[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 17]
[House]
[Page 23615]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    PAST COMMENTS ABOUT COST OF IRAQ

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, during the lead-up to the war in Iraq, we 
had great assurances from the President and his staff that in the 
aftermath the United States would not be tagged with the bill.
  Press Secretary Ari Fleischer: ``It is a rather wealthy country. Iraq 
has to be able to shoulder much of the burden of their own 
reconstruction.''
  Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, arguably the godfather of 
this policy: ``There is a lot of money to pay for this that doesn't 
have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the 
Iraqi people. The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 
billion and $100 billion over the course of the next 2 or 3 years. We 
are dealing with a country that can really finance its own 
reconstruction, and relatively soon.''
  Then, of course, the wonderful Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld: 
``I do not believe the United States has responsibility for 
reconstruction. In a sense, funds can come from those various sources I 
mentioned: frozen assets, oil revenues and a variety of others things, 
including the Oil for Food program.''
  Well, what a difference a few months makes. The President has 
presented the second bill for Iraq, $70 billion last April, and now 
another $87 billion that he wants this Congress to borrow on behalf of 
the American people to spend for the ongoing conflict and to rebuild 
that country.
  That is right, borrow. We are going to obligate Americans for the 
next 30 years to pay for the rebuilding of Iraq. Apparently, it is 
necessary when creating a democratic and civil society that there be 
massive investment in public works, public infrastructure, schools, 
hospitals, universal health care, telecommunications, ports, rail, 
water, all those things; and the American people should borrow the 
money, according to the President, to do those things so that the Iraqi 
people can move toward a democratic and civil society.
  But, unfortunately, according to the President, it is not necessary 
to do those things and pay for those things and not advisable to borrow 
the money to do those things to pay for the continuance of a democratic 
and civil society here in the United States of America.
  Yes, he says we can borrow $20.3 billion to do all those things in 
Iraq, but we cannot afford it here. We are borrowing money to pay tens 
of thousands of Iraqis to have no-show, no-work jobs, to provide 
stability, but the President says we cannot draw on the Unemployment 
Trust Fund, the $16 billion balance on taxes we have paid, to give 
extended unemployment benefits to Americans.
  On a per capita basis, the United States is going to spend ten times 
as much per citizen in Iraq on drinking water as it will in the United 
States, despite the D-minus grade that our water infrastructure has, 
despite the unfunded mandates on rural communities that cannot afford 
to meet those Federal requirements. Two times as much for water 
resource projects, ten times as much for sewer and drinking water.
  Iraqis will receive 300 times as much to put together a reliable 
electricity system in their country. Did the President not notice, I 
guess they have generators at the White House and Camp David, he did 
not notice that the lights went out in the eastern United States, but 
they did because of a crumbling and underinvested infrastructure. We 
are going to spend 300 times as much per citizen in Iraq. Thirteen 
times as much for medical infrastructure.
  In the little port of Umm Qasr over there, we are about to borrow 
from the American people another $45 million to further upgrade that 
port, at the same time that the President cannot find $8 million to 
dredge ports in Southern Oregon. We just do not have the money to keep 
those ports open, he says, but we can borrow $45 million to further 
improve Umm Qasr, into which we have already dumped $50 million.
  Then there is the Mawizeh marsh. The President wants to borrow on 
behalf of the American people $50 million to restore a marsh. Well, we 
have big huge controversy over the Klamath marsh and that area in 
Oregon, and we need $25 million to move toward resolving that 
controversy. But the President says that money is not here in the 
United States of America, but he will borrow $50 million to restore a 
marsh in Iraq.
  Then there is the horrible problem of Basra and Umm Qasr. Their water 
supply comes through an open ditch, only half of which is lined. Of 
course, my city of Albany gets its water through an open ditch, none of 
which is lined. So it is an emergency that the American people borrow 
$200 million for Umm Qasr and Basra so they can have a modern water 
supply system, but, sorry, there is no money for Albany, Oregon, and 
hundreds of other communities across this country.
  Apparently it is necessary, the President says, to borrow these funds 
on behalf of this generation and future generations of Americans so 
that Iraqis can live a better life, but we cannot afford to do similar 
projects here in the United States of America, to put Americans to 
work. If that money were spent here in the United States of America, it 
would put 1 million people to work, but that is not on the President's 
radar screen.

                          ____________________