[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 176 (Wednesday, November 14, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H13917-H13937]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ORDERLY AND RESPONSIBLE IRAQ REDEPLOYMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 818, I call up
the bill (H.R. 4156) making emergency supplemental appropriations for
the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30,
2008, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4156
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in
the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, namely:
TITLE I--POLICY ON REDEPLOYMENT AND CONDUCT OF OPERATIONS IN IRAQ
Sec. 101. It is the sense of the Congress that--
(1) the war in Iraq should end as safely and quickly as
possible and our troops should be brought home;
(2) the performance of United States military personnel in
Iraq and Afghanistan should be commended, their courage and
sacrifice have been exceptional, and when they come home,
their service should be recognized appropriately; and
(3) the primary purpose of funds made available by this Act
should be to transition the mission of United States Armed
Forces in Iraq and undertake their redeployment, and not to
extend or prolong the war.
Sec. 102. (a) No person in the custody or under the
effective control of the United States Government shall be
subject to any treatment or technique of interrogation not
authorized by and listed in the United States Army Field
Manual FM2-22.3 Human Intelligence Collector Operations.
(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to any
person in the custody or under the effective control of the
United States Government pursuant to a criminal law or
immigration law of the United States. Nothing in this section
shall be construed to affect the rights under the United
States Constitution of any person in the custody or under the
physical jurisdiction of the United States.
Sec. 103. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used in contravention of the following laws enacted or
regulations promulgated to implement the United Nations
Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment (done at New York on
December 10, 1984)--
(1) section 2340A of title 18, United States Code;
(2) section 2242 of the Foreign Affairs Reform and
Restructuring Act of 1998 (division G of Public Law 105-277;
112 Stat. 2681-822; 8 U.S.C. 1231 note) and regulations
prescribed thereto, including regulations under part 208 of
title 8, Code of Federal Regulations, and part 95 of title
22, Code of Federal Regulations; and
(3) sections 1002 and 1003 of the Department of Defense,
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes
in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006
(Public Law 109-148).
Sec. 104. (a) The Congress finds that United States
military units should not enter into combat unless they are
fully capable of performing their assigned mission. The
Congress further finds that this is the policy of the
Department of Defense.
(b) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used to deploy any unit of the
Armed Forces to Iraq unless the President has certified in
writing to the Committees on Appropriations and the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives at least 15 days in advance of the deployment
that the unit is ``fully mission capable''.
(c) For the purposes of subsection (b) the term ``fully
mission capable'' means capable of performing a unit's
assigned mission to the prescribed standards under the
conditions expected in the theater of operation, consistent
with the guidelines set forth in the Department of Defense's
Defense Readiness Reporting System.
(d) The President, by certifying in writing to the
Committees on Appropriations and the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives that
the deployment to Iraq of a unit that is not assessed fully
mission capable is required for reasons of national security
and by submitting along with a certification a report in
classified and unclassified form detailing the particular
reason or reasons why the unit's deployment is necessary, may
waive the limitations prescribed in subsection (b) on a unit-
by-unit basis.
Sec. 105. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act
are available immediately for obligation to plan and execute
a safe and orderly redeployment of United States Armed Forces
from Iraq.
(b) Within 30 days after enactment of this Act, the
President shall commence an immediate and orderly
redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq, which
shall be implemented as part of the comprehensive regional
stability plan described in subsection (g). The President
shall endeavor to begin such redeployment with units of the
Armed Forces that have been deployed in excess of 365 days,
except to the extent those units are needed to provide for
the safe withdrawal of other units of the Armed Forces or to
protect United States and Coalition personnel and
infrastructure.
(c) The reduction in United States Armed Forces required by
this section shall be implemented in conjunction with a
comprehensive diplomatic, political and economic strategy
that includes sustained engagement with Iraq's neighbors and
the international community for the purpose of working
collectively to bring stability to Iraq.
(d) The goal for the completion of the transition of United
States Armed Forces to a limited presence and missions as
described in subsection (e) shall be a date that is not later
than December 15, 2008.
(e) After the conclusion of the reduction and transition of
United States Armed Forces to a limited presence as required
by this section, the Secretary of Defense may deploy or
maintain members of the Armed Forces in Iraq only for the
following missions:
(1) Protecting United States diplomatic facilities, United
States Armed Forces, and American citizens.
(2) Conducting limited training, equipping, and providing
logistical and intelligence support to the Iraqi Security
forces.
(3) Engaging in targeted counterterrorism operations
against al-Qaeda, al-Qaeda affiliated groups, and other
terrorist organizations in Iraq.
(f) Not later than February 1, 2008, and every 90 days
thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report setting forth the
following:
[[Page H13918]]
(1) The current plan for and the status of the reduction of
United States Armed Forces in Iraq and the transition of the
Armed Forces in Iraq to a limited presence whose missions do
not exceed the missions specified in subsection (e),
including the associated force reductions and adjustments and
expectations with respect to timelines and the force levels
anticipated to perform those missions.
(2) A comprehensive current description of efforts to
prepare for the reduction and transition of United States
Armed Forces in Iraq in accordance with this section and to
limit any destabilizing consequences of such reduction and
transition, including a description of efforts to work with
the United Nations and countries in the region toward that
objective.
(g) Not later than February 15, 2008, the President shall
submit to the Congress in classified and unclassified form a
comprehensive regional stability plan for the Middle East,
which shall include a military, diplomatic, political and
economic strategy that provides for the national security
interests of the United States in the region and for the
engagement of targeted counterterrorism operations. The plan
shall include a detailed description of the projected United
States military force presence in and around the Middle East
region for the 5-year period beginning on October 1, 2008.
Sec. 106. The amounts appropriated by this Act are
sufficient to fully meet the immediate needs of the United
States Armed Forces deployed to Iraq. Congressional
consideration of additional funding shall be deferred until
the first report required by section 105(f) is submitted to
the Congress.
TITLE II--SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY
MILITARY PERSONNEL
Military Personnel, Army
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Army'',
$713,700,000.
Military Personnel, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Navy'',
$95,624,000.
Military Personnel, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Marine
Corps'', $56,050,000.
Military Personnel, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Military Personnel, Air
Force'', $138,037,000.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Operation and Maintenance, Army
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army'', $27,429,490,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Navy'', $2,071,560,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Marine Corps'', $2,429,323,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air Force'', $3,582,560,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide'', $1,330,540,000, of which not to exceed
$333,000,000, to remain available until expended, may be used
for payments to reimburse key cooperating nations, for
logistical, military, and other support provided to United
States military operations, notwithstanding any other
provision of law: Provided, That such payments may be made in
such amounts as the Secretary of Defense, with the
concurrence of the Secretary of State and in consultation
with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, may
determine, in his discretion, based on documentation
determined by the Secretary of Defense to adequately account
for the support provided, and such determination is final and
conclusive upon the accounting officers of the United States,
and 15 days following notification to the appropriate
congressional committees: Provided further, That the
Secretary of Defense shall provide quarterly reports to the
congressional defense committees on the use of funds provided
in this paragraph.
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army Reserve'', $61,223,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Navy Reserve'', $47,500,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Marine Corps Reserve'', $26,157,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air Force Reserve'', $8,089,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army National Guard'', $378,381,000.
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard
For an additional amount for ``Operation and Maintenance,
Air National Guard'', $34,422,000.
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For the ``Afghanistan Security Forces Fund'', $500,000,000:
Provided, That such funds shall be available to the Secretary
of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
the purpose of allowing the Commander, Office of Security
Cooperation Afghanistan, or the Secretary's designee, to
provide assistance, with the concurrence of the Secretary of
State, to the security forces of Afghanistan, including the
provision of equipment, supplies, services, training,
facility and infrastructure repair, renovation, and
construction, and funding: Provided further, That the
authority to provide assistance under this heading is in
addition to any other authority to provide assistance to
foreign nations: Provided further, That the Secretary of
Defense may transfer such funds to appropriations for
military personnel; operation and maintenance; Overseas
Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid; procurement; research,
development, test and evaluation; and defense working capital
funds to accomplish the purposes provided herein: Provided
further, That this transfer authority is in addition to any
other transfer authority available to the Department of
Defense: Provided further, That upon a determination that all
or part of the funds so transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes herein, such amounts may
be transferred back to this appropriation: Provided further,
That contributions of funds for the purposes provided herein
from any person, foreign government, or international
organization may be credited to this Fund, and used for such
purposes: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense
shall notify the congressional defense committees in writing
upon the receipt and upon the transfer of any contribution,
delineating the sources and amounts of the funds received and
the specific use of such contributions: Provided further,
That the Secretary of Defense shall, not fewer than 5 days
prior to making transfers from this appropriation account,
notify the congressional defense committees in writing of the
details of any such transfer: Provided further, That the
Secretary of Defense shall submit a report no later than 30
days after the end of each fiscal quarter to the
congressional defense committees summarizing the details of
the transfer of funds from this appropriation.
Iraq Security Forces Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For the ``Iraq Security Forces Fund'', $500,000,000:
Provided, That such funds shall be available to the Secretary
of Defense, notwithstanding any other provision of law, for
the purpose of allowing the Commander, Multi-National
Security Transition Command--Iraq, or the Secretary's
designee, to provide assistance, with the concurrence of the
Secretary of State, to the security forces of Iraq, including
the provision of equipment, supplies, services, training,
facility and infrastructure repair, renovation, and
construction, and funding, and to provide training,
reintegration, education and employment programs for
concerned local citizens, former militia members and
detainees and former detainees: Provided further, That the
authority to provide assistance under this heading is in
addition to any other authority to provide assistance to
foreign nations: Provided further, That the Secretary of
Defense may transfer such funds to appropriations for
military personnel; operation and maintenance; Overseas
Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid; procurement; research,
development, test and evaluation; and defense working capital
funds to accomplish the purposes provided herein: Provided
further, That this transfer authority is in addition to any
other transfer authority available to the Department of
Defense: Provided further, That upon a determination that all
or part of the funds so transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purposes provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation:
Provided further, That contributions of funds for the
purposes provided herein from any person, foreign government,
or international organization may be credited to this Fund,
and used for such purposes: Provided further, That the
Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional defense
committees in writing upon the receipt and upon the transfer
of any contribution, delineating the sources and amounts of
the funds received and the specific use of such
contributions: Provided further, That the Secretary of
Defense shall, not fewer than 5 days prior to making
transfers from this appropriation account, notify the
congressional defense committees in writing of the details of
any such transfer: Provided further, That the Secretary of
Defense shall submit a report no later than 30 days after the
end of each fiscal quarter to the congressional defense
committees summarizing the details of the transfer of funds
from this appropriation.
