Providing for Further Consideration of H.R. 4435, Howard P. "Buck" McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015; and Providing for Consideration of H.R. 3361, USA FREEDOM Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 426 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, I make a point of order against consideration of the rule, House Resolution 590.

Section 426 of the Budget Act specifically states that the Rules Committee may not waive the point of order prescribed by section 425 of that same act. House Resolution 590 waives all points of order against further amendments printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules.

Therefore, I make a point of order, pursuant to section 426, that this rule may not be considered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, last night, a bipartisan group, Congressman Walter Jones of North Carolina; Congressman Adam Smith, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee from Washington State; Congressman Garamendi; and Congresswoman Lee from California; and I, offered an amendment to be able to have a debate on a vote on our policy in Afghanistan--the longest war in American history.

It seemed odd to me that a bill like the Department of Defense authorization bill would come to the floor without the ability for Members to have a vote on Afghanistan. We are at war, and you would never know it by the actions of this House.

I am ashamed of this House that a bill like this would come to the floor and the leadership would block any attempt to be able to have a debate and a vote on what our policy should be in Afghanistan.

The rule that we are going to debate later today makes in order 162 amendments. There are amendments on everything from deferred retirement for military chaplains to charging admission to air shows to public access to Rattlesnake Mountain. I am sure public access to Rattlesnake Mountain is a big deal, but it is not as big a deal as the war in Afghanistan, where we have brave men and women in harm's way because we put them there.

The question is whether or not our policies should remain the same or whether it should change.

The President of the United States has said that he wants to draw down American forces in 2014. I hope he does. But there are also reports that we may be there for a considerably longer period of time.

I don't know what the policy is going to be, but let me read to you what this amendment that the Republican leadership blocked says. This is basically what we are asking here. It says:

In the event that the United States Armed Forces remained deployed in Afghanistan after December 31, 2014, then no later than March 31, 2015, the President shall send to Congress a determination describing the purpose and expected duration of such deployment and the projected number of troops to be deployed.

Who could possibly object to that? Basically, it is having the White House inform us of what the policy is. Where is the problem?

The second part of it goes as follows:

No later than 30 days following the receipt of the President's determination, Congress shall enact a joint resolution to improve the content of the President's determination.

Should Congress vote against the President's determination, the President is directed to remove all troops not required to protect United States diplomatic facilities and personnel in a safe, orderly, expeditious redeployment from Afghanistan.

Does anybody really object to that? Does anybody object to doing what we are supposed to do--to have a say on issues like war? It astounds me that Members of Congress would want to hide behind the Rules Committee blocking bringing this to the floor as though it is a way to avoid a serious debate and a vote on this policy.

By the way, the sponsors of this amendment have different opinions on Afghanistan. Some of us believe we should get out of there right now. That is where I am. Some of those who cosponsored this amendment believe that we should be there and have at least a small force in Afghanistan beyond 2014.

So this is not about right now saying we want to get out of Afghanistan. What this is saying is that if the President decides to change his promise of keeping us there no later than December 2014, then we ought to have a vote. We ought to be informed of what is going on and we ought to have a vote. Who could object to that?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I want my colleagues to understand one thing. The amendment that we are talking about is germane. I spent a great deal of time working with the Parliamentarian to make sure that the concerns that the Republican majority had about the germaneness of this amendment were addressed. It is a germane amendment. There is absolutely no reason at all for this not to be on the floor.

Let me just say that it doesn't take any courage to praise the troops and then hide from the vote. It is an act of cowardice, quite frankly. The fact that we are debating a Defense Department authorization bill, we are at war, and we are not allowed to be able to consider an amendment about what our policy should be in Afghanistan, well, what do you tell the troops? What do you tell their families? This war is on auto-pilot and we will just let it go?

I mean, we have a responsibility. This Chamber voted to send young men and women into harm's way. We have a responsibility and we are not living up to it. There is no reason in the world why this amendment should not be made in order. It is germane. It complies with all the rules.

The only reason why it isn't made in order is because someone in the Republican leadership said, no, we are not going to have a debate; we are not going to have a vote. Maybe they are afraid they are going to lose. I heard last night that they don't want to embarrass the President.

Really?

I mean, select committees on Benghazi, 53 votes to overturn the Affordable Care Act. They don't want to embarrass the President? Well, with friends like you, the President doesn't need any enemies.

The bottom line is this an important issue, and how dare we come to the floor on the defense bill and be silent and indifferent when it comes to Afghanistan.

