[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 2]
[House]
[Page 2358]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  PROVIDING MENTAL HEALTH FOR VETERANS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I have spoken many times from this podium, 
over 130 times actually, about the moral imperative of bringing our 
troops home from Iraq. With sectarian strife reaching a bloody, violent 
high in Iraq last week, it is clear that our military presence is doing 
more harm than good. But for many of our Iraq veterans, even an 
immediate end to the occupation would be too late to spare them a 
possible lifetime of physical and psychological damage.
  Much is made, and with good reason, of the physical wounds suffered 
in combat, but even those who return home physically unharmed often 
face terrifying demons. Even the toughest, bravest and best trained 
soldiers are not immune to devastating trauma, the result of daily 
exposure to danger and unspeakable carnage. These demons must be 
addressed, and they must be addressed medically in order for many 
soldiers to return to normal, productive lives.
  But the Washington Post reports today that not enough veterans are 
getting the mental health care they need. One-third of returning Iraq 
and Afghanistan veterans are seeking mental health services, and the 
great majority of those who are diagnosed with psychiatric problems are 
going untreated.
  It is a budget problem and it is a diagnostic problem. Given the 
nature of the war in Iraq, we must adjust the official standards for 
what constitutes trauma and, thus, what qualifies veterans for 
subsidized treatment.
  Because the combat danger in Iraq is anywhere and everywhere, many, 
many of our troops are exposed to conditions that lead to mental 
distress. As one psychiatrist at Walter Reed explained, ``There is no 
front line in Iraq, and everyone in a convoy is a target.'' Steve 
Robinson, head of the National Gulf War Research Center, told the Post 
that there are few sanctuaries in Iraq. ``Every place,'' he said, ``is 
a war zone.''
  Meanwhile, it seems the Department of Veterans Affairs is poorly 
equipped to deal with this situation. Today's Washington Post article 
cites budget constraints and worries that the Department won't be able 
to handle the huge influx of returning soldiers in need of mental 
health treatment.
  But who caused those budget constraints? Certainly it wasn't our 
troops in Iraq who foolishly promised that we could fight a quarter-of-
a-trillion-dollar war and dole out billions of dollars of tax cuts to 
the wealthiest Americans. It wasn't our troops who twisted arms to pass 
this Medicare Part D boondoggle, which is subsidizing the drug 
companies and the insurance interests while leaving seniors to wrestle 
with a bewildering bureaucracy.
  Is there any reason why we couldn't have anticipated an enormous 
demand for Iraq-related mental health services? Of course there wasn't. 
Couldn't we have included enough money into the war supplemental bills 
this body has passed? Couldn't we have sacrificed other budgetary 
handouts and goodies, the ones that benefit people who haven't offered 
a fraction of the sacrifice for their country that our Iraq veterans 
have?
  I guess if you assumed that our troops would be greeted in Iraq as 
liberators and if you assumed that we would be in and out of Iraq in a 
flash, you never got the got to the point where you worried about the 
mental health of returning veterans.
  Once again we see the disastrous, tragic consequences of failed 
planning and poor execution of this war.
  We must do everything we can to help our Iraq veterans cope with 
their traumas. It is the least our government can do after sending them 
to war on false pretenses, with insufficient equipment and without an 
exit strategy.
  But as an even more urgent matter, we can ensure that no more 
soldiers suffer from terrifying nightmares and setbacks and flashbacks 
by ending this occupation and bringing them home at once.
  I have actually presented my four-point plan for a radical shift in 
our Iraq policy to the President of the United States. This policy 
includes four major areas:
  One, greater multilateral cooperation with our allies in enlisting 
their help in establishing an interim security force in Iraq;
  Two, a diplomatic offensive that recasts our role in Iraq as 
construction partner, rather than military occupier; this means no 
permanent bases in Iraq, no American claims on Iraqi oil;
  Three, a robust post-conflict reconciliation process with a peace 
commission established to coordinate talks between the Iraqi factions; 
and
  Four, and most importantly, withdrawal of the U.S. Armed Forces.

                          ____________________