[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 13109-13110]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    MEMO TO THE SUPERCOMMITTEE: CUT WAR SPENDING, NOT THE SAFETY NET

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Woolsey) for 5 minutes.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, today the Joint Select Committee on Deficit 
Reduction holds its first organizational meeting; and it does this as 
it begins its work on reaching the spending cut benchmarks called for 
in the debt ceiling compromise.
  I have a suggestion for the 12 members who have been entrusted with 
this responsibility. I know exactly the place they should identify for 
their savings. It's a government program that's been notorious for 
waste and cost overruns. It's been cited many times over by neutral 
experts for its excess and inefficiency. It hasn't achieved its stated 
goals and it is deeply unpopular with the American people.
  I'll give you a hint. It's not Medicare or Social Security. It's not 
food stamps or unemployment benefits or Pell Grants or WIC. It's not 
any of the programs that comprise the safety net for our Nation. It's 
not any initiative designed to lift up the American people and giving 
them a chance to rise above difficult economic times.
  No. It's a decade-long effort that has been fiscally irresponsible, 
eroded our moral authority around the world, and cost our Nation more 
than 6,000 precious lives.

                              {time}  1030

  That's right, Mr. Speaker, our ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq 
are the perfect target for the spending cuts our country needs to 
restore fiscal balance.
  I have written a letter to the supercommittee, cosigned by 23 of my 
colleagues--so far, they're still signing on--strongly urging the 
committee to take a hard look at the overwhelming crippling costs of 
these wars. Afghanistan alone is costing the American people at least 
$10 billion a month, and to date, Iraq and Afghanistan combined have 
sucked the Treasury dry to the tune of a staggering $2.3 trillion--not 
million, not billion, $2.3 trillion. Frankly, this would be a rip-off 
at a fraction of the cost. If these wars were revenue neutral, if they 
carried no price tag at all, I would say it's not worth it. Just during 
the month of August, when Congress was in recess, 70 more brave 
Americans died in Afghanistan, making last month the single deadliest 
month of this 10-year war.
  The notion that things are looking up in Afghanistan is ridiculous on 
its face. Our continued occupation is impeding progress, not making it; 
fanning the flames of the insurgency instead of putting them out; 
making us less safe, not more. And for this, we are asking our people 
here in the United States to go without.
  Less than 12 hours from now, however, the President will be speaking 
from the Chamber, and he will be talking about his job creation 
strategy. My

[[Page 13110]]

colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I fear, will react by saying 
we can't spend a dime more to solve our devastating economic crisis and 
put Americans back to work, yet the overwhelming majority of them have 
nothing at all to say about the trillions of dollars we've wasted and 
are continuing to spend on reckless, senseless, immoral wars.
  It's true that budgets are about choices. Which will we choose: the 
human destruction of seemingly endless wars abroad or the pressing 
human needs we have here at home?
  The supercommittee has a big job, Mr. Speaker. It will be grossly 
irresponsible for them to ignore one of the biggest ticket items when 
they're making their considerations. Let's help solve our budget crisis 
and our moral crisis at the same time by bringing our troops home.

                          ____________________