Iraq Freedom Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For ``Iraq Freedom Fund'', $3,168,000,000, to remain
available for transfer only to support operations in Iraq and
to fight terrorism: Provided, the Secretary of Defense and
the Director of National Intelligence shall, no fewer than 30
days prior to making transfers under this authority, notify
the Committees on Appropriations in writing of the details of
any such transfer made for intelligence activities: Provided
further, That funds transferred shall be merged with and be
available
[[Page H13919]]
for the same purposes and for the same time period as the
appropriation or fund to which transferred.
Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund
(including transfer of funds)
For an additional amount for ``Joint Improvised Explosive
Device Defeat Fund'', $1,638,500,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2010: Provided, That such funds shall be
available to the Secretary of Defense, notwithstanding any
other provision of law, for the purpose of allowing the
Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat
Organization to investigate, develop and provide equipment,
supplies, services, training, facilities, personnel and funds
to assist United States forces in the defeat of improvised
explosive devices: Provided further, That within 60 days of
enactment of this Act, a plan for the intended management and
use of the Fund is provided to the congressional defense
committees: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense
shall submit a report not later than 60 days after the end of
each fiscal quarter to the congressional defense committees
providing assessments of the evolving threats, individual
service requirements to counter the threats, individual
service requirements to counter the threats, the current
strategy for predeployment training of members of the Armed
Forces on explosive devices, and details on the execution of
this Fund: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense
may transfer funds provided herein to appropriations for
operation and maintenance; procurement; research,
development, test and evaluation; and defense working capital
funds to accomplish the purpose provided herein: Provided
further, That this transfer authority is in addition to any
other transfer authority available to the Department of
Defense: Provided further, That upon determination that all
or part of the funds so transferred from this appropriation
are not necessary for the purpose provided herein, such
amounts may be transferred back to this appropriation:
Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense shall, not
fewer than 5 days prior to making transfers from this
appropriation, notify the congressional defense committees in
writing of the details of any such transfer.
PROCUREMENT
Aircraft Procurement, Army
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement,
Army'', $302,200,000, to remain available until September 30,
2010.
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Weapons and
Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army'', $1,574,217,000, to remain
available until September 30, 2010.
Procurement of Ammunition, Army
For an additional amount for ``Procurement of Ammunition,
Army'', $154,000,000, to remain available until September 30,
2010.
Other Procurement, Army
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Army'',
$1,976,100,000, to remain available until September 30, 2010.
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement,
Navy'', $25,300,000, to remain available until September 30,
2010.
Other Procurement, Navy
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Navy'',
$88,281,000, to remain available until September 30, 2010.
Procurement, Marine Corps
For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Marine Corps'',
$729,232,000, to remain available until September 30, 2010.
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Aircraft Procurement, Air
Force'', $147,800,000, to remain available until September
30, 2010.
Other Procurement, Air Force
For an additional amount for ``Other Procurement, Air
Force'', $42,125,000, to remain available until September 30,
2010.
Procurement, Defense-Wide
For an additional amount for ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'',
$102,588,000, to remain available until September 30, 2010.
OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS
Defense Health Program
For an additional amount for ``Defense Health Program'',
$649,001,000; of which $599,001,000 shall be for operation
and maintenance; and of which $50,000,000 shall be for
research, development, test and evaluation, to remain
available until September 30, 2009, only for peer reviewed
research on traumatic brain injury and psychological health,
including post-traumatic stress disorder.
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 201. Appropriations provided in this Act are
available for obligation until September 30, 2008, unless
otherwise provided in this Act.
(transfer of funds)
Sec. 202. (a) Upon a determination by the Secretary of
Defense that such action is necessary in the national
interest, the Secretary may transfer between appropriations
up to $4,000,000,000 of the funds made available to the
Department of Defense in this Act.
(b) The Secretary shall notify the Congress promptly of
each transfer made pursuant to the authority in this section.
(c) The authority provided in this section is in addition
to any other transfer authority available to the Department
of Defense and is subject to the same terms and conditions as
the authority provided in section 8005 of the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act, 2008, except for the fourth
proviso.
Sec. 203. Funds appropriated in this Act, or made
available by the transfer of funds in or pursuant to this
Act, for intelligence activities are deemed to be
specifically authorized by the Congress for purposes of
section 504(a)(1) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50
U.S.C. 414(a)(1)).
Sec. 204. None of the funds provided in this Act may be
used to finance programs or activities denied by the Congress
in fiscal years 2007 or 2008 appropriations to the Department
of Defense or to initiate a procurement or research,
development, test and evaluation new start program unless
such program or project must be undertaken immediately in the
interest of national security and after written prior
notification to the congressional defense committees.
Sec. 205. (a) From funds made available for operation and
maintenance in this Act to the Department of Defense, not to
exceed $500,000,000 may be used, notwithstanding any other
provision of law, to fund the Commander's Emergency Response
Program, for the purpose of enabling military commanders in
Iraq and Afghanistan to respond to urgent humanitarian relief
and reconstruction requirements within their areas of
responsibility by carrying out programs that will immediately
assist the Iraqi and Afghan people.
(b) Not later than 15 days after the end of each fiscal
year quarter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report regarding the
source of funds and the allocation and use of funds during
that quarter that were made available pursuant to the
authority provided in this section or under any other
provision of law for the purposes of the programs under
subsection (a).
Sec. 206. (a) During fiscal year 2008, funds available in
this Act to the Department of Defense for operation and
maintenance may be used, notwithstanding any other provision
of law, to provide supplies, services, transportation,
including airlift and sealift, and other logistical support
to Coalition forces supporting military and stability
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
(b) The Secretary of Defense shall provide quarterly
reports to the congressional defense committees regarding
support provided under this section.
Sec. 207. (a) Supervision and administration costs
associated with a construction project funded with
appropriations available for operation and maintenance,
Afghanistan Security Forces Fund, or Iraq Security Forces
Fund, and executed in direct support of the Global War on
Terror only in Iraq and Afghanistan, may be obligated at the
time a construction contract is awarded.
(b) For purposes of this section, the term ``supervision
and administration costs'' includes all in-house Government
costs.
Sec. 208. Each amount appropriated or otherwise provided
in this Act is designated as an emergency requirement and
necessary to meet emergency needs pursuant to subsections (a)
and (b) of section 204 of S. Con. Res. 21 (110th Congress),
the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2008.
Sec. 209. (a) Not later than January 15, 2008 and every 90
days thereafter through the end of fiscal year 2008, the
Secretary of Defense shall set forth in a report to the
Congress a comprehensive set of performance indicators and
measures for progress toward military and political stability
in Iraq.
(b) The report shall include performance standards and
goals for security, economic, and security force training
objectives in Iraq, together with a notional timetable for
achieving these goals.
(c) The report shall include, at a minimum, the following
specific provisions:
(1) With respect to stability and security in Iraq, the
following:
(A) Key measures of political stability, including the
important political milestones that must be achieved over the
next several years.
(B) The primary indicators of a stable security environment
in Iraq, such as number of engagements per day, numbers of
trained Iraqi forces, trends relating to numbers and types of
ethnic and religious-based hostile encounters, and progress
made in the transition to Provincial Iraqi Control (PIC).
(C) An assessment of the estimated strength of the
insurgency in Iraq and the extent to which it is composed of
non-Iraqi fighters.
(D) A description of all militias operating in Iraq,
including the number, size, equipment strength, military
effectiveness, sources of support, legal status, and efforts
to disarm or reintegrate each militia.
(E) Key indicators of economic activity that should be
considered the most important for determining the prospects
of stability in Iraq, including--
(i) unemployment levels;
(ii) electricity, water, and oil production rates; and
(iii) hunger and poverty levels.
(F) The criteria the Administration will use to determine
when it is safe to begin withdrawing United States forces
from Iraq.
(2) With respect to the training and performance of
security forces in Iraq, the following:
(A) The training provided Iraqi military and other Ministry
of Defense forces and the equipment used by such forces.
[[Page H13920]]
(B) Key criteria for assessing the capabilities and
readiness of the Iraqi military and other Ministry of Defense
forces, goals for achieving certain capability and readiness
levels (as well as for recruiting, training, and equipping
these forces), and the milestones and notional timetable for
achieving these goals.
(C) The operational readiness status of the Iraqi military
forces, including the type, number, size, and organizational
structure of Iraqi battalions that are--
(i) capable of conducting counterinsurgency operations
independently, without any support from Coalition forces;
(ii) capable of conducting counterinsurgency operations
with the support of United States or Coalition forces; or
(iii) not ready to conduct counterinsurgency operations.
(D) The amount and type of support provided by Coalition
forces to the Iraqi Security forces at each level of
operational readiness.
(E) The number of Iraqi battalions in the Iraqi Army
currently conducting operations and the type of operations
being conducted.
(F) The rates of absenteeism in the Iraqi military forces
and the extent to which insurgents have infiltrated such
forces.
(G) The training provided Iraqi police and other Ministry
of Interior forces and the equipment used by such forces.
(H) Key criteria for assessing the capabilities and
readiness of the Iraqi police and other Ministry of Interior
forces, goals for achieving certain capability and readiness
levels (as well as for recruiting, training, and equipping),
and the milestones and notional timetable for achieving these
goals, including--
(i) the number of police recruits that have received
classroom training and the duration of such instruction;
(ii) the number of veteran police officers who have
received classroom instruction and the duration of such
instruction;
(iii) the number of police candidates screened by the Iraqi
Police Screening Service, the number of candidates derived
from other entry procedures, and the success rates of those
groups of candidates;
(iv) the number of Iraqi police forces who have received
field training by international police trainers and the
duration of such instruction;
(v) attrition rates and measures of absenteeism and
infiltration by insurgents; and
(vi) the level and effectiveness of the Iraqi Police and
other Ministry of Interior forces in provinces where the
United States has formally transferred responsibility for the
security of the province to the Iraqi Security forces under
the Provincial Iraqi Control (PIC) process.
