SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 1 TOP OF DOC
89–533PDF
2003
REQUESTING THE PRESIDENT TO SUBMIT TO THE HOUSE THE REPORT PREPARED FOR THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF AND DOCUMENTS ON RECONSTRUCTION/SECURITY OF POST–WAR IRAQ; AMENDING THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 TO REAUTHORIZE OPIC; COMMENDING THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR DEMOCRACY; AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FY 2004/2005 TO CARRY OUT THE CONGO BASIN FOREST PARTNERSHIP; CONDOLENCES IN RESPONSE TO THE MURDER OF SWEDISH FOREIGN MINISTER LINDH; AND EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING THE UKRAINE MAN–MADE FAMINE IN 1932–1933
MARKUP
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
H. Res. 364, H.R. 3145, H. Con. Res. 274, H.R. 2264,
H. Res. 372, and H. Res. 356
Page 2 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
SEPTEMBER 25, 2003
Serial No. 108–49
Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/international—relations
COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman
JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa
DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey,
Vice Chairman
DAN BURTON, Indiana
ELTON GALLEGLY, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida
CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina
DANA ROHRABACHER, California
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
PETER T. KING, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
Page 3 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
AMO HOUGHTON, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado
RON PAUL, Texas
NICK SMITH, Michigan
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia
MARK GREEN, Wisconsin
JERRY WELLER, Illinois
MIKE PENCE, Indiana
THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
WILLIAM J. JANKLOW, South Dakota
KATHERINE HARRIS, Florida
TOM LANTOS, California
HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa
DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
BRAD SHERMAN, California
ROBERT WEXLER, Florida
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
Page 4 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
BARBARA LEE, California
JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania
EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon
SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada
GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
ADAM B. SCHIFF, California
DIANE E. WATSON, California
ADAM SMITH, Washington
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
CHRIS BELL, Texas
THOMAS E. MOONEY, SR., Staff Director/General Counsel
ROBERT R. KING, Democratic Staff Director
DANIEL FREEMAN, Counsel/Parliamentarian
LIBERTY DUNN, Staff Associate
C O N T E N T S
MARKUP OF:
H. Res. 364, Of inquiry requesting the President to transmit to the House of Representatives not later than 14 days after the date of adoption of this resolution the report prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff entitled ''Operation Iraqi Freedom Strategic Lessons Learned'' and documents in his possession on the reconstruction and security of post-war Iraq
Page 5 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
H.R. 3145, To amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to reauthorize the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, and for other purposes
Amendment to H.R. 3145 offered by the Honorable Barbara Lee, a Representative in Congress from the State of California
H. Con. Res. 274, Commending the National Endowment for Democracy for its contributions to democratic development around the world on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the National Endowment for Democracy
H.R. 2264, To authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 to carry out the Congo Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP) program, and for other purposes
H. Res. 372, Expressing the condolences of the House of Representatives in response to the murder of Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh
H. Res. 356, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the man-made famine that occurred in Ukraine in 1932–1933
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Letter dated September 25, 2003 from General Richard B. Myers, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, U.S. Department of Defense to the Honorable Duncan L. Hunter, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, and Chairman, Committee on Armed Services
Page 6 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Letter dated September 25, 2003 from the Honorable Duncan L. Hunter to the Honorable Henry J. Hyde, a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois, and Chairman, Committee on International Relations
The Honorable Henry J. Hyde: Prepared statement on H. Res. 364
The Honorable Robert Wexler, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida: Prepared statement on H. Res. 364
The Honorable Tom Lantos, a Representative in Congress from the State of California: Prepared statement on H.R. 3145
APPENDIX
The Honorable Tom Lantos: Prepared statements on H. Con. Res. 274, H.R. 2264, H. Res. 372, H. Res. 356
The Honorable Edward R. Royce, a Representative in Congress from the State of California: Prepared statement on H.R. 2264
The Honorable Ron Paul, a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas: Prepared statement on H. Res. 364
The Honorable Barbara Lee: Prepared statement on H.R. 3145
Page 7 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The Honorable Betty McCollum, a Representative in Congress from the State of Minnesota: Prepared statement on H. Res. 364
REQUESTING THE PRESIDENT TO SUBMIT TO THE HOUSE THE REPORT PREPARED FOR THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF AND DOCUMENTS ON RECONSTRUCTION/SECURITY OF POST–WAR IRAQ; AMENDING THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961 TO REAUTHORIZE OPIC; COMMENDING THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR DEMOCRACY; AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FY 2004/2005 TO CARRY OUT THE CONGO BASIN FOREST PARTNERSHIP; CONDOLENCES IN RESPONSE TO THE MURDER OF SWEDISH FOREIGN MINISTER LINDH; AND EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE REGARDING THE UKRAINE MAN–MADE FAMINE IN 1932–1933
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2003
House of Representatives,
Committee on International Relations,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 1 p.m., in Room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry J. Hyde (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Chairman HYDE. The Committee will come to order. Pursuant to notice I now call up H. Res. 364, ''Resolution of Inquiry requesting the President to transmit to the House of Representatives not later than 14 days after the date of adoption of this resolution the report prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff entitled 'Operation Iraqi Freedom Strategic Lessons Learned' and documents in his possession on the reconstruction and security of post-war Iraq,'' for purposes of markup and move its adverse recommendation to the House.
