[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 9544-9546]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                  IRAQ

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, we heard again this afternoon the same old 
story from President Bush about the war in Iraq. He claimed again that 
his new escalation strategy is working, that the signs of success are 
everywhere, and that victory is imminent. He also, once again, attacked 
those of us with the courage to ask the tough questions and tell the 
truth about Iraq.
  In an effort to shift attention from this administration's failed 
policies--and I say that in the plural--the President and his allies 
have repeatedly questioned whether I and my fellow Democrats support 
our troops. No one wants us to succeed in Iraq more than Democrats. We 
have proven that time and time again since this war started more than 4 
years ago. We take a backseat to no one in supporting our troops, and 
we will never abandon our troops in a time of war.
  Given the White House spin machine that has been working overtime in 
an effort to defend its failed policies, it is important for me to 
repeat what I said yesterday afternoon in this Chamber: The longer we 
continue down the President's path, the further we will be from 
responsibly ending this war. I said it yesterday, I say it again: The 
longer we continue down the President's path, the further we will be 
from responsibly ending this war. But there is still a chance to change 
course, and we must change course.
  Partisans who launched attacks on my comments are the same ones who 
continue to support the failed strategy that hurts our troops. Is this 
administration supporting the troops when it sends our brave men and 
women into battle without the necessary body armor; with vehicles that 
are not properly armored? I ask, is the administration supporting the 
troops when it fails to provide them the health care they have earned 
when they come home?
  Our responsibilities end with these troops--never. They don't end 
when they leave Iraq. They don't end when they get back home. We have 
to continue to help them. That is what we have done.
  Is the administration supporting the troops by threatening to delay 
their funding unless Congress continues to rubberstamp its failed 
policy?
  I believe supporting our troops means giving them the funding they 
need and a strategy they deserve. It means stopping the partisan 
attacks. And it means spending time working together on a bipartisan 
basis to develop an effective strategy to successfully end this war.
  I wish some of my detractors felt the same. An effective strategy is 
exactly what we are offering the President and our troops--no more, no 
less. Let's all understand, changing course in Iraq will increase 
America's security by bringing this war to a responsible end and 
permitting our troops to more effectively fight terror all over the 
world. This is precisely the strategy President Bush is vowing to veto.
  We heard the same old story from the President today because his 
strategy calls for more of the same. It is a failed strategy for our 
troops in Iraq. It is a failed strategy for our security at home. It is 
dangerous that the President refuses to recognize the reality on the 
ground in Iraq.
  For those who claim we are on the right path in Iraq, I ask them to 
look at this week's newspapers. I am only going to mention now a few 
things we find in this week's news.
  The White House announced additional National Guard troops would be 
sent to Iraq; many, if not most, without the necessary training and 
equipment. The White House extended tours in Iraq for all active Army 
troops from 12 to 15 months. A week after the Iraqi Parliament was 
bombed in the Green Zone, which is the most secure part of

[[Page 9545]]

