Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill

Floor Speech

EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS BILL -- (Senate - March 26, 2007)

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the House of Representatives passed an emergency war spending bill on Friday that includes tens of billions of dollars for projects that have no connection whatsoever to the needs of our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, that tells U.S. generals how to do their jobs, and which pulls out of thin air a date for evacuating U.S. troops from Iraq.

It was meant to send a message to the Commander in Chief, but its only real effect is to delay the delivery of urgent material support to our troops. The President has said he will veto any legislation that includes a surrender date and which substitutes the judgment of politicians in Washington for the judgment of commanders in the field. Those who voted for the House spending bill on Friday, therefore, knew it had no chance of being approved. It was an empty promise to the troops.

The Constitution gives Members of Congress a concrete way of expressing their opposition to a war, and that is to vote against funding it. But House Democrats are trying to have it both ways: They call their bill a statement against the very war it continues to fund, a promise of support for the troops that has no chance of being signed.

Who loses out in this strange calculus? American soldiers and marines deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq and their worried families here at home are the losers.

The Secretary of Defense said as much last week. He said delaying the approval of funds would slow the training of units already headed into Iraq and reduce the funds available for repairs to buildings and equipment. He said it would force the Army to consider cutting funds for renovations to barracks and cut off repairs to equipment that is needed to support troop deployment training.

The House brushed these concerns aside to express a point of view. But troops who have been sent into battle with assurances of support got another message: Don't count on it from us.

Some have said the Senate version of the war spending bill is more palatable. They say this because its date for withdrawal is only a goal. They think that by retaining this provision, they will eventually force Republicans to accept the notion that battlefield commanders should be tied to arbitrary timelines. Believe me, they are wrong.

The week before last, we prevented legislation that would have told our enemies the date on which we will give up. A majority in the Senate showed it won't approve a bill that shares our battle plan with the enemy or which tells soldiers and commanders how to do their jobs.

We won't let timelines be used as the toll booth for getting aid to the troops, and we need to send the President a bill that doesn't include them so he can sign it without delay. I urge my colleagues to put an end to this unfortunate and misguided effort to set an arbitrary date upon which to withdraw from Iraq and to strip language from this emergency spending bill that only guarantees our troops will have to wait for the help they need and the support they deserve.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Source