(I) The estimated total number of Iraqi battalions needed
for the Iraqi Security forces to perform duties now being
undertaken by Coalition forces, including defending the
borders of Iraq and providing adequate levels of law and
order throughout Iraq.
(J) The effectiveness of the Iraqi military and police
officer cadres and the chain of command.
(K) The number of United States and Coalition advisors
needed to support the Iraqi Security forces and associated
ministries.
(L) An assessment, in a classified annex if necessary, of
United States military requirements, including planned force
rotations, through the end of calendar year 2008.
Sec. 210. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this or any other Act shall be obligated or
expended by the United States Government for a purpose as
follows:
(1) To establish any military installation or base for the
purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United
States Armed Forces in Iraq.
(2) To exercise United States control over any oil resource
of Iraq.
Sec. 211. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be obligated or expended to provide
award fees to any defense contractor contrary to the
provisions of section 814 of the John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 109-364).
Sec. 212. During the current fiscal year, appropriations
made available to the Department of Defense for operation and
maintenance in this Act may, upon determination by the
Secretary of Defense that such action is necessary to meet
the operational requirements of a Commander of Combatant
Command engaged in contingency operations overseas, be used
to purchase items having an investment item cost of not more
than $500,000.
Sec. 213. Section 3303(c) of Public Law 110-28 shall apply
to funds appropriated in this Act.
This Act may be cited as the ``Orderly and Responsible
Iraq Redeployment Appropriations Act, 2008''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 818, the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the gentleman from California
(Mr. Lewis) each will control 1 hour.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, because of unusual
circumstances, I would choose at the floor well to yield control of the
time to the former chairman of the committee, the ranking member of the
Defense Subcommittee, Bill Young of Florida.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida will be
recognized.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, we hear so many voices in this country and in this
Chamber who are willing to fight to the last drop of someone else's
blood. Those of us who are supporting this resolution today are being
accused of being for ``precipitous withdrawal.'' I hardly think that
seeing this war continue for another 14 months constitutes precipitous
withdrawal.
Mr. Speaker, it is 56 months since the United States first launched
its attack against Iraq. It is 4\1/2\ years since the President
appeared before his ``Mission Accomplished'' banner on that carrier. It
is almost 5 years since the administration ignored the advice of
General Shinseki. It is 2\1/2\ years since Vice President Cheney said
that he thought the insurgency was in its last throes. Since that time,
we have had 3,800 Americans killed and 28,000 wounded. We have had
8,000 Iraqi military personal killed and 38,000 civilians killed. We
have had 4 million Iraqis displaced. 2.3 million of them have been
displaced internally in the country. One and a half million have fled
to Syria, 1 million to other countries. Not a pretty picture.
This war is the most colossal blunder in modern U.S. history. It is a
mistake that has shattered our influence in the region, and it has made
the one country in the region that we did not want to see strengthened,
Iran, it has made them infinitely stronger in that region. We are in
the process of borrowing $600 billion and we are not having the guts to
pay the bill ourselves.
There is no sense of shared sacrifice in this country. The only
families being asked to sacrifice are military families and they're
being asked to sacrifice again and again and again and again. We aren't
even willing to tax ourselves to pay for the cost of this war, so we're
shoving off the cost to our kids. Shame on every one of us for making
that decision.
In November, the public tried to send two messages to this Congress.
The first was that they wanted a change in policy in Iraq. The second
is that they wanted a change in domestic policy. And yet after blowing
$600 billion in Iraq, after signing a Defense bill which adds $39
billion to spending levels over last year, the President has yesterday
blocked our efforts to add $6 billion to pay for investments in
education, health and medical research here at home.
{time} 1915
The President is telling the American people, ``Forget what message
you think you sent in November in the election.'' He is stiffing the
American people. He is saying, ``Forget what message you thought you
were sending to Washington; I am the `Great Decider' and we are going
to do things my way.'' That is what we are getting out of the White
House. Instead of compromise and instead of searching for common
ground, the President is making clear that he prefers to govern through
confrontation, he prefers to go it alone, with one-third support in the
country and one-third support in the Congress.
The same is true in Iraq. This is the same President who decided to
go it alone, with almost no allies, who decided to go it alone when it
came to evaluating intelligence, ignoring the caution alerts that were
sent by the State Department intelligence people and the CIA analysts.
He bulldozed through. When Baker-Hamilton was produced to offer an
opportunity for change, the President simply used that as an
opportunity to say ``full steam ahead, no change in course'', and he
has deepened and intensified our involvement in Iraq.
At home, he insists that Congress cuts 50 percent out of vocational
education; he insists that we cut 1,100 grants out of medical research
at the National Institutes of Health; he insists that we cut rural
health programs by 54 percent; he insists that we cut low-income
heating assistance programs by 18 percent; he insists that we cut
financial support for programs under No Child Left Behind that he
mandated in the first place. He insists that we cut all of that, and
yet he demands $200 billion more for Iraq. I say enough is enough.
[[Page H13921]]
He gave a speech to the American people which was designed for the
purpose of public deception, in my view, because it was designed to
leave the impression that the President intended to reduce steadily our
troop commitment in Iraq, when in reality it was intended to assure
that 6 months from now we have the same number of troops we have there
that we had 6 months ago.
Mr. Speaker, the President is asking for $200 billion more, and as
chairman of the Appropriations Committee, I announced that I had no
intention of providing that money, but I made it clear I'd be happy to
provide it all, provided that the President would recognize that we
needed a policy change and would get on board with the determination to
have a goal of removing our troops from combat operations by the end of
next year. That is hardly precipitous.
So what this measure does, instead of giving the President $200
billion to continue the war, it gives him $50 billion to shut the war
down. Instead of having troops there for the next 10 years, as the
President indicated in his speech, we want to have them out by December
of 2008. It requires redeployment to begin in 60 days, and it ends the
authority for any agency of the United States Government whatsoever to
engage in torture.
We are mired, Mr. Speaker, in Iraq because of the self-important
illusions of hopeless romantics in the administration. We hear tell
these days that the President talks a lot about Teddy Roosevelt and
Winston Churchill. If that is the case, he is harboring dangerous
illusions. He ought to heed the advice of a statesman 80 years ago who
wrote the following. I will read excerpts from this letter.
``I am deeply concerned about Iraq. The task you have given me is
becoming really impossible. Incompetent Arab officials are disturbing
some of the provinces and failing to collect revenue. We overpaid on
last year's account, which it is almost certain Iraq will not be able
to pay this year, thus entailing a supplementary estimate. . . I have
had to maintain troops in Mosul all through the year in consequence of
the Angora quarrel. This has upset the program of relief and will
certainly lead to further expenditures. . . . I do not see what
political strength there is to face a disaster of any kind, and I
certainly cannot believe that in any circumstances any large
reinforcements would be sent . . . In my own heart, I do not see what
we are getting out of it. I think we should now put definitely to the
assembly the position that unless they beg us to stay, and stay on our
own terms in regard to efficient control, we shall actually evacuate
before the close of the financial year. I would put this issue in the
most brutal way, and if they are not prepared to urge us to stay and to
cooperate in every manner, I would actually clear out. . . .
``I think I must ask you for definite guidance at this stage as to
what you wish and what you are prepared to do. At present, we are
paying millions a year for the privilege of living on an ungrateful
volcano out of which we are in no circumstances to get anything worth
having.''
That was the real Winston Churchill speaking in 1922 in a letter to
Lloyd George. It seems to me that the President in the White House
today ought to heed the words of Winston Churchill so long ago and at
long last reconsider a policy change in Iraq. That is what this
legislation is designed to stimulate.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the majority chairman of the committee
bringing this bill before the House because we do need the money, not
for our troops at home, not for the basic bill, because that basic bill
was signed by the President yesterday. What we need is to make sure
that our troops in the field have the equipment that they need, the
force protection measures they need, the body armor that they need, the
MRAPs that they need, the ammunition they need, whatever they need to
take on the enemy to accomplish their mission, to protect themselves
while they are doing it. So I want to speak directly to the bill rather
than to the politics or the history of the political aspect of this
legislation.
Fifty billion dollars is a good number. I wish it would have been a
little higher because I don't think it takes us all the way to where we
need to be for a supplemental next spring as far as what we are doing
in Afghanistan and Iraq, but the $50 billion that is in this bill, the
dollars are good. What is provided by those dollars is needed for our
troops in the field. That has to be the important decision that we make
tonight: Are we going to fight a political battle here on the floor
while our soldiers overseas are facing the enemy of terrorism? I don't
think that is what we are here for today. I think we are here to pass
this bill.
The gentleman from Wisconsin mentioned a policy change; that this
bill is going to bring about a policy change. There was a policy change
earlier in the year. Most everybody referred to it as the surge, and
many Members of this body opposed the surge. But if you listened to the
briefers this afternoon in the Rayburn building, that policy change has
produced a lot of very positive effects.
So there was a policy change. But, nevertheless, whether you still
support the policy change or not, that is up to everybody's individual
decision. Despite what your position is on the war, on the battle, you
have got to be prepared to provide for the troops that are there,
whether you like the fact that they are there or not. I want them home.
I want them home as soon as we can get them home.
Along with Chairman Murtha of the subcommittee, I have seen too many
wounded soldiers and marines in our military hospitals. We have both
attended too many funerals of our war heroes who were sent home after
having lost their life on the battlefield. So I want this war over and
I want our troops home as soon as we can get them home in victory;
victory in a war that didn't start on September 11 and it didn't start
in March of 2003 when we went into Iraq or Afghanistan. It started back
in 1983, October 23 of 1983. Terrorists bombed our Marine barracks in
Beirut. Those marines were there as peacekeepers, not as part of any
other expeditionary force, other than to keep the peace, and 241 of our
military marines and soldiers lost their lives there.
In 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed; in June of 1996, the home
of the airmen in Saudi Arabia in the Khobar Towers were bombed, and 19
of our airmen lost their lives. In August of 1998, our embassies in
Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by terrorists and 11 Americans lost
their lives and hundreds of others were injured. In October of 2000,
the USS Cole, on a peaceful mission off the shore of Yemen, was bombed
by terrorists and 17 lives were lost. All this started before September
11, and of course I don't think anybody denies what happened to us on
September 11. So this war started a long time ago, and this threat is
basically the same threat that we saw starting in 1983.
