Declaring that the United States Will Prevail in the Global War on Terror

DECLARING THAT THE UNITED STATES WILL PREVAIL IN THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR -- (House of Representatives - June 15, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself 8 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, we will not be having a real debate on Iraq today. It will be a pretend debate, one that will have absolutely no effect on U.S. policy. No amendments, no substitutes, no chance for Members of Congress to actually do their jobs by making thoughtful changes to the resolution.

The distinguished chairman of the International Relations Committee testified before the Rules Committee that the resolution before us will at least give Members the opportunity to ``get things off our chest.''

Mr. Speaker, I am not interested in therapy. I am interested in changing this failed policy.

This process is disrespectful to the men and women of our Armed Forces, disrespectful to the people we represent, and disrespectful to the traditions of this House.

The Bush administration is trying to encourage, cajole, and sometimes even strong arm the Iraqi Government into being more inclusive, to respect the rights and privileges of the minority, to embrace the democratic process. Well, I hope the government of Iraq is not watching today, because the Republican majority certainly has no intention of teaching by example.

We are all committed to a sovereign, free, secure and united Iraq. The important question remains, to achieve this goal, is the United States committed to keeping 150,000 or 100,000 or 50,000 American military men and women in Iraq for an indefinite amount of time, perhaps even decades into the future?

Under the current policy, the mission in Iraq is neverending. The resolution before us asks us not just to stay the course, but to stay forever.

The reason why so many of us, Democrats and Republicans, want to have a meaningful debate and meaningful votes on the war in Iraq is because the Bush administration has lost our confidence and our trust.

For too long this Congress has given the administration blank checks and unchecked authority. We have abdicated our responsibilities. We have not done our job, which is to legislate, to conduct oversight, and to shape the policy of this Nation.

Mr. Speaker, the reality of our policy in Iraq is one characterized by corruption, mismanagement, incompetence and self-delusion. 2,493 American soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen have died since the beginning of the war, 94 percent of them since the President declared, ``Mission Accomplished.''

And despite unanimous congressional agreements against permanent military base funding, the Republican majority stripped these provisions from the emergency supplemental conference report presented to the House on Tuesday.

In the period leading up to the war, the President said, ``Imagine a terrorist network with Iraq as an arsenal and as a training ground.'' Unfortunately, we do not have to imagine that anymore. The State Department now reports that Iraq is indeed a terror haven. The very thing we wanted to prevent by going to war was actually created by the war.

Certainly the death of terrorist Abu Musab al Zarqawi is welcome news. We did not create Zarqawi, but it was the war in Iraq that offered him the opportunity to kill American soldiers and innocent Iraqi civilians and to inflame sectarian hatreds.

But as we all know, foreign terrorists represent only 6 to 8 percent of those committing violence in Iraq. By far, most attacks are carried out by Iraqi Sunni insurgents and by the growing Shiia and Sunni sectarian groups battling each other.

The American-backed effort to arm tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers and officers, coupled with a failure to curb a nearly equal number of militia gunmen, has created a galaxy of armed groups, each with its own loyalty and agenda. Sectarian violence has become almost as serious a threat as the insurgency. As former commander of U.S. Central Command General Anthony Zinni said in April, ``These militias will be a fact of life after we are gone. No one seems to have a plan for these militias.''

It is a disturbingly familiar refrain, Mr. Speaker: No one seems to have a plan.

On the ground, reconstruction is not going well. A plan to build 150 health care clinics has not resulted in much more than empty shells and uneven walls. Power blackouts remain a constant frustration. Only 19 percent of Iraqis today have working sewer connections, down from 24 percent before the war. While most Iraq reconstruction projects are way behind schedule, there is one construction effort that is right on target: the $592 million U.S. embassy, which will be the size of about 80 football fields.

The recent report by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction found massive corruption and mismanagement of U.S. aid. Billions of dollars have been lost or squandered through fraud and corruption, much of it by a handful of corporate contractors with special, privileged ties to the administration and a near complete lack of systematic oversight of funds.

And still, Mr. Speaker, there is no accountability for this money and no accountability for this war, not within the Republican White House and not here in this Republican House.

This is a critical point, because this debate must be about more than simply how long we will stay in Iraq.

Where is the accountability for the corruption taking place in our reconstruction projects? Where is the accountability for our troops receiving faulty body armor and other equipment? Where is the accountability for the lack of funding to provide services for all the veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan who are dealing with post-traumatic stress and other needs? Where is the accountability for the creation of death squad-type militias within the Iraqi police and security forces? Where is the accountability for the abuse of prisoners and detainees which is costing the United States so much of its credibility and standing in the international community?

It is not the role of the Congress to turn a blind eye to whatever the administration wants to do. Quite the opposite. It is our responsibility to oversee every single taxpayer dollar that is being spent on this war.

The total bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan stands at $450 billion. If we stay in Iraq for just one more year, we will have spent, off budget, off the books, half a trillion dollars on this war, a debt that President Bush and the Republican majority intend to pass on to our children and our grandchildren.

Leadership, Mr. Speaker, requires courage. It requires taking responsibility. It requires accountability. It demands competence. In every single one of these areas, the White House, the Pentagon, this Republican Congress score an F for failure.

Instead, all the American people are getting is a world class PR and spin campaign coming out of the White House.

Make no mistake, H. Res. 861 requires no accountability from the White House or the Congress on the war in Iraq. It will not provide any increased protection for our troops on the ground. It will not protect our tax dollars from further waste, fraud, or abuse.

It won't demand direction, let alone a plan, from the President about how and when our troops will return home.

So here we are, treating the issue of war and the safety of our troops with a resolution that carries the same force of law as a resolution congratulating a sports team. Quite frankly, this process is an outrage and it should be rejected by this House.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, let me yield myself 10 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, let me correct something that has been said on this floor. In the testimony before the Rules Committee, the Democrats not only asked for an open rule, we asked for a substitute. We were denied that. We were shut out. It is here in black and white in the testimony.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, let me say simply in closing that we will not be having an open debate on Iraq policy today. No one from either side of this aisle will be allowed to present policy alternatives that will be debated and voted upon. No one will be able to offer amendments to increase accountability over the hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars that have been poured into this war. Just like the last 3 years, there will be no debate that might actually affect the direction of U.S. policy in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, for the past 3 years, Democrats and Republicans have come to the Rules Committee with amendments to the various defense bills that would have required greater accountability and modified our policies in Iraq. The Republican majority in this House has routinely denied these amendments the right of debate. They have routinely kept them from being offered on the floor of this House for votes. So when the Republican leadership says they have offered us a debate on Iraq, it is simply not true.

This is not what we asked for. We do not need therapy. We do not need time to get things off our chests. We need real debate and meaningful votes on U.S. policy in Iraq.

At best, the Republicans have structured a glorified 10-hour Special Order on Iraq. But let us not dignify it by calling it a debate when no Member will have the opportunity to vote on competing policy proposals.

Mr. Speaker, to our troops who are in harm's way, to their families and friends and to the American people, I offer my sincere regrets that once again the Republican-led Congress is failing to address the war in Iraq in the serious manner it deserves and has instead chosen to create this sham of a debate.

Mr. Speaker, the great British conservative Edmund Burke once said, ``A conscientious man would be cautious how he dealt in blood.'' Mr. Speaker, I wish the majority of this House would heed those words.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov/