Congressional Record, Volume 153 Issue 195 (Wednesday, December 19, 2007)

[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 195 (Wednesday, December 19, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S15977-S15978]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

MESSAGE TO THE IRAQI POLITICAL LEADERSHIP

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I want to review the outcome of last
evening's debate and vote on the Iraq amendment that I offered along
with Senators Reed, Voinovich, Hagel, Snowe, Reid, Smith, and Salazar.
The amendment expressed the sense of the Congress that the missions
of the U.S. forces in Iraq should transition to counterterrorism
operations, and training, equipping, and supporting Iraqi forces, as
well as force protection, and that--and this is, perhaps, the most
critical, the important part of the amendment we voted on--that it
should be the goal to complete that transition by the end of 2008.
The vote on our amendment was 50 yeas and 45 nays.
Legislating on Iraq is a difficult matter because of the need to gain
60 votes in order to overcome a filibuster, and it was made perhaps
even more difficult last night because the Republican leader stated
that the President would veto the Consolidated Appropriations Act if it
contained our amendment.
Now, imagine that. The President of the United States would veto
funds for the troops if 60 or more Senators simply expressed their
nonbinding opinion that a goal should be to bring most of our troops
home by the end of next year. I would hope the President would welcome
at least the nonbinding advice of the Congress and not threaten funding
for the troops if that advice were forthcoming.
Despite a great deal of pressure, including the veto threat, our
amendment secured six Republican votes--more Republican votes than
amendments to change course in Iraq have secured to date. Senators
Voinovich, Hagel, Snowe, Smith, Collins, and Dole joined 44 of the 46
Democrats who were present to produce a 50-vote majority in favor of
our amendment.
I am confident that at least four of the five absent Senators would
have supported our amendment, as they have done in the past. So we
would have had 54 votes in favor of our amendment, which would have
been the most votes thus far for this type of a policy change in Iraq.
Now, what does that majority Senate vote mean, last night's majority
vote? What message does it send to the White House, the American
people, the Iraqi political leadership, and the Iraqi people?
I believe the message is that more and more Senators are embracing
the view that the American people reflected during the last election a
little over a year ago; namely, that we want to change course in Iraq,
and we want to have a reasonable timetable for the return of most of
our troops, and that we have reached the limits of our patience with
the Iraqi political leadership. I hope the President takes full notice
of last night's majority vote, although the majority will was thwarted
by a filibuster. I am sure he is aware of the vote, since the
Republican leader said the President would veto the legislation if it
contained our amendment.

I hope the American people understand a growing majority of the
Senate agrees with their view that we need to establish a goal for the
reduction of most of our forces in Iraq and the goal should be most
should leave Iraq by the end of next year.
I hope the Iraqi political leaders understand a growing majority of
the Senate is willing to vote to change course in Iraq as a way to
bring pressure on them to make the long-promised political compromises
that virtually everyone agrees are required to end the violence in
Iraq.
I hope Prime Minister Maliki, in particular, understands what the
U.S. Department of State said on November 21 about him and the other
political leaders in Iraq. This is an extraordinary finding by the
Department of State. I hope it gets somehow or other through to Prime
Minister Maliki. Here is what the Department of State report said:

Senior U.S. military commanders now portray the
intransigence of Iraq's Shiite-dominated government as the
key threat facing the U.S. effort in Iraq, rather than al-
Qaida terrorists, Sunni insurgents, or Iranian-backed
militias.

I wish the President of the United States would read his own State
Department report so that not only would the majority of the Senate
adopt resolutions intending to put pressure on the Iraqi leadership by
telling them the open-ended commitment of American forces is over, but
that the President of the United States would tell the Iraqi leaders
what his own State Department said in that November 21 report. It is so
important that I am going to repeat it:

I hope the members of the Iraqi Council of Representatives, the Iraqi
Parliament, understand they must find a way to bring about
reconciliation or face the consequences of squandering that window of
opportunity provided by the military successes of the surge that, as
General Odierno notes, will not be open forever. As I did after my trip
to Iraq last August, I once again express my personal hope that the
Iraqi Parliament will replace Prime Minister Maliki with someone who is
willing to strongly push national reconciliation and to replace that
Prime Minister with someone less connected to a sectarian group.
Finally, I wish to note that while last night's vote relative to Iraq
was the last such vote this year, it is not the last vote the Senate is
likely to hold on our policy in Iraq. The $70 billion approved last
night is only about one-third the amount the administration has sought
for Iraq and Afghanistan. The next time the Congress considers funding
for the war in Iraq, of the many factors that Members will no doubt
consider, none will be more important than whether Iraqi political
leaders have compromised with each other and assumed responsibility for
the future of their own country.

Thanking Staff and Senator Salazar

As others of my colleagues, let me add my thanks to our staffs, the
Senate staff, our pages, all the people who make it possible for us to
try to do the

[[Page S15978]]

best job we can do. We don't often express our thanks to our staffs, to
our pages, but this is surely the appropriate time of year to pause for
a moment to express that gratitude to them. Without their support,
without their assistance, it would not be possible for us to function.
They make it possible for us to do a lot better than we otherwise would
and even to make it possible for us to do some important things once in
a while.
I wish to also express my thanks to the Presiding Officer. General
Salazar I almost called Senator Salazar--Senator Salazar has been of
invaluable assistance to me on so many matters, and I know that feeling
exists with other Members of the Senate. As I talk about Iraq this
afternoon, looking at our Presiding Officer, Senator Salazar, I am
reminded of the countless numbers of times and the efforts Senator
Salazar has made to try to pull this body together to see if we
couldn't make a difference in terms of Iraq policy. That effort to
achieve a bridge across the aisle, to bring Senators together, is
something which Senator Salazar does as well as any Member of this
body. Even though we don't often or always succeed in achieving
bipartisan results, we would achieve them far fewer times but for the
assistance and help of our Presiding Officer. So I wish to add my
thanks to him as well.
I yield the floor. I note the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Levin). Without objection, it is so
ordered.

____________________