I am pleased that sufficient funds are included for the Army
operation and maintenance account to allow for 6 months of war
operations. Other accounts would apparently allow for only 4 months of
operations, however. The size of the package is secondary to the policy
provisions that have been attached to the bill. Many Members have
stated they cannot vote for war funding without language requiring a
withdrawing from Iraq. The reality is most of them have already done
that.
When we passed the Defense appropriations bill, the basic Defense
appropriations bill for 2008, we provided transfer authority, large
amounts of transfer authority so that if we didn't get a bridge fund
passed, if we didn't get a supplemental passed, the Services could
reach into their basic accounts to pay for fighting the war in
Afghanistan and Iraq.
So those who voted for that bill have already voted to fund the war,
whether they like it or not. That legislation has now been signed into
law, so the money is there to borrow. We are going to start hearing
about cuts in services at military bases here in the United States if
we don't pass a supplemental or a bridge fund and the Services will
have to borrow from their basic funds. We don't want that to happen. We
don't want the Services to run short on anything that they have to do
to provide for the security of our Nation.
So whatever your position on the war, whatever decisions are going to
be
[[Page H13922]]
made about withdrawal from Iraq, this money, this $50 billion and more
will be needed in the next 6 months and it needs to be passed.
This bill was only filed last night. Some of the provisions have not
been sufficiently reviewed, in my opinion.
{time} 1930
I have read this bill twice, word for word, and I am concerned about
some of the sections of this bill.
Section 102 regarding interrogations says in part that ``nothing in
this section shall be construed to affect the rights under the United
States Constitution of any person,'' and I will repeat, ``any person in
the custody or under the physical jurisdiction of the United States.''
Now, to me, that means that terrorists who we capture on the
battlefield, who have been killing our own American soldiers on the
ground, I read that to mean that they will be given the same
constitutional protections as any citizen of the United States of
America. And I object to that. I don't think they deserve the
protection of the Constitution.
I wonder, does that mean we have to read the terrorists their rights
under the Miranda ruling? Can they be released on a technicality? Can
they get out on bail? Those are protections guaranteed to American
citizens. Are we going to give terrorists that same right? Well, this
bill says that we are going to give terrorists that same right.
Terrorists go by no rules. They do not subscribe to the Geneva
Convention and they do not deserve the same protection under our
Constitution that our constituents enjoy.
I think this bill needs a lot of repair work before it can become
law.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Lincoln Davis).
Mr. LINCOLN DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of this
bill and the effort by this Congress to bring accountability to the war
in Iraq.
This war is in desperate need of a new direction. For nearly 5 years,
our brave men and women have valiantly toed the line for this
administration, and I'm proud to say that they have had great successes
in their mission. We have seen a terrible dictator overthrown, tried
and put to death, and in his place the people of Iraq carried out free
and open elections. For all of this, we owe our soldiers and their
families a debt of thanks.
But today's debate is not about the purpose of this war. We are here
to make a decision on how best to bring accountability to this
engagement. Today's legislation will keep soldiers on the ground to
oversee diplomatic missions, protect U.S. citizens, equip and train
Iraqis to stand on their own and continue to engage in targeted attacks
on terrorists as we seek them out. This is a responsible strategy that
worked for Eisenhower in South Korea when troops remained to oversee
the DMZ after major operations had ended, and it can work for America
today in Iraq.
However, I have long felt that it is time to remove our men and women
from the kill zones of Iraq. Our soldiers are trained to do the job of
the United States military, not the job of police-on-the-beat for the
nation of Iraq. We need to redeploy our troops so they can continue to
carry out the work of defending America from terrorist threats around
the globe. It is time for the Iraqis to occupy their own country with
their own military and police force.
This bill begins the redeployment of our combat troops, while
continuing to fund initiatives for our men and women that protect them
from IEDs, traumatic brain injury and more. But the days of a blank
check from this Congress must come to an end. The American people
deserve a new direction in Iraq, and this legislation is an important
step.
I would like to add that I bristle when I hear the other side talk of
``cut and run'' Democrats. The legacy of the Democratic Party is one of
great wartime leaders. Andrew Jackson may have done the cutting at the
Battle of New Orleans, but it was Colonel Packingham who did the
running. It was President Wilson who convinced the American people to
take on the oppressors in the First World War. It was President
Roosevelt who said ``we have nothing to fear but fear itself'' before
leading the charge into the battlefields of Asia and Nazi Germany. And
it was President Truman who ended that war by dropping a nuclear
weapon.
I am a member of a Democratic Party that has never cut and run, but
has been responsible with our men and women in regard to their safety
and families, as well as our national security. We need a change in
Iraq and a change in course. This must happen.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the very
distinguished minority leader, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).
Mr. BOEHNER. Let me thank my colleague from Florida for yielding.
Let me just say that the gentleman from Wisconsin, the chairman of
the committee, is a Member that I know well and have great respect for,
and along with the gentleman from Florida and the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, they have spent over 30 years doing everything they could
to support our troops. But if you think that the debate that we are
having tonight is something that we have heard before, it is. Over 40
times this year, we have had votes and debates in this house on the
issue of Iraq.
Let me just say that my colleague from Wisconsin is known for his
famous statement about Members coming to the floor of the House posing
for ``holy pictures.'' Now, if there has ever been a case over my 17
years here in Congress of people posing for holy pictures, it is over
this issue of Iraq.
When I came to the Congress in 1991 as a brand new Member, my first
vote in this Chamber was on whether to go to war with the Iraqis in
Kuwait. I remember coming here as a brand new Member, Members in the
well of this House who had been here 30 and 40 years, tears in their
eyes, talking about this being the most difficult vote they had ever
cast. It was a very difficult moment for me and all of my colleagues.
But we went through that, and we went through it successfully.
So when we have the issue of war debated here on the floor of the
Congress, there is no issue, no issue that is more personal, no issue
that is of greater significance to our country, than all of us casting
our vote on sending our young men and women into battle anywhere
overseas. So I understand the passion that we have on both sides of the
aisle over this issue.
But I think we all have to understand that we are in Iraq for a very
important reason. We went there to get rid of Saddam Hussein. I think
everybody understands that. We went there to make sure that the weapons
of mass destruction were gone. They are gone. Where they went, I don't
think we will ever know. We went there to set up a democratically
elected government, and, frankly, we have succeeded.
It was al Qaeda 3 years ago that made Iraq the central front in their
war with us. We didn't start this war with al Qaeda. They did. And as
the gentleman from Florida pointed out earlier, it didn't start on 9/
11, it started back in the early eighties. And it persisted through the
eighties and the nineties, and America and the rest of the world looked
up, looked away, and just hoped the problem would go away.
Well, it didn't go away. After 3,000 of our fellow citizens died on
9/11, what was America to do? Look up, look away and just hope the
problem would go away one more time? No. So we went to Iraq. But it was
al Qaeda and it was Iran who have made this the central front in their
war with us.
America has no choice but to succeed in our efforts in Iraq. We all
know what failure in Iraq will bring. Failure in Iraq brings a
destabilization of Iraq itself, a safe haven for the terrorists to
operate from, a destabilization of the entire Middle East, the end of
Israel as we know it, and who doesn't believe that if we leave Iraq and
we leave in failure, that the terrorists don't follow us home and that
we have to deal with the problem here on the streets of America?
This is not what America wants. America wants us to succeed, and it
is success that we are having in Iraq. You all know the statistics. You
have all seen the headlines over the last several weeks and the last
several months. Our troops in Iraq are doing a marvelous job on our
behalf. They are succeeding. They are training the Iraqi Army to take
our place. The Iraqi Army is more
[[Page H13923]]
out in front than ever before. The amount of violence in Iraq is down
significantly. Our troops, our troops, are dying in less numbers each
and every day. Why? Because we are having success there.
So we ought to thank our troops, thank our troops for the great job
they are doing, because General Petraeus put forward a plan that is
working.
Now, I understand that a lot of my colleagues on the other side have
invested all their political capital over the course of this year in
failure in Iraq. It hasn't happened, thankfully, because for the good
of our Nation, not today, not tomorrow, maybe not next week, but for my
kids and their kids, success in Iraq is critically important. And I
think all the Members in this Chamber understand just how important
success is there. We are taking on an enemy that is growing in all
parts of the world, and if we are not willing to take them on in Iraq,
if we are not willing to draw the line and defeat them, where will we
draw the line? Where will we stand up for America, and where will we
stand up for American values? Iraq is the place to do it.
The bill that we have before us goes back to the same old tired plan,
the plan for failure, if you will. That is what the bill that we have
before us does. It ties the hands of the administration, it ties the
hands of our generals, it ties the hands of our people on the ground,
and it will lead to nothing other than failure.
We have been down this path. We have been down this path all year
long. And I will admit to my colleagues, we have had plenty of mistakes
that have been made in Iraq. There has never been a war when there
haven't been a lot of mistakes made. You can go back to the Civil War
and look at all the mistakes that were made. The First World War, the
Second World War, Vietnam, there were a lot of mistakes that got made
in wars, and mistakes have been made in this war.
But, ladies and gentlemen, you all know that we have no choice, no
choice, but to succeed, and the plan that we have before us, to fund
our troops for the next 4 months, will lead to nothing other than
failure.
So I am going to ask my colleagues, let's stop the political games.
We all know what is going on here. It is another political stunt,
another political stunt trying to trap the President, trying to trap
the generals and putting handcuffs on them. Let's stop it.
I think my colleagues on both sides of the aisle want us to succeed.
Instead of playing these political games, what we ought to be doing is
passing this bill cleanly. And we ought to be passing the Military
Quality of Life Veterans bill, because our troops are coming home. We
have got 3,000 troops that have been sent out of Diyala on their way
home. We are going to have troops coming home all year. And if we don't
pass the Military Quality of Life Veterans bill, the benefits they are
entitled to, the services we ought to be providing to those veterans
coming home will not be there.
So let's vote ``no'' on this bill. Let's find a way this week to make
sure that the veterans bill is up on this floor and passed and in the
President's hands.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), the chairman of the Defense
appropriations subcommittee.
Mr. MURTHA. As the gentleman from Florida said, we just passed a $459
billion bipartisan Defense appropriation bill, and it funds the troops,
it funds the health care, it funds almost all the Defense Department.
It does not fund the war in Iraq.
