[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 12]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 17555-17556]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  EDMUND MUSKIE AWARD FOR NANCY PELOSI

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. ANNA G. ESHOO

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 26, 2007

  Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, the following remarks were delivered by 
Peter Kovler, Chairman of the Board of the Center for National Policy 
in Washington, DC, on June 19, 2007, on the occasion of Speaker Nancy 
Pelosi being the recipient of the Center's prestigious Edmund Muskie 
Award.

       In the entire history of the United States, I believe there 
     have been three powerful Speakers of the House during moments 
     of war. Henry Clay in the nineteenth century, Sam Rayburn 
     during World War II and now Nancy Pelosi during our 
     simultaneous wars on terror and the war in Iraq.
       But there is one stark difference between Speaker Pelosi 
     and Speakers Clay and Rayburn; and that is she has an 
     opposing view to the contemporaneous President of the United 
     States on how those wars should be run; and her courage and 
     her steadfastness in those views arguably make her the single 
     most significant Speaker in our Nation's history.
       How did Nancy Pelosi get to this point; and how this nation 
     is so fortunate to have her; and how an award named for Ed 
     Muskie is so appropriate are a few of the points I would 
     quickly like to address.
       In my view Nancy Pelosi has come to be our most important 
     foreign policy Speaker in part because of how she served in 
     the House before her rise to this position. As a 10 year 
     member of the House Permanent Select Committee on 
     Intelligence, she was its longest continuous serving member. 
     The experience and knowledge gained there has made her able 
     to deal with these issues in a sophisticated way, rather than 
     just guessing or speculating at what might be important. No 
     wonder she had the knowledge and skepticism that comes with 
     knowledge to oppose initially the Iraq invasion and 
     occupation, even when that kind of vote was so difficult in 
     those political and cultural circumstances. And no wonder she 
     knew so

[[Page 17556]]

     much about terrorism issues that she would have the 
     confidence to make implementation of the 9/11 Commission 
     recommendations her very first piece of legislation in her 
     first five months.
       How fortunate are we to have her as the Speaker of the 
     House is one way to pose a question, but a second way is to 
     ask what it would be like if we had a speaker who had no 
     background in foreign policy analysis or in intelligence 
     analysis and not even any curiosity about the subject. I 
     think the answer is obvious, and we would have a House of 
     Representatives that was at best disinterested, but most 
     likely passive in the face of the Executive Branch and 
     passive in the face of an American public that is crying out 
     for better alternatives.
       Finally, I would like to address why the Muskie Award is 
     especially appropriate for Speaker Pelosi.
       For those of us in this room of a certain age, we know that 
     Ed Muskie's public life was inextricably tied to the Vietnam 
     War. He wrestled with that as the vice presidential candidate 
     in 1968. It happened again in his seeking the presidential 
     nomination in 1972. And though not getting wide public 
     notice, he did so again in the 1980s when as chairman of this 
     organization he ran numerous meetings on Vietnam policy, led 
     a delegation to Hanoi and, though still controversial, 
     advocated a new policy towards that country that included 
     their recognition.
       I bring this up because the Vietnam War has played such an 
     enormous part in our thinking on the Iraq War. For better or 
     worse, it is the single most significant historical parallel 
     we use in trying to come to grips with the Iraq War.
       And I believe that I can say with enormous confidence that 
     Ed, first a believer in the Vietnam mission and then a 
     skeptic about the choices we made, would have been so very 
     proud to have Speaker Pelosi as the recipient of an award 
     named after him.
       Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you this year's winner 
     of the Center For National Policy's Edmund Muskie Award, 
     Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

                          ____________________