Page 8 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Without objection, the resolution will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point, and the Chair yields himself 5 minutes for purposes of a statement.
[H. Res. 364 follows:]
89533a.AAB
89533a.AAC
Chairman HYDE. On September 9, 2003, H. Res 364, a resolution of inquiry, was introduced requesting the President to transmit to the House of Representatives the ''report prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff entitled 'Operation Iraqi Freedom Strategic Lessons Learned' and documents in the President's possession on the reconstruction and security of post-war Iraq.'' This resolution of inquiry, the third such resolution concerning Iraq that this Committee has considered in the last few months, consists of two parts.
First, the resolution seeks access to the report prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff entitled ''Operation Iraqi Freedom Strategic Lessons Learned.'' It is my understanding that the requested document is not yet in the form of a report, but is in the form of an initial briefing document which will in turn be followed by a comprehensive written report at a later date. This briefing and report are major undertakings that will entail hundreds of interviews, a large number of which are still ongoing. The briefing and report are very much works in progress and exist today in draft form only.
Page 9 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I think it is important for all Members to take a special note that the product ''Lessons Learned,'' has been issued routinely by the Defense Department following every major conflict involving our Armed Forces. This is an extremely important document and provides essential guidance for future conflicts. It is presently nowhere near completion and it would be a disservice to those who must fight our future wars to rush the process of compiling the lessons learned. Once those lessons learned are completed, the Defense Department routinely makes them available to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees and to all Members under appropriate security conditions. I hope common sense will prevail in this matter.
You have before you a copy of a letter from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. As you can see from this letter, once the briefing is final, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will provide a complete, unredacted copy of the classified briefing to the Committee of primary jurisdiction, the House Armed Services Committee. After the briefing is completed and submitted, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will receive the follow-up written report at a later date, which also will be submitted to the House Armed Services Committee.
[The information referred to follows:]
89533a.eps
Chairman HYDE. Chairman Hunter has written a letter to this Committee, a copy of which is also before you, informing us that the Armed Services Committee will, in turn, grant, under appropriate security conditions and House Rules, access to any Member of the House who wishes to review the briefing and the follow-up report.
Page 10 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[The information referred to follows:]
89533d.eps
Chairman HYDE. Second, the resolution seeks access to ''documents . . . on the reconstruction and security of post-war Iraq.'' This is extremely if not fatally vague and is a broad request for documents lacking totally in specificity and it becomes virtually impossible to support this request.
The Armed Services Committee plans to continue its weekly oversight briefings by Department of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff concerning these issues. I repeat, a weekly briefing is conducted by DOD and the Joint Chiefs in the Armed Services Committee available to all Members of the House.
Therefore, since I believe this resolution is premature insofar as the first document is concerned, and vague and unworkable as far as the second request is concerned, that is why I move to report this resolution adversely, and I urge my colleagues to support my motion.
And I now recognize Mr. Wexler.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hyde follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE HENRY J. HYDE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, AND CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Page 11 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
H. RES. 364
On September 9, 2003, H. Res. 364, a resolution of inquiry was introduced requesting the President to transmit to the House of Representatives the ''report prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff entitled 'Operation Iraqi Freedom Strategic Lessons Learned' and documents in the President's possession on the reconstruction and security of post-war Iraq.''
This resolution of inquiry, the third such resolution concerning Iraq that this Committee has considered during the last few months, consists of two parts.