Now, when I spoke out 2 years ago, I said we need stability in the
Middle East. All of us want stability in the Middle East. We can talk
about Iraq, but it's not in isolation that you talk about Iraq. You
have to talk about Pakistan and what's happening in Pakistan and why we
haven't had an overall diplomatic success there. You can talk about
Turkey, on the verge with tanks moving towards the border and might go
into Kyrkystan, which would completely disrupt what is going on in
Iraq.
You can talk about Iran and the policy that we have had in Iraq and
how it has disappointed us with the influence that Iran has gained.
When we were attacked, Iran was one of the first countries to come to
the support of the United States with their concern about what had
happened, their concern about al Qaeda.
What we are trying to do here today is stop torture. We do it by
saying the Army Field Manual has to be the guideline for torture. If
you're going to have prisoners, and I have talked to service people,
Colin Powell agrees with this, Gates agrees with this, almost all the
military understands if you don't have guidelines set by the Army Field
Manual, it hurts our troops. It's pretty hard to argue. If you're for
torture, I don't say you vote for this or you vote against this bill,
but this stops torture by saying you've got to comply with the Army
Field Manual.
The other thing we say in this bill is you have to have fully
equipped and fully trained troops. Can anybody argue about that? Is
there anybody that can say to me we shouldn't have fully trained and
fully equipped troops? I don't think so.
{time} 1945
The other thing, it sets a goal. And the goal is to start the
redeployment out of Iraq and have them out within a year. That doesn't
mean that we are going to necessarily get it, but we have to start it.
At some time we have to convince the Iraqis that we need to change the
direction and they are going to have to take responsibility. I think
they have started that. I think we have backed off a little bit.
What we did in Vietnam was make the mistake that every time they made
a mistake, we took over. In this particular case, we have to let the
Iraqis continue to do their job.
Now, the government has let us down; there is no question about it.
The government has not changed the policies. There has been ethnic
cleansing. There have been 4 million people ethnically cleansed either
by sending them out of the country or by moving them from Sunni areas
into Shiite areas or vice versa.
This is one of the reasons that the military commanders have said
over and over, the Iraqis are finally taking an interest. The al Qaeda
has been defeated, according to what the military commanders are
saying.
What is the point in us being there if al Qaeda has been defeated? I
said a couple of years ago, there are only 2 or 3,000 al Qaeda, and the
Iraqis know where they are and know what they have to do to take care
of them.
I am convinced that this bill starts to force the Congress to have
oversight. We are the board of directors, somebody said to me today.
The President is the executive officer. We are the board of directors.
When the board of directors sees the policies going in the wrong way,
and actually, the people of the United States are the board of
directors and we act for the board of directors by the people of the
United States. If we think it is going the wrong way, we have to change
the policy.
This is a change in policy. This holds the President accountable for
the decisions he is making. It doesn't tie the commanders' hands. No
torture. They are supplied with equipment and training. That is not
tying the hands of the commanders. And we are starting to get them out
already.
Al Qaeda has been defeated. The civil war has wound down. It is time
to get us out. Let's remember, stability in the Middle East doesn't
depend just on Iraq. It depends on Pakistan with nuclear weapons or the
possibility of nuclear weapons. Stability depends on Iran. Stability
depends on Syria. Stability depends on Turkey, our allies. We need a
diplomatic effort.
As I said and the Chief of the Joint Chiefs said, we cannot win this
militarily; it has to be won by the Iraqis and it has to be won
diplomatically.
This helps us hold the administration accountable, and I would ask
for all Members to vote for a bill that changes the direction of this
Congress and this country in this effort in Iraq.
[[Page H13924]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14NO07.001
[[Page H13925]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14NO07.002
[[Page H13926]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14NO07.003
[[Page H13927]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14NO07.004
[[Page H13928]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14NO07.005
[[Page H13929]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14NO07.006
[[Page H13930]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14NO07.007
[[Page H13931]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14NO07.008
[[Page H13932]]
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds just to
point out, and I agree strongly with Mr. Murtha's statement about
torture. I don't think Americans want to be known as a Nation that do
torture.
But we have put prohibitions on torture in our Defense appropriations
bills almost from the beginning of the war, and so we have made it very
clear that we are opposed to the use of torture. We just wish the other
side would go by the same rules.
I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from
California, the former chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Mr.
Hunter.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time. I want to also thank everyone who works on this committee and has
spent so much time over the years working to prepare our military
forces to be able to handle contingencies and wars around the world. We
appreciate that, and you have lots of great experience.
But let me tell you, this provision in this particular bill is
terrible for the warfighters. Let me talk about a small piece of it.
You have what I call a 15-day wait, notify and hold provision. That
means before any unit can go into Iraq, a 15-day period, waiting
period, has to expire after you have notified the Armed Services
Committees and the Defense appropriations committee that unit is
``ready for battle'' and meets a mission-capability standard.
Now, the problem with that is we have a war against terror in which
teams, whether they are special operations teams, medivac teams, EOD
teams, special fire support teams like C-130, A-6 gun ships are
constantly moving across the boundaries between Iraq and the rest of
the world. Some of our assets come off of carriers. Some of them come
out of Incirlik, Turkey. Some from Kuwait and some of them come from
other places.
This idea that before a special forces team can move across a line
you must have a 15-day notify and wait period is totally unworkable.
I want to give to you what Admiral Fallon, head of the Central
Command, said when we asked him what he thought about the notify and
hold provision. He said, ``I would ask for consideration that we not
limit the flexibility of our commanders in allowing them to use forces
that might be necessary to meet a situation or a mission which they
might be asked to undertake. And so I would opt to allow our commanders
to have the flexibility of making that decision rather than have some
dictated requirement in advance.''
I would say to my good friend, Mr. Murtha, who has several times
stated that the administration should listen to its generals: Every
team that goes into that warfighting theater goes in because one of the
battlefield commanders has requested their presence.
I can remember talking to my son when he was in the battle of
Fallujah as an artillery officer and he was inside the city as a
forward observer. And I asked him what the most important platforms we
had out there were. He said the A6 C-130 gunship. I said, Where are
they? He said, They come and they go.
Ladies and gentleman, we move firefighting teams, all types of
special operations crews and teams, EOD teams, A6 C-130 gunships across
those borders constantly, and to have a requirement where you are going
to have to give a 15-day notification and wait before you can move that
unit in is devastating to our warfighting capability.
I would ask for a ``no'' on this measure.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, as one who opposed the invasion of Iraq and as
one who has led efforts to end the occupation of Iraq, I rise today to
support the Orderly and Responsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations
Act of 2007.
First, I would like to thank Speaker Pelosi, Chairmen Obey and Murtha
for really crafting this historic legislation that takes the first step
to end the occupation of Iraq. This bill's main purpose, main purpose,
is to begin to fund the end of this occupation.
This is also the very first time that this Congress will explicitly
tie funding to bringing our troops home. It mandates a start date for
the President to begin redeployment of our brave troops within 30 days
of his signature. It also once again puts Congress on record
prohibiting the establishment of permanent military bases and United
States economic control of Iraqi oil and also of torture.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation is not perfect. I strongly feel that
there should be additional clarity on the numbers and nature of U.S.
forces that remain for protection of diplomats and training of Iraqi
forces. And given the President's determination to protect his legacy
by allowing the occupation to continue indefinitely, we really must be
wary of providing him opportunities to prolong or extend this war.
So we made sure in this legislation that this bill explicitly states
that ``the primary purpose of this $5 billion should be to transition
the mission, redeploy troops in Iraq, and not to extend or prolong the
war.''
But I am also disappointed that the end date in this legislation is a
goal no later than December 2008. But hopefully, the Senate will pass
this and send it to the President.
This legislation does conform to what Congresswomen Waters, Woolsey
and myself have been working on all year. Earlier this year, we
authored the Lee amendment that stipulates funding for Iraq should be
used to fully fund, fully fund, the safe and orderly redeployment of
our troops from Iraq. We did this way back in March. Now, 92 Members of
Congress wrote to the President to put him on notice to this effect. So
I am glad this remains the main purpose of this legislation.
This legislation represents for many of us a very important step
forward to end the combat operations in Iraq. Otherwise, believe you
me, I would never vote for it.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation does not give the President a blank
check for his occupation. It provides a down payment on redeploying our
troops from Iraq and ending the occupation. It clearly says these funds
are to be used to begin to end the death, the violence, and the
destruction that the Bush administration has brought on Iraq, which he
has brought on our brave young men and women, and our country and the
world.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to
the very distinguished gentleman from New Jersey, the former vice
chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I rise in strong opposition to this legislation,
the process that brought it here tonight, but not to the money that is
badly needed for our troops in the field.
For each of the last 3 years, the Defense appropriations bill, ably
led by Chairman Young and Chairman Murtha, has included a
straightforward bridge fund to cover the cost of ongoing operations in
Iraq and Afghanistan.
Indeed, the continuing resolution we passed last month gave our
military access to the bridge funding until November 16. This funding
allowed our warfighters, all volunteers, the ability to fuel their
Stryker vehicles and Humvees, restock their ammunition, resupply their
mess halls, power the systems that allow them to keep in touch with
their families at home, and even to ship their new MRAP vehicles to the
battle zone so they may be better protected from IEDs. And yes, protect
their fellow soldiers and innocent Iraqis.
But bowing to antiwar sentiment, the majority leadership pointedly
chose to keep this important bridge funding out of the defense bill
that we approved last week.
So while our brave warfighters are hard at work in Iraq in a hellish
environment, they find they have to watch their own backs from those in
Washington who want to choke off funding for their missions, both
military and humanitarian.
I submit that this deliberate attempt to starve our operations in
Iraq threatens the very safety of those troops and the lives of
hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis. No, Mr. Speaker, we should be
sending to the President a clean bridge fund that does not tie the
hands of commanders in the field and allows them to build on their
undeniable successes in recent months in Iraq. Cutting money does tie
their hands, limits those commanders' options, as does the setting of
date certain.
[[Page H13933]]
My colleagues, the ill-advised process this House started last week
is not without its costs. While Congress deliberately procrastinates,
and some say throws roadblocks in front of our brave warriors battling
violent international terrorists every day, military operations in Iraq
and Afghanistan will run out of money, causing the Department of
Defense to borrow from other important programs to support their
operations.
I am told this process could completely drain the Army's operations
and maintenance accounts by the end of next January.
