[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 17]
[Senate]
[Pages 23441-23443]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    PRESIDENT BUSH'S AGENDA FOR IRAQ

  Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, as a Member of the Appropriations 
Committee, having had the opportunity to listen carefully to Secretary 
of Defense Rumsfeld lay out before the Senate and to the American 
people President Bush's agenda for Iraq, I think I need to share my 
dismay at some itemization of the President's requests.
  We all know, due to the lack of internationalization and the go-it-
alone approach in Iraq, that the cost in blood and in money is almost 
exclusively American. That contrasts with Desert Storm over a decade 
ago when George Bush, senior, led that war. While the United States did 
the lion's share of the fighting, the financial cost, at least, was 
offset--not quite but almost entirely--by our allies.
  In this case, a unilateral or near unilateral preemptive effort, 
alienating our allies, has led us to a situation where, on the heels of 
the $70 billion supplemental appropriations of a short time ago, the 
President has now asked for an additional $87 billion in yet another 
installment, and there will be more to come from the American 
taxpayers. This is at a time when our budget is deep in red ink, having 
gone from budget surpluses from the last years of the Clinton 
administration to now record deficits.
  To put this $87 billion in some perspective, that is roughly three 
times what the Federal Government spends on K through 12 education for 
an entire year. At a time when we are told we do not have the money to 
come up with the additional $8 billion for Leave No Child Behind, we 
have an $87 billion request here. This is, again, due to a woeful lack 
of postwar planning for our circumstances in Iraq.
  Much of this money will go for equipment and pay and resources for 
our troops in the field. There, there will be no quibbling. There will 
be strong bipartisan support for that. My own son fought with the 101st 
Airborne in Baghdad. No one is more supportive of our troops than I. 
Although out of that immense amount of money, no doubt we do need to 
scrutinize it carefully to make sure the money is well spent.
  But on the other $20.3 billion request for reconstruction--and when 
George Bush says reconstruction, keep in mind he is not talking about 
repairing things that were damaged in the war. He is talking about 
building whole new water systems and communications systems and roads 
and schools and housing systems that never have existed before. So it 
was with some interest that I looked at what some of the components are 
of our taxpayers' money that George Bush recommends that we authorize 
in this body.
  There is $164 million for the curriculum for training the Iraqi 
military. This doesn't involve any training, organization, hiring any 
troops or policing. This is for a new textbook for a few for curriculum 
training--$164 million?
  There is $100 million to finance 500 experts for investigating crimes 
against humanity at $200,000 per expert; 500 at $200,000 per expert to 
investigate crimes in Iraq; $20 million to protect 400 judges and 
prosecutors at $50,000 a crack--$50,000 a person, or 400 judges. That 
is just this year. Heaven knows what this is going to be in the future.
  There is $100 million to enroll 100 families of five in a witness 
protection program at $200,000 a person. Mr. Chairman, $200,000 a 
person for witness protection in Iraq? I think you ought to be able to 
hide someone pretty well for

[[Page 23442]]

