Waiving Points of Order Against Conference Report on H.R. 4939....
WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4939, EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT FOR DEFENSE, THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR, AND HURRICANE RECOVERY, 2006
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, on Friday the Rules Committee met and reported a rule for consideration of the conference report of H.R. 4939, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006. The rule waives all points of order against the conference report and against its consideration. Additionally, it provides that the report shall be considered as read.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4939, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006, is intended to fully fund our forces overseas and at home.
Mr. Speaker, at a time when our sons and daughters are deployed overseas in a wartime environment, this legislation provides critical funds that will be used to conduct ongoing operations in the global war on terror.
Unlike other wars, this war is one where terrorists are having a critical impact and one that requires the perpetual vigilance of not only our forces but the American people. To our forces' credit, just last week they were successful in killing Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, one of the critical players among the nonstate terrorist actors. This success required professionalism, perseverance, and tenacity, qualities our military has in abundance.
It is worth noting that if we were not in Iraq we would never have killed al-Zarqawi. However, it is also fair to observe that al-Zarqawi was dedicated to pursuing and killing Americans around the globe. If we had not found him, he surely would have found and attacked us.
Mr. Speaker, the Iraqis also deserve to be commended for their efforts in this struggle. During this war, they have held three elections, written a constitution, and just last week formed a permanent government. They played a key role in locating al-Zarqawi and are assuming an increasing role in defending their own country. They are watching what we do here today. They require and request our continued support as they move forward in their efforts to build a new and better Iraq. The passage of this rule and the underlying legislation is an important sign that this country and this Congress will keep its commitment to Iraq as it strives to create a future of hope and promise.
But, Mr. Speaker, real challenges remain, and it is these challenges that require our action today. Our military, our sons and daughters, need these funds immediately. They require our support and we must give it to them.
Mr. Speaker, I am aware that some may question the cost of the global war on terror. Some may question its worth. But, Mr. Speaker, today is not September 10 of 2001. We know what terrorists are capable of doing. Our enemies have chosen to make Iraq the central theater in the global war on terror. They seek to do to us what their predecessors did to the former Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and that is a triumph which we must deny our enemies for our own sake as well as that of the Iraqi people.
This war is a generational test, one that will affect not only our children and grandchildren but our great grandchildren as well. We cannot fail in our objectives. We chose this path as a Congress in 2002, and now we must stay on the hard road to its completion. We must support our forces now by passing this rule and the underlying legislation.
Mr. Speaker, many may wish to raise extraneous policy issues in this debate. Some may want to discuss issues that, however important, are superfluous to the question at hand. Frankly, I welcome the debate today and later this week; however, now is the time to support our sons and daughters deployed overseas in the field of battle. Now is the time to accept the true challenges we face. We can do so by passing this rule and the underlying legislation.
Before I close, Mr. Speaker, I wish to note that this supplemental has another purpose. It contains funds that are badly needed by our fellow Americans on the gulf coast as they are still recovering from the devastating effects of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Our fellow citizens need and deserve our support. I am proud that we are responding as we have twice before. This, like the war on terror, is a national priority. These twin issues, the war on terror and recovery of the gulf coast, demand and will receive resources from the Congress on a bipartisan basis.
However, I am pleased to note that in our negotiation with the other body our conferees have kept their focus on the challenges at hand. They have not allowed the generous impulses that underlay this legislation to be perverted into a reckless spending spree on other items. For that they are to be commended. They have given us a bill that meets the needs at hand, yet remains fiscally responsible. That is no small accomplishment. This legislation deserves support from all Members.
Mr. Speaker, to that end I urge support for the rule and the underlying bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I simply want to note that this supplemental actually addresses many of the gentlewoman's concerns. It includes money for armoring Humvees and truck vehicles. The supplemental makes modifications to requests in order to get the safest, most effective armored vehicles to troops in the field, including the National Guard, in a timely manner. It also adds $726 million to requests to ensure that Army tracked combat vehicles, such as Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles, are upgraded and available to the National Guard. There is also in this appropriation additional funds to look after the well-being of the troops.
I think that our House Committee on Armed Services has done an excellent job in identifying problems as they have shown themselves and dedicating resources to them throughout this conflict.
