[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 18404-18405]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             THE ADMINISTRATION'S MISTAKES IN THE IRAQ WAR

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, for more than 3 years, this Congress, which 
has been given the name of the ``do-nothing Congress,'' has turned a 
blind eye to the intractable war in Iraq, ignoring the administration's 
many mistakes and allowing it to stay on a failed course.
  Here we are, with 6 days left in the 109th Congress, and the 
Republicans, who control the House and Senate and the White House, have 
not held one hearing--not one--into the President's wartime failures. 
During the Civil War, President Lincoln was faced continually with 
oversight hearings by his Congress. Of course, we know during World War 
II, there were a number of commissions. The most famous was that 
conducted by Senator Harry Truman of Missouri, which led to his 
becoming Vice President. Some say, but for that he would not have been 
chosen as Vice President. What was the Truman Commission? It was to 
determine what was going on with World War II. Was money being wasted? 
Were troop levels right? Korean war hearings were also held, and the 
same for the Vietnam war. But for this war, none--even though this war 
has taken longer than it took to settle the differences in the European 
theater in World War II. Soon it will be the same amount of time that 
we were able to beat Japan.
  This Republican Congress has wasted 20 months on horse slaughtering; 
the Schiavo case, dealing with someone's personal relationship, which 
should not even have been before this body; gay marriage; the nuclear 
option; flag burning; repealing the estate tax. But they could not find 
a day for some time to look at the President's mistakes, missteps, and 
misconduct, which have hurt American security and plunged Iraq into a 
civil war--not a day.
  Yesterday's Washington Post newspaper brought the latest indictment 
of the Bush incompetence in Iraq, in a front-page story entitled ``Ties 
to GOP Trumped Know-How Among Staff Sent to Rebuild Iraq.'' Mr. 
President, this article says a lot of things, but here is some of it:

        . . . applicants didn't need to be experts in the Middle 
     East or in post-conflict reconstruction. What seemed most 
     important was loyalty to the Bush administration.

  It is interesting to note that the person selected to do this is a 
man by the name of O'Beirne. I saw that name and it flashed because I 
have been on programs with a woman by the name of Kate O'Beirne. And 
I'll be darned, it happened to be her husband who was chosen to find 
the people to take care of postwar Iraq.
  Here are some of the questions that were asked of the applicants: 
``Did you vote for George W. Bush in 2000?'' They even asked questions 
about how the applicant felt about Roe v. Wade. People being 
interviewed for purposes of helping rebuild war-damaged Iraq were asked 
questions on Roe v. Wade. The questions had nothing to do with one's 
competence, their educational background, or their experience. The 
article says that

       . . . from April 2003 to June 2004 [it was clear that 
     O'Beirne] lacked vital skills and experience

to do what he was required to do. It says:

       A 24-year-old who had never worked in finance--but had 
     applied for a White House job--was sent to reopen Baghdad's 
     stock exchange. The daughter of a prominent neoconservative 
     commentator and a recent graduate from an evangelical 
     university for home-schooled children were tapped to manage 
     Iraq's $13 billion budget, even though they didn't have a 
     background in accounting.

  The article also says:

       Interviews with scores of former CPA personnel over the 
     past two years depict an organization that was dominated--and 
     ultimately hobbled--by administration ideologues.
       ``We didn't tap--and it should have started from the White 
     House on down--just didn't tap the right people to do this 
     job,'' said Frederick Smith, who served as deputy director of 
     the DPA's Washington office. ``It was a tough, tough job. 
     Instead we got people who went out there because of their 
     political leanings.''
       But many CPA staff members were more interested in other 
     things: in instituting a flat tax--

  People were sent there with no background, no education, no academic 
experience, and set out to create a flat tax in Iraq.
  They were interested ``in selling off government assets, in ending 
food rations and otherwise fashioning a new nation that looked a lot 
like the United States. Many of them spent their days cloistered in the 
Green Zone, a walled-off enclave in central Baghdad with towering 
palms, posh villas, well-stocked bars and resort-size swimming pools.''
  Mr. President, this picture says it all. Here is Paul Bremmer. They 
dumped General Garner after a few weeks and brought Bremmer in. Here he 
is, on his throne--on his throne. He is on a throne surrounded by 
Iraqis.
  Mr. DURBIN. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. REID. I will be happy to yield for a question.
  Mr. DURBIN. Can the Senator refresh my memory? Was Mr. Bremmer the 
recipient of a gold medal or something from the President? Didn't he 
receive some high decoration or medal for his performance in Iraq?
  Mr. REID. The answer is, yes, he received that. I assume one would 
expect that from somebody who had a throne while he was over there.
  Mr. DURBIN. Isn't it also true that George Tenet, who was responsible 
for the intelligence that was so bad that led us into the war in Iraq, 
got a medal from the President the same day?
  Mr. REID. That is true.
  Mr. DURBIN. Did Michael Brown with FEMA receive a gold medal from the 
White House before he was dismissed?
  Mr. REID. I don't think he did. Even though he was doing a heck of a 
job, I don't think he obtained a medal from the White House.
  Mr. DURBIN. Apparently, these gold medals were being awarded for 
incompetence. They missed Mr. Brown, but they did give one to Mr. 
Bremmer.
  Mr. REID. The article goes on to say--and I say to my friend and 
anyone within the sound of my voice:

       To recruit the people he wanted, O'Beirne sought resumes 
     from the offices of Republican congressmen, conservative 
     think tanks and GOP activists. He discarded applications from 
     those his staff deemed ideologically suspect, even if the 
     applicants possessed Arab language skills or postwar 
     rebuilding experience.
       Smith said O'Beirne once pointed to a young man's resume 
     and pronounced him ``an ideal candidate.'' His chief 
     qualification was that had he worked for the Republican Party 
     in Florida during the presidential election recount in 2000.

