[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23613-23614]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      COMMENTS FROM THE HOME FRONT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, in 1838 a former President, John 
Quincy Adams, was a Member of this House of Representatives. Congress 
in those days, conservatives in Congress, had passed a House rule 
saying that slavery, believe it or not, could not be debated or 
discussed on the floor of the House of Representatives.

[[Page 23614]]

  John Quincy Adams decided that he wanted the people of his district 
and other districts in Massachusetts to be heard, so he brought to the 
floor, every day or a couple of times a week, letters from his 
constituents protesting that slavery could not be discussed on the 
floor and supporting the ending of slavery in the United States.
  Today, we are faced with a serious issue, perhaps not the seriousness 
quite of slavery in our country, the biggest blot in our history, but 
we are faced with the issues of what we do in Iraq and what we do with 
Iraq.
  Debate in this House has not been particularly open or forthcoming, 
so I have chosen today, as John Quincy Adams did, to bring letters from 
constituents about Iraq to the House floor. I have received literally 
hundreds of them, as have my colleagues, questioning our intentions and 
the President's intentions, questioning the veracity of the 
administration, whether the administration has been straight-forward 
with the American people. I would like to share some of those letters 
with you.
  Patty from North Royalton, Ohio, said, ``All of the worst case 
possibilities with Iraq, with the exception of the weapons of mass 
destruction, of course, and the truth of the administration, have 
proven true, and the American public is being asked to foot the bill.
  ``I suggest a proposal to break apart the military spending from the 
rebuilding. Focus this administration on the bare necessities for now. 
We are trying to do way too much at one time.''
  Mary Lu wrote, ``U.S. out, UN in. We should pull our soldiers out and 
turn the rebuilding process over the United Nations. Congress should 
vote no on the $87 billion until the President works it out with the 
United Nations. Roll back the tax cuts to pay for the war. The only way 
we could responsibly pay for Iraq's reconstruction is by rolling back 
President Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy. If we roll back the tax cuts 
on the top 1 percent, we could pay for the $87 billion and have money 
left over for other programs, like prescription drugs for the 
elderly.''
  Jay of Richfield, Ohio, writes, ``If we assume there are 290 million 
men, women and children in the U.S., that means that every man, woman 
and child in America will be contributing $300 to the reconstruction of 
a country we will never visit, and whose welfare would have never 
affected us but for the lies of the Bush administration.''
  Janet from Norton, Ohio, writes, ``Please do not vote for one more 
cent to be spent on this losing proposition in Iraq. Enough is 
enough.''
  Judith writes, ``Our President has arrogantly put us into a position 
where we stand, in many ways, alone, and we are making a huge mess of 
things. We do have an obligation to the Iraqis, but they aren't happy 
with our presence there and are crippling our ability to help them. The 
most effective thing we can do is turn over control of the operation to 
the United Nations.''
  Helen writes, ``Wealthy Republicans who voted for Bush do not send 
their kids to die in Iraq, and wealthy Republicans made sure their tax 
money was given to them before presenting the bill in Iraq. The rest of 
the tax money isn't theirs to spend on defense contracts. It is ours.
  ``The U.S. kleptocrats want to profit from Iraq,'' talking about 
Halliburton and many of the President's friends who are getting the 
unbid contracts. ``They can only do it by keeping the UN out.''
  I found in these letters, Mr. Speaker, literally dozens of them 
questioning the fact we are spending $1 billion a week right now, 
before the President asked for $87 billion more. A third of that money 
is going to private contractors, many of them contributors to the 
President, most of those contracts unbid, and many of them going to a 
company called Halliburton, from which Vice President Cheney is still 
drawing a $13,000 a month benefit check.
  Andrew writes, ``I believe the Bush administration should be required 
by law to submit to the following conditions before his request for $87 
billion is approved. The $87 billion should be funded by the immediate 
cancellation of the recently-passed tax cut for the wealthy, where 43 
percent of the tax benefit goes to the richest 1 percent of 
Americans.''
  It is clear there is a theme here. The American people in this mail, 
and in the mail that literally every Member of this Congress is 
getting, the people of this country are concerned that this $87 billion 
is only a start, that it is going to be a lot more in the future. There 
is no plan. The American people need to continue to speak out.

                          ____________________