In fact, it is my understanding that the Deputy Secretary of Defense
has warned that the military would have to start preparing in December,
next month, to close domestic military facilities, lay off civilian
workers, and delay contracts if the bridge funding is not provided.
This could have very damaging consequences for those communities
privileged to host a military installation.
Mr. Speaker, I am also troubled that this bill requires the
withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq and slaps restrictions on the
mission of U.S. troops, again, both military and humanitarian.
This harkens back to what was recently described by the junior
Senator from Connecticut as the ``narrative of defeat and retreat.'' As
Senator Lieberman said yesterday, and I quote, ``Rather than supporting
General Petraeus and our troops in the field, antiwar advocates in
Congress are instead struggling to deny or disparage their
achievements, and are now acting, once again, to hold hostage the
funding our troops desperately need and to order retreat by a date
certain, regardless of what is happening on the ground.''
I would remind my colleagues that even the Iraq Study Group warned us
against setting arbitrary deadlines. We should let the troops and their
commanders do their work.
I have always maintained that our brave troops' service in Iraq
should be as short and as safe as possible. This legislation does
nothing to advance either of these goals. I urge rejection of this
bill.
General Leave
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent all Members may have 5
legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include tabular and extraneous material on H.R. 4156.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
Mr. OBEY. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Murtha).
Mr. MURTHA. I would say to my good friend from New Jersey, he voted
for the $459 billion bill where we had a CR that fully funded the
MRAPs, fully funded, $16 billion for the year. We are not holding up
the MRAPs. And we provided the transportation.
{time} 2000
We were very careful with this bill. The gentleman knows how careful
I am in taking care of the troops. The gentleman knows how careful he
is in taking care of the troops. None of us are trying to put
roadblocks in the way. What we are trying to do is hold the
administration accountable for what they have done. We want stability
in the whole Middle East, not just in Iraq. So we have got to focus
also on the future of the country. Russia is starting to come up, China
is starting to come up. And in our bill, which the gentleman from New
Jersey was a part of, we started to look ahead. Iraq is occupying us as
well as we occupying Iraq.
So I have to say to the gentleman, I just want to make sure we keep
the facts straight. We have fully funded the MRAPS, even though it's
costing $150,000 per MRAP to get them overseas because of the lateness
of the request.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).
(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. PENCE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this Iraq supplemental bridge
fund. While no one is declaring victory in Iraq, the tide is turning.
But nothing changes here on Capitol Hill. And here we go again, by some
estimates, the 41st effort by the majority to come to this floor and
force a precipitous and reckless withdrawal of forces from Iraq,
another Democrat plan for redeployment from Iraq tying $50 billion in
necessary combat funds for our troops to a Democrat plan for
withdrawal.
With unambiguous evidence of progress on the ground filling the
newspapers of America, the Democrats in Congress seem to have decided
to add denial to their plan of retreat and defeat in Iraq. And the
newspapers speak for themselves.
The Washington Post last week wrote, ``The number of attacks against
U.S. soldiers has fallen to levels not seen since before the February
2006 bombing of a Shia shrine in Samarra that touched off waves of
sectarian killing.'' The death toll of American troops in October fell
to 39, the lowest since March 2006.
And on Thursday last, The New York Times noted, `` `American forces
have routed al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the Iraqi militant network, from
every neighborhood in Iraq,' a top general said today, `allowing
American troops involved in the surge to depart as planned.' ''
The Washington Times would say, ``Responding to the good news,
Speaker Pelosi has unveiled her newest legislative strategy to damage
the war efforts. House Democrats this week,'' they wrote, ``will try to
enact a bill calling for immediately beginning to withdraw U.S. troops
from Iraq. The surrender language will be attached to a 4-month, $50
billion funding.''
``The contrast could hardly be more striking,'' they said. ``American
soldiers performing heroically and successfully, risking their lives on
the battlefield in Iraq, Speaker Pelosi and the Democrat leadership by
contrast look for ways to advertise American weakness to the enemy.''
And I say from my heart, with great respect to the good and patriotic
Americans with whom I differ on this point, I urge my colleagues to
reject this Democrat plan for withdrawal. But I also urge my countrymen
to give our soldiers a chance. I know things have not always gone as we
had all hoped in Iraq.
In my role as the ranking member of the Middle East Subcommittee and
before, I have traveled to this war-torn country five times over the
last 4\1/2\ years. I have seen success and I have seen less than
success. I have seen advance and I have seen failure. But today, we are
seeing hope spring. Freedom and stability are beginning to take hold in
Iraq. And I say from my heart, we cannot lose faith in ourselves. We
cannot lose faith in freedom. We must reject this latest plan for
retreat and defeat.
Mr. OBEY. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Woolsey).
Ms. WOOLSEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
This is almost the 250th time I have been down on this House floor to
talk about Iraq in the last 2 years. I can't remember, so I say almost
how many times it's been.
During that time, the American people have been demanding two things,
that the Congress step up to our responsibility and bring our troops
home, and that we take bold steps to face up to the President by using
our power, the power of the purse, to hold him accountable for what is
going on in Iraq.
Today, Speaker Pelosi is leading the House of Representatives in a
bold direction. It is the first time so far that we have tied funding
to redeployment. Ninety-two Members of the House have written a letter
to the President demanding that no more funding for Iraq go forward
without it, meaning bringing our troops home and redeployment.
This vote also leads to next year's appropriations where we can use
the power of the purse and fully fund bringing our troops home in a
very responsible and very timely and actually safe way.
This bill is not perfect. It is the boldest step yet, however, and we
must support it. I would not support it if we were not tying the
funding to responsible redeployment. I would not support it unless
there was a start date for the President to begin the redeployment of
our brave men and women in uniform. This bill is the beginning, but it
is a bold beginning. I think we should consider everything that is in
it, and then build on that for the future and get our troops home as
soon as possible.
[[Page H13934]]
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 3 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, it seems like not that long ago, but it was
a year or so ago, we heard repeatedly: We're losing in Iraq. We're
losing in Iraq. We've got to have a policy change. We're losing in
Iraq. We've got to have a policy change. And we got a policy change.
It's kind of refreshing to hear so many say we're winning, and a
little bit surprising to hear we're winning, so we need a policy
change. We're winning, so we need a policy change? We know if we pull
out too quickly, we don't leave a stable area.
Hearing comments earlier about somebody won't listen to anyone else;
they get no input. I thought they were talking about the Democratic
majority. Just today on FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act, I'm told at 1:30 that we've got to have amendments in by 4 o'clock
on a bill that we weren't even allowed to see. You want input? Let's
start it right here on the floor.
I heard comments about Vietnam mistakes. The biggest mistake that
history teaches us about Vietnam was that it was micromanaged from
Washington. If you want documentation, go to Sam Johnson's book. After
the carpet bombing finally took place and we went after and took it to
them, the bombing stopped, we gave away the farm at Paris, and as the
prisoners left the Hanoi Hilton, one of the leaders said, ``You know,
you Americans are so foolish. If you'd have kept it up another week, we
would have had to unconditionally surrender.'' But we were micromanaged
from Washington.
We show the greatest reverence for those who have given their last
full measure of devotion not by pulling out before we leave a stable
area, but by seeing that we finish the job and leave a stable area so
they will not have died in vain.
I leave with a comment of Travis Buford's mother as we stood there by
his casket in Nacogdoches, Texas at the funeral home earlier this year.
I said to his mother as we stood near his coffin, ``Is there anything I
can do?'' She gritted her teeth and she said, ``Go back and tell the
Congress to shut up and let the military finish their job.''
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, after that very thoughtful statement, I would
like to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin
(Mr. Kagen).
Mr. KAGEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight in support of H.R. 4156
because people in Wisconsin want their country back.
This bill supports our troops and demands the President begin to move
our forces away, away from Iraq and back after our real enemies, Osama
bin Laden and his followers.
Iraq will forever be President Bush's war, an unnecessary war based
on lies and deceptions. His poor judgment has written perhaps the
saddest chapter in our Nation's history, wearing down our military and
the endless, centuries-old Iraqi civil war.
The vote today will end not the hatred between the Shiites and
Sunnis, but it will redirect our efforts away from Iraq as soon as
humanly possible. A ``yes'' vote supports our troops by protecting them
from a President who does not understand reality.
People in Wisconsin have asked me to deliver their message here, here
on the House floor: I want my country back. I want my country back.
Tonight, we will begin to move our country in a new direction, away
from Iraq and back after Osama bin Laden and his followers.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
(Mr. GINGREY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight in strong opposition to H.R.
4156, the so-called Orderly and Responsible Iraq Redeployment
Appropriations of 2008, because in fact, Mr. Speaker, the bill should
be called the Disorderly and Irresponsible Iraq Redeployment
Appropriations Act.
Let me be clear, Mr. Speaker. What we are debating tonight, disguised
as a genuine bridge fund to sustain operations in the global war on
terror, is nothing more than another defeatist measure intended to
placate the Democrats' liberal base as we approach this Thanksgiving
recess.
The Democratic leadership apparently has decided it's more to stand
with the Out of Iraq Caucus, MoveOn.org and Code Pink than with our
brave men and women in uniform. Rather than funding our soldiers' needs
and delivering a decisive blow to the terrorist campaign in Iraq, the
Democrats are again conditioning the funding on a date certain for
withdrawal.
At a time of sustained progress by our forces, Mr. Speaker, it seems
that what is great news for America and for our troops is consequently
bad political news for a Democratic majority who has literally bet the
farm on a defeatist agenda.
Just last weekend, Prime Minister Maliki stated that violence between
Sunnis and Shias has nearly disappeared from Iraq, disappeared from
Baghdad, with terrorist bombings down 77 percent.
The Washington Post reported that attacks against United States
soldiers have fallen to levels not seen since the February 2006 bombing
of the Shia shrine in Samarra. And an Investor's Business Daily article
detailed that military analysts, including many who are opposed to the
war, have concluded that the United States and its allies are on the
verge of winning in Iraq. And, thankfully, United States casualties in
Iraq are at their lowest level since March of 2006, Mr. Speaker. Now is
not the time to risk impeding the progress we are making. Now is the
time to continue building on the turnaround we have made, and to state
unequivocally that we are on the verge of victory in Iraq and that we
will finish the job.
