
  The decision saying that we want to make sure that the readiness 
level of our troops before they are put into harm's way is an important 
decision to be made and a decision that has been endorsed by the 
Defense Department. This is not new language, this is not a new idea, 
this is something that has to be placed into this supplemental to make 
sure the Defense Department does exactly what they said they would do 
in their own policy. We are not putting forth any new benchmarks for 
the Iraqi Government; this is what the President said. This is what he 
said, this is what came out of his mouth, that they have to meet these 
benchmarks, or we will no longer continue to do the things we have been 
doing. So that is the reason why it is in writing.
  It is almost like when you talk to someone on the phone, and you have 
a health care crisis, and you call down to the hospital and you say, 
listen, I have a problem, I need you to help me out. You are talking to 
a person on the phone. First of all, you may say, can I have your name, 
please; who am I speaking with? Or another example: If I'm looking for 
financing for my house, and I am talking to someone on the phone, and 
they say, yes, sure, we can give you a very low interest rate, a 3.2 
percent interest rate. Hey, can you give me that in writing?
  What we are doing here in this emergency supplemental is we are 
giving the American people and our men and women in harm's way a 
supplemental in writing. It is not a speech. We are not talking to the 
Kiwanis Club, even though we have great Kiwanis Clubs out there, don't 
get me wrong. We are not at a Rotary luncheon giving those speeches 
back home saying, ``I love the troops, I love the troops.'' We are 
putting it in writing. We are not saying we love the veterans, when the 
veterans come up here to look at this great Capitol and see the flags 
flying over the House Chamber and over the Senate and over the dome of 
the Capitol and over the office buildings and all, proud to be an 
American, proud that they had something to do with allowing us to 
salute one flag. It is not about a little speech I give out on the 
sidewalk thanking them for help. They want to see it in writing. They 
want to make sure we have their back.
  This is a leadership call, you have to make a decision. And the 
bottom line is we have been elected and federalized by our constituents 
to make decisions. And I can guarantee you, Mr. Murphy, there is not a 
Republican voter or a Democratic voter or any Independent voter who has 
a problem with accountability, and that is what this bill does.
  Now, someone may have a problem with the fact that they didn't do 
what they needed to do when they were in the majority to do it. And now 
we have provided an opportunity, and I have pointed out all of the 
votes here earlier, and then some, of the opportunities that we have 
allowed Republicans to have a bill that they wanted to vote for all 
along to the floor, and they voted in the affirmative, even though 
their leadership voted the other way. Now, that is for their leadership 
to say that they are accountable to their constituents because they 
decided to vote against something good.
  But when you look at this emergency supplemental, this emergency 
supplemental is the first time since this war has started, Mr. Murphy, 
Members, Mr. Speaker, the first time that the President actually would 
have a document in writing that passed in the affirmative on this floor 
to say that the Iraqi Government will meet these benchmarks, or 
redeployment will stop; to say we will make sure that we invest in 
veterans health care and giving Homeland Security what they need to be 
able to carry out the duty and protection of the homeland.
  It also says, Department of Defense, pulling a page out of your own 
regulations, and we are going to put it in the bill to make sure that 
you actually do it, not just some bureaucrat sitting over there at the 
Pentagon saying we have to find three more brigades from somewhere, if 
they are ready or not, we have to make sure that we have the numbers in 
Iraq. If that soldier has only been home for 120 days, and we call for 
200-plus days of downtime with their families to be able to regroup 
from being in a battle zone, those are rights that our men and women 
have. So we are no longer leaving that decision up to some bureaucrat 
in the Pentagon to make on behalf of an American who goes off to fight 
on our behalf.
  Now, is there language in there in case of emergencies; you know, if 
the

[[Page H2730]]

President, within the national interest that we have to redeploy, we 
have to send these troops back into the theater? Of course there is.