Baghdad, almost 200 Iraqis lost their lives in that city on Wednesday. 
The bombings continue today. They will continue tomorrow. We are losing 
about four American troops every day this month.
  I went to the White House this Wednesday with Speaker Pelosi to meet 
with the President and talk about a bipartisan way to craft an 
effective strategy in Iraq. We did so because we believe, as do the 
American people, that the lives of too many of our soldiers and too 
many Iraqis are on the line. The President refused to work with us.
  How has the President responded? He has chosen to repeat his 
inflexible veto threats and continued to attack those who questioned 
his failed policies. Meanwhile, our troops and our national security 
are suffering.
  It is painfully clear to me, the American people, bipartisan 
majorities in both the House and the Senate, military experts all over 
this country, and the Iraq Study Group, that the only way to succeed is 
to give our troops the strategy their sacrifices deserve. These groups 
all know there is no military solution in Iraq.
  General Petraeus, the commander on the ground, has said so himself: 
20 percent can be won militarily; 80 percent has to be won through our 
diplomatic efforts, politics, and economics.
  I repeat, the only way to succeed lies through a comprehensive 
political, diplomatic, and economic strategy--so says the commander on 
the ground there, General Petraeus. Unfortunately, the only one to whom 
this is not obvious is our President.
  The longer we continue down the President's path, the further we will 
be from success. But there is still a chance to change course, and we 
must change course. That is what we are offering the President in the 
supplemental we passed in both bodies with bipartisan support. We are 
offering a reasonable and attainable timeline to reduce combat missions 
and refocus our efforts on the real threats to our security. We are 
offering action, not just words.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the 
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I wanted to say to my friend 
and my colleague and our leader that the President of the United 
States, when he was Governor of Texas, had a reputation as someone who 
reached out as a uniter, bringing together the two parties in a 
bipartisan way. Since the President has been elected President and has 
served in that capacity, he has chosen to change, for what reason I do 
not know because the country yearns for bipartisanship. That was 
clearly one of the messages that came out of last year's election, the 
2006 election, that the people of this country are tired of the 
partisan bickering, and they want us to come together. Yet, as the 
majority leader was just recounting, there has been occasion after 
occasion where it seems, unnecessarily, that the White House has gone 
out of its way to attack someone simply because they were a member of 
the other party.
  I want to give the Senate an example. Because I had been twice 
before, over a 6-year period, to visit the President of Syria, 
immediately upon the Iraq study commission report that recommended that 
we open up to Syria, this Senator from Florida decided that I was going 
to go back, hoping that there might be some encounter in that 
conversation with the President of Syria that might crack the door a 
little bit. I did that in the week before Christmas.
  The White House chose to attack me for having made that trip--
however, very conveniently not attacking any Republican Senator who 
happened to follow, as did two Democratic Senators and one Republican 
Senator in a week or two after I made that trip.
  So, too, it is noteworthy that the White House chose to attack 
Speaker  Nancy Pelosi in her visit with President Assad while being 
mute about the congressional delegation that had just visited President 
Assad 4 days earlier, which included my good personal friends, the 
Congressman from Virginia, Frank Wolf, and the Congressman from 
Pennsylvania, Joe Pitts. 
  When we are facing an issue of war and peace, as we are now, we have 
to come together. The person at the top has to set the standard and the 
atmosphere. These kind of attacks that become personal, as they were 
against Speaker Pelosi, are not going to do anybody any good.
  Mr. REID. Will my friend yield?
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. I will certainly yield.
  Mr. REID. I certainly appreciate the Senator being here on the floor 
this afternoon. The Senator comes from the fourth most populous State, 
but soon to be the third, a State large in area with lots and lots of 
people moving there--thousands of people every month. It is a State 
that this good man has represented in so many different ways.
  We first served together in the House of Representatives. If there 
were ever a person who served in Congress who served as a moderate, it 
would be the Senator from Florida. He is a person who is always looking 
for consensus, always trying to work things out, understanding that the 
art of legislation is compromise.
  I so appreciate his brief statement today, and I apologize for 
interrupting it. I would just go back to more than 6 years ago when 
President Bush was elected. I, too, was so enthused about his coming 
here. He told me: I want to be a uniter, not a divider. I have been 
stunned by what has been going on. It started with Social Security; 
Medicare; the recent flap with the Attorney General, the Katrina 
situation, wiretaps, stem cells, Terry Schiavo, energy--on and on, with 
all these things that we, with rare exception, with a little bit of 
patience, with a President willing to work with us, could have done on 
a bipartisan basis. On the war, we have to resolve that on a bipartisan 
basis. This legislative body is reaching out. That is what we are 
doing.
  I say to my friend, I appreciate very much not only his statement 
today but who he is, who he represents, and how he represents the 
people of Florida. We need more Bill Nelsons in this Congress of the 
United States.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. I am grateful to the leader. I believed it was 
necessary. Partisanship has gotten out of control around here. I was so 
encouraged, the day that we were sworn in when the two leaders, the 
Democratic leader and the Republican leader, convened us in a private 
meeting in the Old Senate Chamber. There was a wonderful spirit. It 
clearly was, in large part, as a message from the American people that 
they were tired of the partisan bickering. That was clearly one of the 
messages from the election.
  We started off in this mutual camaraderie of how we can make a body 
like this function that cannot pass anything unless we have 60 votes 
out of 100 Senators in order to shut off debate. That means we have to 
have coming together. As the Good Book says, ``Come, let us reason 
together.''
  It is harder and harder to do that in a poisonous, partisan 
atmosphere. But it has to be set at the top.
  I cannot tell the White House what to do. I can sure recommend. But 
there is something that I can do; that is, I am responsible for myself 
and my actions and how I treat others, treat others in this Chamber.
  There is an age-old principle, and it has to be: Treat others as you 
want to be treated. I will put that in the old English, which might be 
a little bit more familiar: Do unto others as you would have them do 
unto you.
  If we had a little bit more of that, we could sure get some things 
done around here. Typically, what happens in these 51-to-49 votes, 
there is not that much difference that we couldn't have 10 votes on 
that side of the aisle or 10 votes on this side of the aisle go one way 
or another in reaching a mutual

[[Page 9546]]

consensus. Yet over and over it has been avoided.
  I felt compelled to say these things.

                          ____________________