Mr. Speaker, we cannot give in to the terrorists' extremist views and
sinister plans for the Middle East and the world. And we certainly
should not send a message to the terrorists that such a capitulation
will begin in 30 days and will wrap up by December of 2008.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on tying funds for
our troops to a date certain withdrawal from Iraq. I urge all my
colleagues to vote ``no'' on this dangerous bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 2156, the so-
called ``Orderly and Responsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations of
2008.'' Because, in fact, this bill is a ``disorderly and irresponsible
Iraq Redeployment Appropriations Act.''
Let me be very clear, Mr. Speaker. What we are debating today--
disguised as a genuine bridge fund to sustain operations in the Global
War on Terror--is nothing more than another defeatist measure intended
to placate the Democrat's liberal base as we approach the Thanksgiving
recess.
The Democratic leadership has decided it is more important to stand
with the ``Out of Iraq Caucus,'' MoveOn.org and Code Pink than with our
brave men and women in uniform. Rather than funding our soldiers' needs
and delivering a decisive blow to the terrorist campaign in Iraq, the
Democrats are again conditioning the funding on a date-certain
withdrawal.
At a time of sustained progress by our forces, Mr. Speaker, it seems
that what is great news for America and for our troops is consequently
bad political news for the Democrat majority and their defeatist
agenda.
Mr. Speaker, a July New York Times editorial authored by Michael
O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack stated ``We are finally getting somewhere
in Iraq, at least in military terms. . . . The soldiers and marines
told us they feel that they now have a superb commander in General
David Petraeus; they are confident in his strategy, they see real
results, and they feel now they have the numbers needed to make a real
difference.''
In September, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker spoke
optimistically about the future of Iraq citing concrete progress.
Acknowledging we still had a long way to go, they recognized we had
achieved tactical momentum and were building momentum toward local
reconciliation. Indeed, local Iraqis were turning against extremists.
Last weekend Prime Minister al-Maliki stated that violence between
Sunnis and Shi'ites has nearly disappeared from Baghdad, with terrorist
bombings down 77 percent. The Washington Post reported that attacks
against U.S. soldiers have fallen to levels not seen since before the
February 2006 bombing of a Shi'ite shrine in Samarra. An Investor's
Business Daily article detailed that military analysts--including many
who are opposed to the war--have concluded that the U.S. and its allies
are on the verge of winning in Iraq.
[[Page H13935]]
And thankfully, U.S. casualties in Iraq are at their lowest level
since March 2006. Now is not the time to risk impeding the progress we
are making. Now is the time to continue building on the turn-around we
have made and to state unequivocally that we are on the verge of
victory in Iraq, and that we will finish the job.
Mr. Speaker, let me remind my colleagues of the consequences of
giving up on Iraq: the collapse of a democratic Iraqi government,
likely leading to mass killings and genocide in the nation; an
emboldened al-Qaeda; regional instability; Iran and Syria setting the
course of Iraq's future; and Israel being pushed into the Mediterranean
sea.
The stakes are too high for political posturing. Ayman al-Zawahiri
has said ``the Jihad in Iraq requires several incremental goals. The
first stage: expel the Americans from Iraq.''
Mr. Speaker, we cannot give in to their extremist views and sinister
plans for the Middle East and the world. And we certainly should not
send a message to the terrorists that such a capitulation will begin in
30 days and will wrap up by December of 2008.
Mr. Speaker, never have I been so glad that we've got General
Petraeus leading our troops in Iraq and not the Democratic leadership
of this house. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on tying funds for
our troops to a date-certain withdrawal from Iraq. I urge all of my
colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.
Mr. OBEY. I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from New
Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter).
Ms. SHEA-PORTER. I have had to listen as my colleagues on the
opposite side of the aisle have made comments like, give our soldiers a
chance.
This is not about our soldiers. This is about a failed policy. I
think we need to go over some of the facts again, the facts that 70
percent of Americans remember but my colleagues on the opposite side of
the aisle seem to have forgotten.
Number one. There were no Iraqis on the plane that day.
Number two. There were no weapons of mass destruction.
{time} 2015
They weren't there. They were never found.
Number three. There was no al Qaeda in Iraq before the war, so it
doesn't matter if we reduce the number. There were none before the war.
Number four. This could have been a war against terrorists, should
have been a war against terrorists, not a war against the Iraqis.
Now we have almost 4,000 dead Americans. We don't even know how many
dead Iraqis. It's a terrible tragedy in our Nation. And we're making
decisions to spend billions of dollars in Iraq while we tell our
people, sorry, we don't have money for education. Sorry, we don't have
money for health care. Sorry, we don't have money to build bridges.
Bring these troops home. And this is what we are doing responsibly.
We're saying ``no'' to the President and ``yes'' to the American
people.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from Nebraska (Mr. Fortenberry).
Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, before we vote on this measure, the
American people need to know that U.S. troops in Iraq have achieved
significant security gains. Violence against U.S. troops and Iraqi
civilians has fallen dramatically, and forces of chaos have had their
safe havens and supply lines systematically eliminated. In fact, it was
recently announced that the curfew in Baghdad may soon be lifted.
Mr. Speaker, we can all agree that the goal is to end the war, but
this must be done in a solicitous and strategic manner. While there is
clearly military momentum in Iraq, the situation remains fragile and
complex, and our work continues to be very dangerous and difficult.
Establishing an arbitrary deadline for withdrawal of our troops would
potentially undermine the stabilization of the country, especially in
light of recent security gains.
However, I would submit that one area of potential agreement in this
body involves a renewed spirit of diplomacy for the region. It is time
for a diplomatic surge. The gains made possible by the steadfast
competence of our troops gives rise to a new diplomatic potential in
the effort to curtail regional destabilizing influences, promote
political and economic progress, as well as provide for the safe and
stable transition of refugees throughout the area.
The recent meeting in Istanbul, Turkey of countries neighboring Iraq,
the upcoming meeting in Annapolis to further the Middle East peace
process, and the United Nation's own recent reengagement in Baghdad are
all positive diplomatic trends that should be aggressively supported
and augmented by our efforts in this House to facilitate the rapid
stabilization of Iraq, potentially empowering an even more rapid
drawdown of our troops and a sustainable peace for the country.
Mr. OBEY. I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Hare).
Mr. HARE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4156.
For the last 4 years, President Bush has demanded more and more money
from this Congress for the war in Iraq, draining funding from domestic
priorities in the process. And this year's just no different.
True to form, in October the President casually requested an
additional $200 billion to continue his failed policy.
Mr. Speaker, every time I travel back to my district, constituents
plead with me to stand up to this President and end the war.
Fortunately for them, the days of the rubber-stamp Congress are over.
This bill before us holds the President accountable.
The bill provides only $50 billion of the President's $200 billion
request, which serves to meet the immediate needs of our troops
currently deployed, while the balance is dependent upon progress in
Iraq.
The funding is also conditioned on the redeployment of troops from
Iraq to begin within 30 days of enactment, with a target for completion
by December of 2008.
Passage of this bill is the first step towards forcing a change of
course in Iraq, shifting the mission from the combat forces to a
comprehensive strategy.
I urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 4156.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, would you advise us as to the time
available on each side?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida has 32\1/4\
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Wisconsin has 34 minutes
remaining.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to reserve my time at
this point.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, leadership is about getting results. I want to
thank our leadership for bringing a bill to the floor for the first
time that gets results.
I've never voted for funds for this war, and I've been waiting a long
time to vote for a bill that would bring our troops home.
On March 20, 2003, the United States invaded Iraq. It was a mistake
then, and every day we've failed to correct this mistake costs us in
cash, in credibility, and in lives. Every day we are not working to get
out of Iraq, we make our Nation weaker and less safe. Every day that we
do not get our troops out of Iraq is another day of mistakes.
The road out of Iraq starts with the first step. This bill is the
first beginning. To start a withdrawal, this bill jump-starts that
withdrawal. It starts in 30 days.
Passing this bill tonight makes clear that the U.S. House of
Representatives has acted to bring our troops home, to end this war,
and to put our country back on the right track. This leadership
deserves your support.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, today I'm proud to join with a unified
Democratic Caucus to cast my vote in support of H.R. 4156, the Orderly
and Responsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations Act. This legislation
marks the first time redeployment language has been attached to
funding, and includes the strongest worded language to date, by stating
Congress's explicit commitment to end the war in Iraq as safely and
quickly as possible and bring our troops home.
The letter my colleagues Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee and I sent to
President Bush stating that we would only support funding for the
redeployment of our troops has grown from 70 to 92
[[Page H13936]]
signatories. As the letter stated, and as the title of this legislation
echoes, we choose to support our military and look out for the best
interests of this country by funding an orderly and responsible
redeployment from Iraq.
While this bill is far from perfect, there's a lot in this bill to be
proud of. This bill requires the redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq
within 30 days. It prohibits the deployment of U.S. troops not deemed
fully trained, and it effectively bans the awful practice of
waterboarding by any affiliate of a U.S. agency. I applaud the shared
commitment of the Democratic Members in both the House and Senate to
end the war in Iraq.
I share the public's dismay at the slow pace of Congress's action to
end President Bush's failed war. It is, of course, the administration,
not Congress, who ultimately deserves the blame for this terrible war.
Before every major debate on the Iraq war, like clockwork, President
Bush fires up the propaganda machine to twist reality and obscure the
facts on the ground.
Those who stand in the way of real change in Iraq must be held
accountable. They must not be allowed to quietly throw wrenches in the
gears of change slowly rotating within this country.
A large and growing majority of Americans now believe it was a
mistake to invade Iraq and that Congress should force a change in the
President's irresponsible policies.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Akin).
Mr. AKIN. Mr. Speaker, before us tonight is yet another Democrat
plan, a plan for failure. I guess it's really not quite so much a plan
as just a schedule for failure.
It seems ironic to me that when there is actually success, the
Democrats are having a hard time seeing the success. And that's,
perhaps, because the success that is going on in Iraq is not a big
government, Washington, D.C. beltway kind of success. It's not the
Parliament in Baghdad where the success is going on. No, it's a
uniquely American and a special success. It's the success that bubbles
from the hearts of the very people that are involved, from the local
communities, from the streets, and particularly from the sheiks. It's
the kind of thing that happened in America where local communities
stood up against the biggest military power in the world and defended
our declaration in the same way these sheiks now are paying a
tremendous price. One, Sheik Meshin al-Jamari, he was encouraged to
come back from his safe haven in Jordan. He came back to take up
responsibility for his tribal area just to the east of Fallujah. And
what was the cost when he turned on al Qaeda? First, his daughter was
killed, then his brother shot, and then his family rounded up inside a
house in Karma, and the house imploded upon their heads. And yet, that
sheik is standing firm because he does have a vision for the
possibility that there will one day be an Iraq where people can be
free.
