[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 9]
[House]
[Page 12593]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     COST OF THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I have come to this floor repeatedly. In 
fact, I have come to the floor over 300 times to discuss the human 
costs of war. Our brave men and women in uniform have given their lives 
in service to our Nation, and tens of thousands have returned home with 
physical and mental scars. And it isn't over yet.
  The costs in treasure and blood will be felt for generations. The 
National Priority Project has done a comprehensive review of the costs, 
and they are actually staggering.
  Since 2001, 675 U.S. troops have been killed in Afghanistan and more 
than 2,600 soldiers have been wounded in action. The trend is not 
encouraging: The U.S. death toll has escalated each year, from 12 in 
2001 to 99 in 2005, 117 in 2004, and 155 in 2008. And it's not over.
  The war in Afghanistan has cost taxpayers $171 billion. With the 
supplemental that was passed today, we have just added $77 billion to 
fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through the year 2009. Obviously, 
it's not over. An additional $130 billion will fund both wars 
anticipated in the 2010 budget.
  It appears from today's vote that many here in the House of 
Representatives haven't learned the lesson from our occupation of Iraq. 
And according to policy experts, Iraq is going to look like a cakewalk 
compared to the battles that we will be seeing in Afghanistan.
  Let's look at what the occupation of Iraq has actually brought: The 
occupation of Iraq has cost $656 billion so far, with another $52 
billion voted on today as part of the fiscal year 2009 war 
supplemental. At least $2 trillion in future budgetary costs, including 
veterans' benefits, will be spent in the very near future. Almost 4,300 
U.S. servicemembers have died in Iraq so far. And hundreds of thousands 
of Iraqi civilians have been maimed and killed.
  Madam Speaker, the costs are too great. We don't have a defined 
mission in Afghanistan. We do not have a development plan. Our endless 
military presence will only serve to fuel anti-Americanism throughout 
the region. But it continues to go on.
  So what's the cost here at home? As we experience one of the worst 
economic recessions in our Nation's history, every taxpayer dollar 
becomes more valuable. Today the majority in the House decided that 
funding an endless occupation of two countries is more important than 
education, health care, and renewable energy right here at home.
  For my State of California, the war in Afghanistan has already cost 
us $21 billion. That means 2.6 million new Head Start places for 
children that need to go to school. It means 9 million individuals 
could have been provided with health care, 38.7 million homes could 
have been provided with renewable electricity.
  We make choices every day on the House floor. Today that choice 
reflects a decision to keep our troops in Iraq until the end of 2011 
and in Afghanistan indefinitely. This vote does not invest in SMART 
Security. It does not take us into the 21st century, because for every 
dollar in the supplemental dedicated for smart humanitarian investment, 
$8 will be spent on the military. And it keeps going on.
  I want to say we either change the way we meet our obligations and 
have a different way of coming together with nations that we don't 
agree with or we're going to be in a lot of trouble as human beings.

                          ____________________