I am ashamed of this process. There is no reason in the world why we shouldn't be debating this issue. We owe it to those young men and women who are over there, those who have sacrificed their lives, those who are at Walter Reed Hospital.

How dare we bring a bill like this to the floor without addressing this most important issue. We are at war, and no one in this place seems to want to talk about it.

Well, it is our responsibility just as much as it is the President's responsibility. To do nothing means we are complicit in continuing this war. I have had enough, and I think Members of this Chamber who agree with us ought to stand with us and vote against this rule.

This process stinks. We played by the rules, we did everything right, and we got nothing--nothing on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order against the consideration of the rule, House Resolution 590.

Clause 9(c) of rule XXI of the rules of the House specifically states that the Rules Committee may not waive the earmark disclosure rule prescribed by paragraphs (a) or (b) of clause 9 of rule XXI. House Resolution 590 waives all points of order against consideration of H.R. 3361.

Therefore, I make a point of order pursuant to clause 9(c) of rule XXI that this rule may not be considered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

What I found interesting about the exchange that we have just had is that nobody can explain to me why we cannot have a vote on the bipartisan amendment that Mr. Jones and Mr. Smith, Mr. Garamendi, Ms. Lee and myself have brought before the House. Nobody can give us a reason why, other than it is not in order because they have the power to not make it in order.

I want my colleagues to understand a few facts. 2,320 U.S. troops have been killed in Afghanistan since 2001.

19,718 U.S. troops have been wounded in Afghanistan since 2001.

127 soldiers were killed in 2013.

1,687 have been killed since the surge of 2009.

An estimated 30,000 Afghan civilians have been killed since 2001.

The VA estimates that approximately 22 veterans will die by suicide every day. At least 30 percent of veterans have contemplated suicide.

Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve a say in the future of America's longest war. We all know that there is no military solution in Afghanistan. The American public is sick and tired of war. American interests are not advanced by another decade of war.

And yet, what does this House of Representatives do when we consider the Department of Defense authorization bill? We do nothing. We do nothing. The only thing that happens is we bring germane amendments to the Rules Committee to be able to debate this issue so the Members will have a say when the President outlines his policy for Afghanistan beyond 2014.

But it seems that the leadership of this House is perfectly satisfied just sitting back and just being okay with whatever happens.

All we are asking for is that if we are going to stay beyond 2014, the President has to tell us what his plan is. That is not radical. That is not out there. He needs to tell us what his plan is, and we need to vote on it. That is our job. And if you don't want to take responsibility for issues like this, maybe you ought to think about retiring because it is an insult to the men and women who are serving our country for us to be silent and indifferent, to not do the proper oversight, to not debate these issues.

It is an insult to the American taxpayer that we are letting the most corrupt government in the world--that is how the Karzai government has been rated, the most corrupt government in the world--continue to steal our money.

We cut food stamps for poor people. We don't have enough money to take care of our veterans in the VA facilities. We are cutting back on moneys for roads and bridges. We can't extend Unemployment Compensation for people who have lost their jobs, and yet we just hand over millions and millions and millions of dollars.

Let me just tell you this, Mr. Speaker. Right now, we authorized in FY13 spending $87.2 billion for Afghanistan. We authorized in FY14 spending $85.2 billion. Proposed FY15 spending, $79.4 billion. Total since 2001, $778 billion. And when you add in the cost of the veterans care that will be needed and all the other associated costs, the total cost of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq are about $4- to $6 trillion. And we are not even paying for most of it. We are borrowing it. It is going on our credit card.

My friends wail about the deficit and the debt, but when it comes to just dumping money into this money pit called Afghanistan, they say nothing.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, when Speaker Boehner became the Speaker of the House, he made a pledge that he would allow the House to work its will on major issues.

This is a major issue. This is a major issue. If my friends want to know why the majority of the American people think that this place is dysfunctional, this is the reason: we can't get a vote on an issue as important as the war in Afghanistan.

Now, there is really no excuse. It is germane. We spent a lot of time working with the Parliamentarian to make sure it is germane to satisfy the concerns of the majority. We did that. It is bipartisan. It is bipartisan. And of people who are cosponsors of the amendment, some want to end the war now and some believe that we need to keep troops there for a period beyond 2014. I mean, we have jumped through every hoop. What else can we possibly do?

And for some reason, somebody in the leadership here said, no, the House of Representatives will not be able to work its will when it comes to Afghanistan.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert into the Record an article entitled ``CNN Poll: Afghanistan war arguably most unpopular in U.S. history.''

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. The American people deserve better than what is on display here.

Mr. Speaker, I want to appeal not just to Democrats but to Republicans. I want to appeal to the fairness of Members in this Chamber. I want to appeal to their sense of making sure that what we do here is right.

On this issue, we ought to have a vote, and the only way to get a vote is if you vote down the rule so we can go back to the Rules Committee and insert this amendment, that is totally germane, into the Department of Defense authorization bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to close by simply saying, it is moments like this where I feel a great sadness for this institution. Again, there are a lot of things in this Defense Department bill that we are going to debate that really, I think, one would fairly characterize as somewhat trivial, and I mentioned some of them earlier.

The fact that we are at war and we can't vote on this war--we are being told that we can't have a say on what the future of our policy is--that is shameful. I am ashamed of this place for running such a closed system on the war.

This is the defense bill. We are not talking about the education bill. We are not talking about the small business bill. This is the Department of Defense authorization bill. This is where we should have the debate. It is germane, and it should be made in order.

I will just finish, Mr. Speaker, by saying that we are approaching Memorial Day. We are all going to go home and give great speeches. When people ask, What are you doing for our troops in Afghanistan, what are you doing to try to get them home, you will be able to say, nothing, because that is exactly what we are going to do if we can't consider this amendment. Nothing. What a shame. What a tragedy. What an insult to those men and women who are serving. What an insult to their families. What an insult to the American people.

When you are in charge, you can do whatever you want, but I would urge my colleagues, on a bipartisan basis, to reject this rule.

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I, once again, rise in strong opposition to this rule, which fails to make in order the bipartisan McGovern-Jones-Smith-Garamendi-Lee amendment on Afghanistan, and I will include the text of my amendment following my remarks.

Mr. Speaker, ours is a very straightforward amendment. We worked very hard to make it thoughtful, bipartisan, and germane. It reiterates the President's commitment to complete the transition of U.S. combat, military, and security operations to Afghan authorities by the end of this year.

It requires the President to send to Congress by the end of March next year a determination that describes the mission, duration, and level of troops of any post-2014 deployment of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, and the Congress then has 30 days to enact a joint resolution to approve the President's determination.

In the event that Congress votes against the President's determination, then the remaining U.S. troops in Afghanistan would be withdrawn in a safe, orderly, and expeditious manner, taking into consideration the security of U.S. diplomatic facilities and personnel.

Last year, 305 Members of this House voted in support of an amendment calling for just such a vote, but under this rule, those same Members will be denied the opportunity to make sure that the President presents clearly to Congress what he intends our troops to do in Afghanistan after the end of this year and for how long. Under this rule, Congress is denied the opportunity to vote on whether they approve the President's plan or not.

I don't know how a vote on our amendment would turn out, and I certainly have no idea how a vote next year on keeping our troops in Afghanistan would turn out, but here is what I do know: I know that the men and women who will be asked to serve and perhaps to die in Afghanistan deserve a debate and a vote. I know their families deserve a debate and a vote.

I know that the American people, who have spent billions and billions and billions of dollars on this war, deserve a debate and a vote; and I know that this Congress has not only the right but the responsibility to make our views known on this important issue.

We are at war, Mr. Speaker. I know that some of my colleagues would rather not think about that. They would rather the issue of Afghanistan just go away, but wishing and hoping doesn't make it so.

This is already the longest war in American history. The American people are tired of it. Our troops and their families have been stretched to their very limits. We have lost over 2,000 servicemembers and spent over $700 billion.

What in the world is the Republican leadership afraid of, Mr. Speaker?

Last night, some of my Republican colleagues told me that they were refusing to make this amendment in order because they didn't want to upset the President. Are you kidding me? Since when does this leadership care one iota about upsetting the President?

We can vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act over 50 times. We can have investigation after investigation after investigation about Benghazi, but we can't take 10 minutes to debate the war in Afghanistan? Give me a break.

Besides, this amendment doesn't upset any plans or negotiations the President is currently carrying out on Afghanistan--not a one. It doesn't interfere with funding for the war, and it doesn't interrupt the deployment of our troops.

I know, in their hearts, that many of my Republican colleagues agree with me, so I am going to give them one more chance to do the right thing. I urge you to support the McGovern-Jones-Smith-Garamendi-Lee amendment on Afghanistan.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to amend the rule to include my amendment calling for a vote on keeping troops in Afghanistan after 2014, and that this amendment receive 10 minutes total debate like every other germane amendment made in order under the rule.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source