                              {time}  2015

  Are we hindering the President from him being Commander in Chief? No, 
we are not. But what we are saying is that there are rules, and you 
have to live by those rules. And it is going to be a majority vote here 
in this House, and the question, Mr. Speaker, how many Members are 
going to be with us when we make that majority vote here in the House 
to set forth the parameters of success on behalf of not only the men 
and women in uniform, but those that have worn the uniform and those 
that have been injured and cannot return back to battle, and even for 
those that are going to battle, that they have exactly what they need.
  We know that we have the number one best military, most able military 
on the face of the Earth. But at the same time, we have to have respect 
for that military and making sure that the men and women have what they 
need and their families.
  Mr. Murphy.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Meek, this is about government. I 
mean, you talk about leadership, it takes leadership to govern.
  You are right. I am as close as anybody to what is happening and what 
people are feeling out there because I spent the last 2 years spending 
every day and every night visiting the pasta suppers and the pancake 
breakfasts really, I think, being as in touch as anybody in this 
Chamber is with where the American people were. And, yes, they have 
specific irreconcilable grievances with this President about the war, 
about his approach to energy policy, about his lack of any 
understanding of health care dilemmas facing the American people.
  But I think they also just have this sense that this place is broken 
down, that Congress couldn't govern any longer, that they couldn't 
maintain their relationship as a coequal branch of government with the 
President, that they couldn't even get anything done on meaningful 
issues like health care reform or immigration or oversight of this war.
  So is this bill perfect? Absolutely not. Are there things that you 
would change in it, things that I would change? Would I move a date 
around here, some money around there? Absolutely. But you know what? 
This isn't a place where you just come and vote your preferences. I 
mean, we are not voting for the American Idol here. We are governing. 
We are putting votes together to make progress for the American people. 
And so there are going to be a lot of folks who are going to cast green 
votes for this, who are going to have problems with certain parts of 
it. But in order to live up to what the American people want us to do 
here, which is to set a new direction, we have all got to come together 
and find a way to govern. It is something that wasn't happening here 
for a very long time.
  And so I am going to be proud to go back, once we get through this 
process, once we are able to put something through the House, through 
the Senate, we hope get the President's signature, I am going to be 
proud to go back and talk about it, talk about how we have fulfilled 
that commitment to redeploy our troops, to start spending our money in 
different places.
  But I am going to be just as proud to tell them that Congress is 
working again; that there is leadership here that is willing to take 
some tough stands, that is willing to ask some people to cast some 
votes that might not be perfect for them; that we haven't allowed the 
perfect to be the enemy of the good, as a lot of people are talking 
about these days. I am going to be just as proud to talk about how this 
place is working again, Mr. Meek.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, I can tell you, Mr. Murphy, it has 
definitely been a pleasure and a joy to be here on the floor with you 
tonight. And I know that I have some information that you want to share 
with the Members that may want to get in contact with us.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Mr. Meek, the Speaker's 30-something 
Working Group, and I have been blessed for the last 2 months to be able 
to join you here on the floor and to have Speaker Pelosi allow us the 
time. Anything that you want to talk to us about, you can e-mail at 
[email protected], a lot of the information that we talk 
about here, as well as information about the 30-something Working 
Group, at www.speaker.gov/30something.
  Mr. Meek, we hope the people will get in touch with us there.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, I know the good people of Connecticut have 
been well served. And we also want to thank, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Ryan for 
coming down at the top of the hour to spend about 20 minutes with us. 
That is pretty good for an appropriator.
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. They were quality 20 minutes.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. It was a good quality 20 minutes, I must add. 
And, Mr. Speaker, it is always an honor and a pleasure to address the 
House, and I mean the full House. I think it is important that we 
continue this discussion. As you know, we are going to be dealing with 
the emergency supplemental on Thursday, and next week we are going to 
get into the budget. These are real issues.
  Timelines will be met. All the appropriations bills are moving 
through the process. They will be passed on time. We will no longer be 
in the business of continuing resolutions.
  This is so, Mr. Speaker, I am proud to say, I used to say in the 
109th Congress, I mean, it is kind of rough when you go in front of 
your hometown and you say, well, I am a Member of the 109th Congress. 
It is almost like kind of saying like you are a bad guy. But in the 
110th Congress, I must say, and every Member of Congress, I am not 
talking about just some Members, I am talking about every Member 
because there were so many issues that were going on here in 
Washington, D.C.
  But now we have the opportunity to work on behalf of the American 
people. We have the opportunity to do good things for veterans. We have 
the opportunity to do great things for children that are on military 
bases. We have an opportunity to make sure that our troops have what 
they need when they go into harm's way. And that is something we should 
all feel good about, on both sides of the aisle.
  And I think that, come Thursday, Members will have a work product 
that they will be able to vote for and not think about. I mean, I feel 
sorry for the Members who have to walk around and say, goodness, I have 
to vote not to fund operations of troops that are in harm's way. They 
shouldn't walk around with that burden. They should be able to say that 
we cannot, I voted for the supplemental. I voted for it twice. They 
didn't have the parameters and the benchmarks that I wanted in it. But 
for the greater good, to make sure that our men and women have what 
they need, Mr. Murphy, if they are in there doing what they were told 
to do, that they must have what they need.
  So, Mr. Speaker, with that we will continue this debate, and we will 
also continue to do the good work up here in Washington, D.C.

                          ____________________