First, the resolution seeks access to the report prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff entitled, ''Operation Iraqi Freedom Strategic Lessons Learned.'' It is my understanding that the requested document is not yet in the form of a report, but is in the form of an initial briefing document which will in turn be followed by a comprehensive written report at a later date. This briefing and report are major undertakings that will entail hundreds of interviews, a large number of which are still ongoing. The briefing and report are very much works in progress and exist today in draft form only.
I think it important for all Members to take especial note that the product, ''Lessons Learned'', has been issued routinely by the Defense Department following every major conflict involving our Armed Forces. This is an extremely important document and provides essential guidance for future wars. It is presently no where near completion and it would be a disservice to those who must fight our future wars to rush the process of compiling the lessons learned. Once these lessons learned are completed, the Defense Department routinely makes them available to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees and to all Members under appropriate security conditions. I hope that common sense will prevail in this matter.
Page 12 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
You have before you a copy of a letter from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. As you can see from this letter, once the briefing is final, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will provide a complete, unredacted copy of the classified briefing to the committee of primary jurisdiction, the House Armed Services Committee. After the briefing is completed and submitted, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will receive the follow-up written report at a later date, which also will be submitted to the House Armed Services Committee.
Chairman Hunter has written a letter to this Committee, a copy of which is also before you, informing us that the Armed Services Committee will, in turn, grant, under appropriate security conditions and House Rules, access to any Member of the House who wishes to review the briefing and the follow-up report.
Second, the resolution seeks access to ''documents . . . on the reconstruction and security of post-war Iraq.'' This is an extremely vague and broad request for documents, and the lack of specificity makes it virtually impossible to support the request.
The Armed Services Committee plans to continue its weekly oversight briefings by the DOD and JCS concerning these issues, which it has conducted since the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom. These briefings have been and will remain open to all Members of the House.
Therefore, since I believe this resolution is premature insofar as the first document is concerned, and vague and unworkable as far as the second request is concerned, and that is why I have moved to report the resolution adversely. I urge my colleagues to support the motion.
Page 13 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. WEXLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting House Resolution 364, a resolution of inquiry requiring President Bush to release to Congress a report drafted for the Joint Chiefs of Staff entitled ''Operation Iraqi Freedom Lessons Learned,'' which provides a detailed assessment of the Administration's wartime strategy and post-war planning in Iraq.
According to media reports, this internal evaluation presents a comprehensive analysis of the Administration's post-war strategy. The report was compiled from a series of interviews with high ranking military officials, including now retired Army General Tommy Franks.
On September 3, The Washington Times disclosed the existence of this classified report labeled ''Final Draft.'' The media reported that the evaluation highlights a flawed and rushed war planning process that limited the focus for preparing for post-Saddam Hussein operations.
The report further states, and I quote:
''Three grades were awarded for wartime strategy employed in Iraq. The Administration's post-war planning and search for weapons of mass destruction received the lowest grade, which the assessment qualified as falling short of expectation and needs. The extent of the planning required was underestimated and insufficient U.S. Government assets existed to accomplish this mission.''
Page 14 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. Chairman, like many of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, I voted for the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq. But as Congress debates President Bush's $87 billion supplemental request, it is imperative that we fully understand the perspective of our military officials on the ground. It is also incumbent upon Congress to analyze the Administration's post-war strategy so that we may improve reconstruction efforts in Iraq and better ensure the security of our troops. In fact, this was the intention of those who drafted this report for the Joint Chiefs, including the Marine Corps' General Gordon Nash, who stated that the value in collecting these lessons learned is that we will save lives, save money and improve our Armed Forces.
Mr. Chairman, I respectfully ask this Committee, how does Congress help save lives if we don't have the report? How does Congress improve the capability of our Armed Forces if we don't have the report? How does Congress approve an additional $87 billion for Iraq if we don't have the report?
As it stands now, Congress lacks the necessary information to make an informed judgment on the reconstruction and stabilization plans for post-war Iraq. As a result, Congress is abdicating its responsibility to our Armed Forces, to the American people, and to the Constitution.
Mr. Chairman, you referred to General Myers' letter sent just this morning to Congress stating that this report is still in draft form and will be provided to us when it is complete. But how do you explain to the American people that the report was complete enough for the Pentagon to give a copy to Secretary Powell and Under Secretary Armitage but not to Congress? How do you explain to the American people that someone in the Pentagon saw fit to give the report to The Washington Times, a report that was complete enough to be stamped ''Final Draft,'' but not complete enough for Congress?