Certainly more can be done, and it is being done in this supplemental. But I would also point out for the record, while every loss of life, every loss of life is a tragedy and something that one would prefer not to happen, this is still one of the lowest, if not the lowest, casualty rates in the history of sustained conflict in our country.
So I think, frankly, those in charge of these particular areas have done a commendable job and, frankly, are trying to improve on that job literally on a daily basis. This supplemental is a step in that direction.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I want to address one of the points that my good friend from Wisconsin made. He used the phrase ``unnecessary war in Iraq.'' I would respectfully disagree with that judgment.
The policy to remove Saddam Hussein was not a policy adopted simply by this administration or this Congress. It was the official policy of the United States under our former President beginning in 1998. Why did we do that? Why did we choose to make the removal of Saddam Hussein a priority in American policy?
You can tick off the reasons. This is the man who launched two regional wars that killed over a million people, and he involved our country in armed conflict in 1991 in Kuwait. This is a man who twice had come close to developing nuclear weapons. First, in 1981, the Israelis took them out. Then he was evidently within 6 months of having nuclear weapons when the Gulf War broke out, according to the United Nations.
You visit Iraq, you can find mass graves everywhere. Tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed. This was a person who was financing terrorism up to the moment he was removed from power, offering $25,000 bounties and rewards to families whose children were killed in terrorist activity.
This is a person who was getting out from under U.N. sanctions, who had already despoiled the Oil-for-Food Program, and who step by step was moving himself toward the ability to be a threat in the region again, or to enhance his threat.
So I think when we actually look at this regime, it is fortunate that it is not there, because, frankly, if it were there today, it would be freer and more powerful and I think more threatening than it was when it was removed.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I just want to once again disagree with my good friend. I find, frankly, comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam to be incredibly overdrawn and misplaced.
When we look at the scale of the American involvement in Vietnam, the level of casualties, the fact that there were not democratic elections, that there was not the constitution, that there has not been the progress; frankly, when we look at the threat that was constituted by Saddam Hussein as opposed to North Vietnam, they simply are not on a comparable scale. Saddam Hussein was somebody who tried to assassinate a President of the United States, who drew us into war, who was actively seeking weapons of mass destruction throughout his political career.
I would agree with the gentleman, the fact that we had had a relationship with him was an enormous mistake and bad judgment by the American Government. I would actually concede my good friend's point in that regard.
I am glad in the end we understood who and what this person is. I point out again, that recognition began before this administration ever took office. That began with an act of this Congress and the preceding administration, the Clinton administration, that declared it was in the interest of the United States to remove this tyrant from office.
I would also point out with respect to the intelligence, while undoubtedly mistakes were made, those were mistakes that were made by the entire planet, and, frankly, I can bring quote after quote out by the preceding administration, by Members of this body that would suggest all of us believed there were weapons of mass destruction.
There is no question that at various points in his career, Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass destruction, acquired them and used them. And in a post-9/11 world, there is every reason to believe he would do so again and that that technology, that capability, could easily migrate to our opponents.
The world is safer; Iraq has a chance for a better future because Saddam is gone. That is due to the heroism and the professionalism of the American military.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COLE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to say that I believe we have had a good debate on the rule. I believe the importance and the timeliness of this legislation could not be more self-evident. This bill has been carefully crafted and worked in a way to ensure that our servicemen receive the best equipment when they go to war.
We had an interesting historical discussion and debate here today. It was an interesting debate as to how we got into this war and whether or not Saddam Hussein, it was appropriate to remove him at the time and in the way that we did. I suspect history will vindicate our judgment in that regard. He was a terrorist, he was a tyrant, he was a threat to global peace; and the world is better because he is gone. Iraq has a potential future because he is gone.
However, I would ask Members to remember this is a vote about our willingness to support our service men and women and not about other policy issues. The men and women serving our cause in Iraq ask for nothing more. In good conscience, we should give them nothing less.
It is also a vote about whether or not we will support our fellow Americans on the gulf coast. On that I doubt there is any division in this House.
To close, I would urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation.
The material previously referred to by Ms. Slaughter is as follows:
Previous Question for H. Res. 857--Rule on Conference Report on H.R. 4939, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006
Strike all after the resolved clause and insert:
That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 4939) making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes. All points of order against the conference report and against its consideration are waived. The conference report shall be considered as read.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov