[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 6763-6764]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        THE REAL REASON TO OPPOSE THE SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, a $124 billion supplemental appropriation is a 
good bill, to oppose. I am pleased that many of my colleagues will join 
me in voting against this measure.
  If one is unhappy with our progress in Iraq after 4 years of war, 
voting to defund the war makes sense. If one is unhappy with the manner 
in which we went to war without a constitutional declaration, voting 
``no'' makes equally good sense.
  Voting ``no'' also makes the legitimate point that the Constitution 
does not authorize Congress to direct the management of any military 
operation. The President clearly enjoys this authority as Commander in 
Chief.
  But Congress, just as clearly, is responsible for making policy, by 
debating and declaring war, raising and equipping armies, funding 
military operations, and ending conflicts that do not serve our 
national interests.
  Congress failed to meet its responsibilities 4 years ago, 
unconstitutionally transferring its explicit war power to the executive 
branch. Even though the administration started the subsequent 
preemptive war in Iraq, Congress bears the greatest responsibility for 
its lack of courage in fulfilling its duties. Since then Congress has 
obediently provided the funds and troops required to pursue this 
illegitimate war.
  We won't solve the problems in Iraq until we confront our failed 
policy of foreign interventionism. This latest appropriation does 
nothing to solve our dilemma. Micromanaging the war while continuing to 
fund it won't help our troops.
  Here is a new approach: Congress should admit its mistake and repeal 
the authority wrongfully given to the executive branch in 2002. Repeal 
the congressional sanction and disavow Presidential discretion in 
starting wars. Then start bringing the troops home.
  If anyone charges that this approach does not support the troops, 
take a poll. Find out how Reservists and Guardsman and their families, 
many on their second or third tours in Iraq, feel about it.
  The constant refrain that bringing our troops home would demonstrate 
a lack of support for them must be one of the most amazing distortions 
ever foisted on the American public. We are so concerned about saving 
face, but whose face are we saving? A sensible policy would save 
American lives and follow the rules laid out for Congress in the 
Constitution, and avoid wars that have no purpose.
  The claim that it is unpatriotic to oppose spending more money in 
Iraq must be laid to rest as fraudulent. We should pass a resolution 
that expresses congressional opposition to any more undeclared, 
unconstitutional, unnecessary, preemptive wars. We should be building a 
consensus for the future that makes it easier to end our current 
troubles in Iraq.
  It is amazing to me that this Congress is more intimidated by 
political propagandists and special interests than the American 
electorate, who sent a loud, clear message about the war in November. 
The large majority of Americans now want us out of Iraq.
  Our leaders cannot grasp the tragic consequences of our policies 
toward Iraq for the past 25 years. It is time we woke them up. We are 
still by far the greatest military power on Earth; but since we 
stubbornly refuse to understand the nature of our foes, we are 
literally defeating ourselves.
  In 2004 bin Laden stated that al Qaeda's goal was to bankrupt the 
United States. His second in command, Zawahari, is quoted as saying 
that the 9/11 attacks would cause Americans to ``come and fight the war 
personally on our sand where they are within rifle range.''
  Sadly, we are playing into their hands. This $124 billion 
appropriation is only part of the nearly $1 trillion in military 
spending for this year's budget alone. We should be concerned about the 
coming bankruptcy and the crisis facing the U.S. dollar.
  We have totally failed to adapt to modern warfare. We are dealing 
with a small, nearly invisible enemy, an enemy without a country, a 
government, an army, a navy, an air force, or missiles. Yet our enemy 
is armed with suicidal determination and motivated by our meddling in 
their regional affairs to destroy us.
  As we bleed financially, our men and women in Iraq die needlessly 
while the injured swell Walter Reed Hospital. Our government 
systematically undermines the Constitution and the liberties it is 
supposed to protect, for which it has claimed our soldiers are dying in 
faraway places.
  Only with the complicity of Congress have we become a Nation of 
preemptive war, secret military tribunals, torture, rejection of habeas 
corpus, warrantless searches, undue government secrecy,

[[Page 6764]]

extraordinary renditions, and uncontrollable spying on the American 
people.
  The greatest danger we face is ourselves, what we are doing in the 
name of providing security for a people made fearful by distortions of 
facts. Fighting over there has nothing to do with preserving freedoms 
here at home. More likely, the opposite is true.
  Surely we can do better than this supplemental authorization. I plan 
to vote ``no.''

                          ____________________