[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 14127-14128]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       CORRECTION FOR THE RECORD

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, on June 23, 2004, I gave a statement on the 
Feingold amendment concerning the Inspector General of the Coalition 
Provisional authority. When it appeared in the Record, text was somehow 
inadvertently added to my statement. My statement should have ended 
after the sixth full paragraph of column three on

[[Page 14128]]

page S7266. I can certainly understand how something like this could 
have happened as we were all working late into the night under very 
tight deadlines. This isn't the first time something like this has 
happened and I bet it won't be the last.
  Of course, this is no fault of the good people of the Official 
Reporters of Debates. They do outstanding work and I know this will 
continue.
  The following is how my statement should have appeared:

       I rise today to express my strong support for the amendment 
     offered by Senator Feingold.
       Senator Feingold's amendment, which I am a proud co-
     sponsor, would allow the work of the Inspector General of the 
     Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA-IG) to continue its work 
     uninterrupted after the June 30 handover.
       This is critical. Congress provided more than $18 billion 
     to rebuild Iraq, roughly the same amount that we spend on the 
     rest of the world combined. Congress jammed through the Iraq 
     supplemental appropriations bill in an extremely short time, 
     without a sufficient number of hearings, into a very chaotic 
     environment without the usual financial controls.
       Recognizing this reality, Congress created a strong, 
     independent Inspector General to help police these funds.
       In the months that followed passage of the Iraq 
     Supplemental, we heard numerous reports of waste, fraud and 
     abuse. If anything, this should have send a clear signal to 
     the administration and Congress that we need more--not less--
     oversight of these funds. It defies logic, then, that the 
     State Department is now proposing to weaken the one entity 
     that Congress specifically tasked with keeping track of these 
     tax dollars.
       The State Department's plan could undermine the 
     independence of this Inspector General and disrupt this 
     important work, reducing Congress's ability to account for 
     these funds. It's unlocking the vault to those who want to 
     cheat us.
       The State Department also has told the Appropriations 
     Committee that it will have to create 25 new positions to 
     handle the work in Iraq.
       Let me get this straight. We want to close down an IG that 
     has about 60 people in place, which are actively conducting 
     audits and rooting out waste fraud and abuse.
       After the administration is finished closing down that 
     office, they will turn around and hire 25 new people to do 
     the same work--only through at a lower level office at the 
     State Department.
       Why on Earth would we want to do this? At a time when we 
     are hearing weekly reports of abuse by Haliburton and others, 
     why would we want to re-invent the wheel? Why would we 
     downgrade the status of the CPA-IG and undermine its 
     independence? It just does not make any sense.
       This is why the amendment offered by Senator from Wisconsin 
     is so important.
       This is why I support his amendment.

  I thank the chair for allowing me to make this correction.

                          ____________________