Our General Allen was asked by some of the Iraqis in his tribe, they
said, When the British left, they left us a big skyscraper. When
America leaves Iraq, will you leave a skyscraper? And General Allen
said, No. We'll leave the ideas that leave you a free people. And one
day there will be Iraqis who come to us and they will say, Hey, GI Joe,
we believe it too. We believe that there is a God that gives
inalienable rights to all people, the right to life and liberty and the
pursuit of happiness, and we will also stand with you because you have
that hope.
It is my hope that the Americans and the Democrats will rediscover
why we have always gone to war in America, because we do believe in our
battle cry from years ago that there is a God that gives basic rights
to all people and that we must have the courage to stand behind those
things. I hope that the Congress will vote to reject a plan of defeat.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. The war in Iraq is a disaster and it's time to bring
our brave troops, the men and women who volunteered to serve their
country for the right reasons but were sent to Iraq for the wrong
reasons. It is time now for them to come home.
For that reason, I support this bill which, for the first time, ties
funding to the responsible redeployment of our troops out of Iraq,
beginning within 30 days of passage and to end in December 2008.
I'm supporting this bill for another important reason. It establishes
once and for all that the United States of America does not torture
people. This bill is not confused about waterboarding. Waterboarding is
clearly made illegal, as well as electric shocks and mock executions
and every other gruesome interrogation method that is currently
prohibited in the Army Field Manual.
The American people elected the Democratic majority in this House
last November because they're done with the war. They're sick and tired
of losing American lives in Iraq. And they're sick and tired of losing
vital programs at home to continue to finance this tragic war.
This is a vote of conscience. I urge every one of my colleagues to
vote in favor of this bill.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. Speaker, we have heard significant discussion tonight about al
Qaeda. And people seem to think that Iraq, the Iraq war was necessary
in order to tackle al Qaeda. Well, that's backwards.
I can recall being out at CIA headquarters after 9/11. I can recall
sitting out at CIA headquarters watching the Predator aircraft as they
flew over Afghanistan, transmitting pictures back here in the search
for bin Laden and al Qaeda. And I remember what those CIA people out
there said, and the frustration they expressed because half of their
resources were being diverted from the search for bin Laden and al
Qaeda to prepare for the attack on Iraq.
It isn't that the war in Iraq was necessary to get at al Qaeda. The
war in Iraq diverted us from concentrating on al Qaeda and bin Laden.
{time} 2030
And we are still suffering the consequences today.
So let's keep the facts straight. Let's keep history straight. And
let's keep our heads straight. The fact is that Iraq got in the way of
our effort to get at al Qaeda and we have been suffering from that fact
ever since.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance
of my time.
Mr. OBEY. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms.
Pelosi), the distinguished Speaker of the House.
Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for yielding and appreciate his
leadership in bringing this important legislation, the Orderly and
Responsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations Act.
Mr. Speaker, on Monday, America honored our veterans, something that
we do every day in our hearts but which we openly celebrated on that
day. I am very proud that this year we could celebrate also the biggest
increase in veterans benefits in the 77-year history of the Veterans
Administration thanks to the New Direction Congress.
Yesterday, the President of the United States signed the Defense
appropriations bill with the biggest increase in defense spending, made
necessary because we must rebuild the capacity of our troops, which
capacity has been weakened by the war in Iraq. And today, we bring
before the Congress new direction legislation regarding the orderly and
responsible redeployment of our troops out of Iraq.
This legislation is necessary because whatever you may have thought
about the war or the conduct of the war or the origin of the war,
whatever you may think about the performance of the Iraqi Government
there, and I have my views on that subject, the fact is we can no
longer militarily sustain the deployment in Iraq. Staying there in the
manner that we are there is no longer an option.
Our troops have performed their duties magnificently, excellently,
patriotically, and courageously. We owe them the deepest gratitude for
their courage, their patriotism, and the sacrifices that they and their
families are willing to make. But even as they tried
[[Page H13937]]
to create and had their military successes, God bless them for that,
the secure framework was established to enable the Iraqi Government to
make the political change necessary to end the civil war. Well, the
sacrifice of our troops was simply not met by the actions of the Iraqi
Government.
How much longer should we expect our young people to risk their
lives, their limbs, their families, for an Iraqi Government that is not
willing to step up to the plate?
This legislation today offers something fundamentally different from
what President Bush is proposing, a 10-year war, a war without end,
costing trillions of dollars at the expense of our military readiness.
In fact, it offers something different than this House has done before.
Indeed, it provides the tools to our troops so that they can get their
jobs done with the greatest respect for that job. But it also presents
a strategy that will bring them home responsibly, honorably, safely,
and soon.
The legislation is different because it ties the funding to a
strategy for redeployment. It is different because the funding provided
is for the short term so that we can measure the administration's plan,
if there is such a plan, to redeploy the troops on the schedule
established in this bill.
We do have a military crisis not seen since Vietnam. Equipment is
wearing out and needs to be replaced. Our troops, wherever they are,
are only being trained for counterinsurgency in Iraq instead of a wider
training for a full range of missions that they may be called on to
perform. The deployment schedule of the Bush administration is wearing
down our forces, plain and simple.
The distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Committee has made
this readiness issue the cornerstone of his opposition to this war in
Iraq. The distinguished chairman of the appropriations subcommittee on
Defense has told us over and over again that this deployment in Iraq
cannot be sustained without weakening our national security, without
diminishing the capacity of our armed services to meet challenges to
our national security wherever they may occur. As such, this readiness
crisis poses a grave threat to America's national security.
Yet under the President's plan, and this was expressed by
representatives of the administration on more than one occasion, the
President's plan would bring 30,000 troops, the number of troops that
were sent in for the surge, that 30,000 troops would be redeployed back
to the U.S. by July of 2008. So let's understand this. This means that
by July of 2008, we will have the same number of troops in Iraq as we
had in November of 2006 when the American people called for a new
direction in Iraq. Again, we cannot afford the President's commitment
in Iraq. It traps us. It traps us, and we cannot, while we are in that
trap, address our readiness crisis.
This redeployment, in addition to undermining our military capacity
to protect the American people, is also unsustainable financially.
According to a recent report by the Joint Economic Committee, this war
could end up costing American taxpayers $3 trillion. We will pay any
price, as President Kennedy said, to protect the American people, but
without us going into the shortcomings of this war and the President's
execution of it, $3 trillion, think of the opportunity cost of that
money in our readiness, in the strength of our country, in our
reputation in the world.
The legislation before us is important. Again, the title of it is the
Orderly and Responsible Iraq Redeployment Appropriations Act. It would
begin redeployment within 30 days of enactment and have a goal of
completing the redeployment by December 15, 2008. The legislation
requires a transition in the mission of U.S. forces from being in
combat to diplomatic and force protection, to targeted counterterrorism
and limited support for the Iraqi security forces. It would prohibit
the deployment of U.S. troops to Iraq who are not fully trained and
fully equipped. Thank you, Mr. Murtha, for your leadership on that
subject and on this one as well and so many others. It requires that
all U.S. Government agencies and personnel abide by the Army Field
Manual's prohibition against torture.
The legislation that Mr. Obey has brought to the floor, and I salute
your leadership over and over again on this subject and so many others,
Mr. Chairman, the House must choose between the President's plan for a
10-year war without end, no end in sight, the longer we're there, the
harder it is to come out, the longer we're there, the more severely it
hurts our military readiness; or a Democratic plan for responsible,
honorable, safe redeployment out of Iraq and soon.
Our troops have already paid too high a price for this war: 3,850
U.S. troops killed, 28,000 injured, thousands of them permanently. That
is, of course, the biggest price to pay. But the price that we are
paying in our reputation in the world for us not to be able to take our
rightful place as a leader in the world to make the world safer, to
make the region, the Middle East, more stable, and so many other
challenges that the world faces, whether it's the eradication of
disease, the alleviation of poverty, the curbing of global warming,
keeping peace, ending the fury of despair that contributes to the
violence in the world. The countries of the world are crying out for
American leadership, and at the same time they disrespect us for what
is happening in Iraq.
We must act now to provide a new direction because it is clear that
the President has turned a blind eye to all of this. And in addition to
what I said earlier, our troops paying the biggest price, our
reputation in the world, the several-trillion-dollar price tag to the
taxpayer, and the cost to our readiness, despite the fact that the
President has turned a blind eye to the facts of Iraq and a tin ear to
the wishes of the American people to take a new direction in Iraq and
bring our troops home, we must act today. I hope that our colleagues
will all support this legislation because in doing so and if it is
enacted into law and if this policy is pursued, we can resume our
rightful place in the world. We can refocus our attention, as Mr. Obey
said earlier, on the real war on terrorism, and we can make the
American people safer by rebuilding and restoring the readiness and the
capacity of our military to protect the American people wherever our
interests are threatened.
All of us stand here and take an oath of office by pledging to
protect and defend the Constitution. In that preamble, to provide for
the common defense is one of our first responsibilities. Unless we do
that, protect the American people, nothing else is possible.
So let us support this legislation which helps us honor our oath of
office to defend the American people and to respect the sacrifice, the
courage, the patriotism of our troops to make us the home of the brave
and the land of the free.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on this important legislation.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the distinguished chairman of the Armed
Services Committee.
Mr. SKELTON. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise in support of this resolution.
It's very important that we take a good look at where we are in the
country of Iraq. It's important that we take a good look at the status
of the United States military forces, in particular our Army, which is
being stretched and strained nearly beyond recognition.
You can't help but have a great deal of pride in the young men and
young women in doing the duty upon which they have been called. But it
is important for us to turn the reins, give the baton over to the Iraqi
forces, to the Iraqi Government. We cannot hold their hand there
forever. It is important that we redeploy our forces in a responsible
and reasonable manner so that their readiness is assured in case of
some future challenge.
____________________