Armed Services Committee Republicans Criticize House Democrats for Voting Against Troop Protection Proposal

Press Release

Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee today criticized House Democrats for voting against a proposal that would have assured American troops currently deployed in Iraq that Democrat legislation would not pose an increased operational risk to them. House Democrats overwhelming voted against a motion to recommit offered by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) during floor debate on H.R. 3159.

The Hunter motion to recommit would have blocked the implementation of H.R. 3159 unless the Secretary of Defense certified to the President and the Congress that H.R. 3159 "would not cause the tour length of any deployed unit (or members assigned to that unit) to be extended" and "would not increase the operational risk to any deployed unit."

Instead, Democrat members supported legislation that could endanger American troops deployed in combat if enacted into law. H.R. 3159 would preclude the President from deploying reinforcements to Iraq unless first issuing a waiver. While the legislations mandates a specific time that units and troops must spend at home before being deployed to Iraq, it would allow the President and his military commanders to deploy units and personnel to Afghanistan with only a minimum amount of time at home.

Rep. Duncan Hunter:

"This legislation would strip critical personnel from their units unless they get a waiver from the President. Effective combat units are built on experience, which can prove to be the difference between life and death in a firefight. We can't afford to chain our combat veterans to their desks back home when they can help our people survive in theater."

Rep. Jim Saxton (R-NJ):

"This is just the latest legislative action proposed by Democrats to score political points at the expense of our fine men and women in uniform. As passed, this bill places another obstacle in the way of our military commanders by limiting their ability to properly plan and conduct operations in the Global War on Terror.

"Instead of drafting legislation that benefits the entire military force—the way Ranking Member Hunter's motion to recommit did—Ms. Tauscher's flawed bill is directed solely at deployments in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and disregards the remainder of our military forces. Their true motive is crystal clear. These congressional members seek to make the situation on the ground harder for our personnel stationed overseas while pretending to support them."

Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-CA):

"It's beyond my comprehension that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle must insist on limiting the authority of our military leaders and General Petraeus. If this bill becomes law, it will paralyze our military. It will increase stress on our armed forces by reducing the pool of forces available, and it will intensify the risk of our soldiers remaining in Iraq. Additionally, it will extend the amount of time forces remain on the ground in Iraq, which would negatively impact the morale of our soldiers and their families at home."

Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC):

"Our troops and their commanders in the field need the flexibility and freedom to make decisions regarding deployment. This legislation undermines the strength of our combat units and the decision-making abilities of their superiors. We should be doing all we can to support the efforts of our troops and let them do their jobs. Congress should not be in the business of micromanaging the troops on the ground."

Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT):

"This Democrat bill was all about them having it both ways—trying to claim a public relations advantage by saying they support the troops by mandating strict rest periods between deployments, but then including an overwhelmingly burdensome waiver process to make it more workable in the real world.

"If the Democrats had offered this language as a ‘sense of congress' resolution, I doubt there's a single Member of Congress who would have voted against it. We're all for the idea of getting our troops the rest they deserve. We're all for the war to end and violence to cease. But in the end, the decision on troop deployments must be left to the judgment of our military commanders. To put something on the books like this only adds to the administrative paperwork burdens of the military during wartime, is most unwise for future conflicts, and is pandering at its worst.

"Our troops deserve better than legislative public relations stunts. They need our full support until they achieve their military objectives."

Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA):

"The Democrat majority outrageously hailed this bill as a troop readiness measure. But when given the chance to ensure that this measure would not impede our troops' ability to fight—and win—the Global War on Terror, the Democrats took a walk. Taking troop management decisions out of the hands of commanders like General Petraeus, and placing them in the hands of Congressional Democrats—that's a risk we can't afford to take."

Source