[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 24 (Wednesday, February 13, 2008)]
[House]
[Page H926]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            CONGRESSWOMAN WOOLSEY'S 250TH IRAQ SPECIAL ORDER

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. LEE. Madam Speaker, I come to the floor this evening to join 
Congresswoman Woolsey in her 250th special order on the ongoing 
quagmire in Iraq. I just want to take a moment to commend Congresswoman 
Woolsey and thank her for her leadership and her commitment to ending 
this occupation of Iraq and bringing our troops home. It was her 
resolution several years ago that we were able to begin, actually, the 
debate on this floor with regard to bringing our young men and women 
home. So I do have to salute you, Congresswoman Woolsey, and thank you 
again very much for your commitment and your tenacity and your 
willingness to be a voice that is so desperately needed to be heard.
  Madam Speaker, it's really, though, unfortunate that Congresswoman 
Woolsey, myself, Congresswoman Waters, and all of our colleagues have 
to come even once to this floor and speak out against the invasion and 
subsequent occupation of Iraq. But the reality is, we are in Iraq. And 
the reality is, also, that the cost of our invasion and the subsequent 
occupation of Iraq have been very high.
  As of February 10, 2008, according to the Defense Department, 3,955 
of our brave young men and women have given their lives, nearly 30,000 
United States troops have been injured, and countless thousands of 
Iraqis have been killed. We've committed a half trillion dollars and 
gotten what in return? We are still occupying a country which has 
undermined our standing and credibility in the world, what we have done 
as it relates to our occupation of Iraq.
  And so we have an opportunity once again to talk about why we do not 
believe funding the President or giving the President another blank 
check for waging war in Iraq makes any sense. We have the opportunity 
to turn this around in the coming war supplemental, which I understand 
may be once again before us next month. We must insist that the only 
funds that the President should get should be to protect our troops on 
the ground and bring them back home safely, not one more dime to 
continue the occupation, nor one more dime to continue the combat that 
is taking place in Iraq. And of course we call that, and it is better 
known as a fully funded redeployment.
  Equally as important, when our troops come home, we must ensure that 
they all come home. And that's why we continue to work with our 
colleagues to include provisions to prohibit permanent military bases 
in Iraq. We have been successful, in a bipartisan fashion, in including 
language in a number of authorizing and appropriation bills, as well as 
a stand-alone bill, H.R. 2929, which passed the House in July of 2007 
by an overwhelming bipartisan vote.
  In spite of the fact that the President has signed these provisions 
into law, I believe it's six times since 2006, he issued a statement as 
he signed the fiscal year 2008 Department of Defense authorization bill 
signaling his intention to ignore the provisions banning permanent 
military bases, to ignore that provision. Sadly, unfortunately, this is 
a pattern coming from the White House that really does seem intent on 
cutting Congress out of any decisions relating to the permanent 
stationing of the United States military in Iraq.
  At the end of last year, without formal congressional input, this 
declaration of principles for a long-term relationship of cooperation 
and friendship between the Republic of Iraq and the United States of 
America was discussed between Prime Minister Maliki and President Bush. 
Now these ``principles'' will set the stage for future agreements on 
the disposition of United States troops in Iraq. To make certain that 
this does not end up being a backdoor way to keep our troops in Iraq 
indefinitely, which of course many of us are worried about, I recently 
introduced H.R. 5128, which will require that any formal agreement 
emerging from this declaration of principles has the approval of both 
the House and the Senate. Further, it states a sense of Congress that 
the Iraqi Parliament should put their seal of approval on any agreement 
as well, which just makes sense.
  Finally, it will prohibit funding for any agreement that may emerge 
from these principles that does not have the approval of the House and 
the Senate.
  There's no denying that a majority of the American people are with 
us. A recent CNN Opinion Research Corporation poll has found that 
nearly two-thirds of all Americans oppose the occupation of Iraq.
  Madam Speaker, we need to end this occupation and bring our troops 
home as safely and as quickly as possible. And it is because of the 
courage and fortitude of Members such as Congresswomen Woolsey and 
Waters, who come to this floor each and every day. When the history of 
this period is written, historians will look back and say that there 
were some who opposed this and wanted it to end and end quickly.

                          ____________________