[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 14]
[House]
[Pages 18851-18852]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                INVESTIGATING REASONS FOR WAR WITH IRAQ

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I know that this journey 
that we have taken since the beginning of the year involving the war 
against Iraq in many instances confuses the American public.
  I certainly applaud the American public's willingness to 
wholeheartedly support the men and women in the United States military. 
America has always joined together around its brave, strong and 
diligent men and women of the United States military when they have 
been put in harm's way and when they are in harm's way because of the 
principles or the direction of Members of this government.
  So this discussion this evening is to separate out the respect and 
appreciation for their bravery. It is an attempt to calmly state that 
this Congress needs to do its responsible duty in terms of determining 
the basis upon which this war was declared and the intelligence that 
was gathered and the reasons given for going to war against Iraq.
  If you read the beginning pages of our Constitution, the Founding 
Fathers, all of whom had some history in fleeing a despotic government, 
determined that this would be a perfect Nation, a Nation grounded in 
democratic principles, a transparent Nation. In the opening lines of 
the Constitution, it said we are organized to create a more perfect 
union. They believed that. They believed in transparency and they 
believed in the honesty of government and the integrity of government.
  I believe that this Congress has a responsibility to openly discuss 
the intelligence gathering that led to the representation that the 
United States of America was about to be under imminent attack by 
Saddam Hussein and his troops and that we were in immediate danger.
  Many of my colleagues came to the floor of the House during that 
vigorous debate in the fall of 2002 with great pain, believing that 
they had to cast a vote for the resolution that was on the floor that 
allowed the President to go to the United Nations, but if, if, the 
United Nations did not move, then the President interpreted the 
resolution to be able to move unilaterally, unilaterally, against Iraq.
  In spite of the fact that many of us argued vigorously that an 
outright declaration of war was required under the Constitution, 
Article I, Section 8, a vote of this body, members of the majority 
disagreed with that, and they fought against what I think is the right 
thinking and forward thinking view of 133 Members of both Houses, who 
said we must have a constitutional vote on a declaration of war.
  Madam Speaker, we had not gone to war, if you will, by the time of 
the 2003 State of the Union presentation made

[[Page 18852]]

by this President. What had occurred was a lot of debate, a lot of 
involvement in the United Nations, but we had not gone at that time 
into Iraq.
  It was a statement in the State of the Union, I believe, that framed 
for the American public the urgency of going. The words ``recently 
purchased uranium from a Nation in Africa'' caused the focal point to 
be on the fact that Saddam Hussein might have nuclear weapons that 
could be poised, if you will, directly at the United States of America.
  That is why it is so extremely important that we have an independent 
commission, which I call for, and subsequently a special prosecutor, if 
necessary. That is why I have offered an amendment to the foreign 
operations appropriations bill to ensure that there be no funds 
blocking the creation of an independent commission, meaning no funds be 
used to block the creation of an independent commission.

                              {time}  2100

  I hope that this amendment will be debated fully on the floor of the 
House on the basis of truth, not on the basis of partisanship. I have 
included as well in that amendment, or in amendments that I will offer, 
the idea of promoting women to be engaged more so in the peace 
processes. Whether it is in the Mideast or whether it is in discussions 
dealing with Liberia, women have been effective proponents and/or 
crafters of peace in international agreements, and I hope that can be 
the case.
  Madam Speaker, I think it is important to note that Americans are 
equally concerned about a bipartisan, nonpartisan independent 
commission that openly presents the facts in a public setting. I 
appreciate the fact that the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence 
is now reviewing this issue, but the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence, behind closed doors, does not represent the people's 
House. It does not represent the people of America being able to 
understand the trail of information that would cause statements to be 
made about the status of a purchase of uranium or the intelligence that 
would suggest to this Nation that we had to go in right at that moment 
unilaterally and not multilaterally.
  Just a brief statement: ``I am looking to you and other Members of 
Congress to look beyond partisan politics and make the courageous 
choice to discover the truth about what the administration did and did 
not know about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction before sending our 
armed forces to Iraq.'' Lora Munsell, Jackson, Ohio.
  Clearly this Congress must speak and must act. I would simply ask we 
allow an independent commission to go forward.

                          ____________________