  I am not making this up. This is hard to comprehend.
  Mr. DURBIN. Will the Senator yield for another question?
  Mr. REID. I will be happy to.
  Mr. DURBIN. I am trying to recall the exact number--it was in the 
billions of dollars--that we gave to the President for the 
reconstruction of Iraq; is that not true?
  Mr. REID. It started out at $18 billion. But as the Senator from 
Illinois will remember, part of that money,

[[Page 18405]]

stacks of one-hundred-dollar bills, was used by some of the contractors 
who were sent over there to play football games--some of these same 
people.
  Mr. DURBIN. It is also true, is it not, that the Democratic policy 
conference has been holding hearings--in fact, I think it is the only 
agency on the Hill holding hearings--on this waste and abuse, this 
profiteering and corruption at the expense of American taxpayers and 
even, equally important--more importantly--at the expense of our 
troops?
  Mr. REID. I say to my friend, this war is approaching 3\1/2\ years, 
and there has not been a single congressional oversight hearing on the 
conduct of the war. This war has now cost us, the American taxpayers, 
about $325 billion. There has not been a single congressional oversight 
hearing on the war.
  Mr. DURBIN. I ask the Senator from Nevada if he might comment on this 
as well: Are we not in a situation where the President has told us that 
he wants to ``stay the course'' in Iraq, and Vice President Cheney, 
when asked a week ago, said he wouldn't change a thing in the way they 
have done this war in Iraq? Is it very clear that unless there is a 
change in leadership in this town soon, we are going to continue down 
this disastrous course, exposing our soldiers to danger every single 
day, their families to the anxiety of separation, and the taxpayers of 
this country to billions and billions of dollars more being spent that 
don't make us any safer?
  Mr. REID. I say to my friend, I spent the weekend reading a book. I 
did other things. I spent a lot of time on an airplane. The book is 
called ``Fiasco,'' written by a man named Thomas Ricks who has spent 
his life covering the military. He has written books on the military. I 
don't know his political persuasion. This book is on the best seller's 
list of the New York Times.
  In this book, he talks in such detail about what has happened as a 
result of the incompetence of this administration to our valiant 
fighting men and women over there. I recommend the book to anyone. It 
is a searing indictment of this administration. It is in keeping with 
what this article is all about.
  Another paragraph:

       One former CPA employee who had an office near O'Beirne's 
     wrote an e-mail to a friend describing the recruitment 
     process: ``I watched resumes of immensely talented 
     individuals who had sought out CPA to help the country thrown 
     in the trash because their adherence to `the President's 
     vision for Iraq' (a frequently heard phrase at CPA) was 
     `uncertain.' I saw senior civil servants from agencies like 
     Treasury, Energy . . . and Commerce denied advisory positions 
     in Baghdad that were instead handed to prominent RNC 
     (Republican National Committee) contributors.''

  One staffer said:

       I'm not here for the Iraqis, I'm here for George Bush.''

  Mr. President, this is really a sad commentary. Important jobs, such 
as rebuilding the Iraq stock exchange, were given to applicants who 
agreed with the President on Roe v. Wade. Qualified individuals were 
turned down for jobs if they didn't vote for Bush in 2000. The children 
of the President's conservative friends were given authority over the 
country's $13 billion budget.
  Today in Iraq we are witnessing the terrible consequences of Bush 
cronyism, and it is our troops, the Iraqi people, and the American 
people who are paying the price.
  Reconstruction has been a failure. The economy is a mess. Thousands 
are dying. Whole provinces have been lost. One province, Anbar 
Province, makes up a third of the country. The military people said it 
is gone. And the political solution necessary to bring Americans home 
is nowhere to be found.
  The testimony we hear from people such as the people in this 
newspaper article is unbelievable. We have heard it time and again. The 
only people who aren't listening are George Bush and this do-nothing 
Congress.
  If the Iraq war has taught us anything, it is that Congress must take 
seriously its responsibility to hold the executive branch accountable, 
and it has not happened. For 2 years, Democrats have offered 
constructive solutions to change course in Iraq and give our troops and 
the Iraqi people the chance for some type of stability and success. We 
have said there must be a redeployment of forces this year to 
transition the mission, to change the mission.
  We have said we must resolve the sectarian differences through a 
political settlement. That is called diplomacy. They need to amend 
their constitution.
  We said they must regionalize the conflict with a contact group or 
conference to bring in those countries that said they will help.
  We need to revitalize, and we can do that as I have indicated: get 
the countries that said they would help to come in and help. There 
needs to be a regional solution. We need to rebuild our badly strained 
U.S. military. There is not a single undeployed Army unit today that is 
battle ready. That says it all.
  A number of generals have witnessed this administration's flawed Iraq 
policy firsthand, and they have repeatedly called for new civilian 
leadership at the Pentagon.
  I say this with all due respect: I bet if those military personnel 
weren't working for Government defense contracts, we would have a few 
more speaking out. But we have had plenty.
  In each instance, when the generals speak out, the Republican 
Congress blocks their efforts and puts their political interests ahead 
of America's safety.
  The war in Iraq has been a diversion from the real war on terror. But 
this administration and this do-nothing Congress are content to stay 
the course, even as it makes America less safe and Iraq less stable.
  We need a new direction. This Congress has failed.
  I yield the floor.
  (The remarks of Mr. Wyden and Mr. Bennett pertaining to the 
introduction of S. 3908 are printed in today's Record under 
``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Murkowski). The Senator from West 
Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. Madam President, what is the limitation on speeches at this 
point?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. We are currently in morning business, with 
Senators allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes.
  Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that I may speak 
for no more than 30 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________