$200,000 a pop. Yet this is going to cost us $100 million.
  There is $10 million for 100 experts to assist prison reconstruction 
for 6 months at $100,000 each. These experts must be much cheaper than 
the $200,000 experts for crime investigation because prison 
construction is only $100,000 per piece but we are going to have 100 of 
them.
  There are 100 experts advising Iraq on how to build prisons in Iraq. 
There is $400 million--we are getting into big money--for two new 
4,000-bed prisons at $50,000 a bed; 4,000 prison beds at $50,000 a bed.
  I have a lot of constituents in my State of South Dakota who live in 
homes that do not cost $50,000 a bedroom by far. Yet here we are 
building this immense infrastructure in Iraq with American taxpayers' 
money at the time we are being told, no, we don't have the money to 
help our police and law enforcement in South Dakota and across the 
country. We don't have the resources for so many other needs which we 
have. We are deep in debt and every dime of this is being paid for from 
the Social Security trust fund?
  The list goes on:
  There is $150 million to begin work on a $500-$700 million children's 
hospital with all the latest technology. We all want to help the 
children of Iraq, but I have to tell you that we have children in South 
Dakota--particularly on our Indian reservations--who have access to 
virtually no health care at all. We have people in rural areas with 
hospitals that are on the verge of closing because of the lack of 
Medicare reimbursement. We have hospitals, clinics, and nursing homes 
across America that may not last a year given the inadequacy of 
Medicare reimbursement, particularly in the rural areas.
  We have teaching hospitals that train the next generation of medical 
experts in America that are financed on fumes and do not know where 
their money is going to come from for next year. Yet we have this kind 
of expenditure request.
  There is $100 million to build seven new cities, complete with 3,258 
houses, roads, elementary schools, two high schools, a clinic, a place 
of worship, and a market--seven new cities with new high schools.
  I have high schools all over South Dakota that can't pass bond 
issues, that are falling down, that do not have infrastructure, and 
that literally are a danger to the pupils. President Bush says he would 
veto legislation that would include money to help rebuild and renovate 
schools in America. But guess who is getting the new schools. It is not 
us. We are going to borrow more money out of the Social Security trust 
fund in order to do this. This is President Bush's priorities? What 
does that reflect on his values? Think of it.
  There is $54 million for comprehensive technical and business process 
studies for a computer network for the Iraqi postal system--$54 million 
for computer studies for the Iraqi postal system. Where I come from, 
you can buy a lot of computers for $54 million. You could run a pretty 
good postal system in a small country with that. This is just for 
computer studies--$54 million. Think of the hospitals, nursing homes, 
clinics, schools, daycare centers, afterschool programs--think of what 
you could do with that kind of resource.
  There is $9 million to reengineer the business practices of Iraq's 
postal service, including instituting ZIP Codes. How has Iraq made it 
for these thousands years without the Americans helping them develop a 
ZIP Code? It is amazing. How have they struggled? How can we expect 
these people to live without our taking money out of the Social 
Security trust fund to help them develop a ZIP Code? What a generous 
thing for this administration to do for other people on the other side 
of the planet on our dime, borrowing money to do it.
  We have another $2 million for garbage trucks at $50,000 apiece. 
Apparently, for these thousands of years the Iraqis have been unable to 
collect their garbage because they did not have a modern garbage truck. 
They had other vehicles for doing this. We are going to provide 40 of 
these at $50,000 a pop.
  I can tell you that I have a lot of people in communities in my State 
wishing they had some help for their infrastructure--whether it is 
garbage, sewage, water, or a lot of other things. A lot of communities 
are struggling but they don't have the resources for this kind of help.
  I am not suggesting that we cut and run from Iraq. I am not 
suggesting that the United States doesn't have a significant role to 
play in the reconstruction of that sad country. We are all glad Saddam 
Hussein is gone. Heaven knows what is going to be in its place.
  We have demonstrated that we can win wars unilaterally. But winning 
the peace, this President should have learned long ago, requires 
significant international assistance. Now that our allies have been 
largely alienated, it looks as if it is going to be our dollars and our 
blood to do it.
  There is $20.3 billion, and the list of these kinds of things goes on 
and on.
  I think this requires serious scrutiny. I think this deserves debate 
in this Senate. Our friends in the Republican leadership have told us 
they don't want to segregate these issues from the financing of our 
troops because they don't want the embarrassment of having a debate on 
this and amendments offered and the possible rejection of some of this. 
Apparently their goal is to wrap the whole thing up into one huge $87 
billion item and anybody who dares vote against that will have their 
patriotism challenged. They will be told they are not good Americans 
because they are not supporting our troops.
  We need a little sanity here. We need an opportunity--not to reject 
everything in the rebuilding of Iraq, but we have a role to play. We 
will step to the plate to do our share.
  But this administration has been told in no uncertain terms that this 
shouldn't be exclusively our obligation; that when we do some 
rebuilding it shouldn't be at such a fabulous level of extravagance far 
beyond what any American community could possibly come to Washington 
and ask for.
  Our people deserve better. They deserve to know what is in George 
Bush's request. They deserve to have some up-and-down votes, and this 
shouldn't be rushed through in a manner that the people do not actually 
understand what they are buying into with an agenda such as this.
  I know we are going to go to markup on this supplemental request very 
quickly next week. The difficulty in shoving this thing through so fast 
is that the American taxpayer will have no idea what was in this thing. 
They will be told it is $87 billion--a huge number. Who knows what that 
means until you explain in some detail what you could buy with that 
kind of money.
  I think we need to have a national debate about America's role in the 
world and about the level and scope of the contributions that America 
is making in rebuilding this country. Why has this administration 
failed to attract international financial support? If you cannot get 
their troops, why not at least some financial resources for this 
rebuilding? Why has that failed, as well? We need to know that.
  We need to know what will follow. I assure this body, this is not the 
last request. This is an installment. There is much more to come, both 
militarily and potentially in rebuilding.
  What has happened to the Iraqi oil revenue? Is there a possibility of 
turning some of this into loans rather than flatout grants? We are told 
we cannot loan the money because Iraq already has a lot of debt. Their 
debt is primarily to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Apparently, it appears we 
are going to put repaying their debts ahead of the American taxpayer, 
ahead of our financial needs. We are saying we have to give grants 
because these people have to pay off their loans to Saudi Arabia and 
Kuwait before they can do anything for us.
  We have water projects in South Dakota. We have sewer wastewater 
problems. We have roads, railroads, all kinds of infrastructure that is 
underfunded. Those communities are being asked for matching funds. Many 
projects in South Dakota and across the country are done by loans. And 
we have a grant level at $20.3 billion, with

[[Page 23443]]

mind-boggling levels of expenditure, for purposes that would leave any 
American citizen shaking his head.
  We do not want to delay anything unnecessarily. There are some urgent 
needs in Iraq, particularly for our troops. We need to take care of 
those needs and have some certainty.
  I hope in the course of this debate the American people are 
considering the use of their dollars, that there be considerable 
scrutiny and the people understand what this President wants them to 
buy into. If that comprehension is out there, there will be a lot of 
unhappiness in the land if, in fact, this Senate is unable to break out 
some of these expenditures; if we have to pass this up-or-down vote in 
one massive $87 billion item--three times America's education budget--
for purposes that would make royalty blush.
  Our people deserve better. The Senate deserves an opportunity to 
consider these issues with much more care than is being suggested.
  We will learn more, no doubt, about the details of some of the 
proposed expenditures from the Bush administration in the days to come. 
I hope we have a very real, sobering debate about the use of our 
constituents' money and whether this is the best use--some of it, no 
doubt, is; but much of it, I submit, is an outrageous abuse to the 
American taxpayer.
  I yield the floor.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I was quite moved by my colleague from 
South Dakota and his comments about the war, the budget and the choices 
that the Senate is going to have to make. I thank my colleague for 
discussing such specific, detailed, and passionate comments, and 
raising the awareness of some of the very substantial issues at stake 
in making such a compelling argument as to why this discussion should 
continue for some reasonable length of time so these issues can be 
aired and the American people can have a better opportunity to come to 
their own conclusion based on facts as the Senator outlined this 
morning.
  I commend the Senator and thank him. Other colleagues will speak of 
the issues, including the international challenges that face America, 
as well as the domestic challenges.

                          ____________________