Page 15 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. Chairman, it has been over 6 months since the Joint Chiefs initiated this report, 3 months since a draft was handed over to DOD and approximately 1 month since it was given to The Washington Times. This is more than ample time for the Pentagon to have given Congress this report. I appreciate General Myers' offer to provide the report at an uncertain date, but this report is useless to Congress if we have already voted on the $87 billion for Iraq.
No more excuses, Mr. Chairman, not while our brave troops are dying. No more stonewalling, not while our troops are dying. We need a plan for Iraq, Mr. Chairman. We need to follow the advice of our military personnel on the ground in Iraq and learn some lessons. This is why I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in requiring the President to release this report. The clock is ticking. Windows of opportunity in Iraq are closing and the American people demand answers, without which support our efforts in Iraq will collapse under the weight of uncertainty and fear. Now more than ever Congress has an obligation to ask questions and it is the President's duty to provide answers before it is too late.
Thank you for your consideration, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wexler follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROBERT WEXLER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA
H. RES. 364
Page 16 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting House Resolution 364, a resolution of inquiry requiring President Bush to release to Congress a report drafted for the Joint Chiefs of Staff entitled ''Operation Iraqi Freedom Lessons Learned,'' which provides a detailed assessment of the Administration's wartime strategy and post-war planning in Iraq.
According to media reports, this internal evaluation presents a comprehensive analysis of the Administration's post-war strategy. The report was compiled from a series of interviews with high ranking military officials—including now-retired Army General Tommy Franks.
On September 3rd, the Washington Times disclosed the existence of this classified report labeled ''final draft.'' The media reported that the evaluation highlights a flawed and rushed war- planning process that limited the focus for preparing for post-Saddam Hussein operations.
The report further states, and I quote, ''Three grades were awarded for wartime strategy employed in Iraq. The Administration's post-war planning and search for weapons of mass destruction received the lowest grade, which the assessment qualified as 'falling short of expectation or needs' . . . The extent of the planning required was underestimated. [And] insufficient U.S. government assets existed to accomplish the mission.''
Mr. Chairman, like many of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, I voted for the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq. But as Congress debates President Bush's $87 billion supplemental request, it is imperative that we fully understand the perspective of our military officials on the ground. It is also incumbent upon Congress to analyze the Administration's post- war strategy so that we may improve reconstruction efforts in Iraq and better ensure the security of our troops.
Page 17 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
In fact, this was the intention of those who drafted this report for the Joint Chiefs, including Marine Corps Major General Gordon Nash, who stated that the value in collecting these lessons learned is that we will save lives, save money and improve our armed forces.
Mr. Chairman, I respectfully ask this committee—How does Congress help save lives if we don't have the report? How does Congress improve the capability of our armed forces if we don't have the report? How does Congress approve an additional $87 billion dollars for Iraq if we don't have the report? As it stands now, Congress lacks the necessary information to make an informed judgement on the reconstruction and stabilization plans for post-war Iraq. As a result, Congress is abdicating its responsibility to our armed forces, to the America people and the Constitution.
Mr. Chairman, you referred to General Meyer's letter sent just this morning to Congress stating that this report is still in draft form and will be provided to us when it is complete. But how do you explain to the American people that the report was complete enough for the Pentagon to give a copy to Secretary Powell and Undersecretary Armitage, but not to Congress? How do you explain to the American people that someone in the Pentagon saw fit to give the report to the Washington Times—a report that was complete enough to be stamped ''final draft,'' but not complete enough for Congress?
Mr. Chairman, it has been over six months since the Joint Chiefs initiated this report, three months since a draft was handed over to DOD, and approximately one month since it was given to the Washington Times. This is more than ample time for the Pentagon to have given Congress this report. I appreciate General Meyers offer to provide the report at an uncertain date, but this report is useless to Congress if we've already voted on the $87 billion dollars for Iraq.
Page 18 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
No more excuses Mr. Chairman—not while our brave troops are dying. No more stonewalling, not while our troops are dying. We need a plan for Iraq, Mr. Chairman. We need to follow the advice of our military personnel on the ground in Iraq and learn some lessons. This is why I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in requiring the President to release this report.
The clock is ticking, windows of opportunities in Iraq are closing and the American people demand answers—without which support for our efforts in Iraq will collapse under the weight of uncertainty and fear. Now, more than ever, Congress has an obligation to ask questions, and it's the President's duty to provide answers before it's too late.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Would the gentleman yield for a question? When you mention final draft, I haven't worked in the Executive Branch on such documents. Anything that says draft isn't it still a draft and not a final document? So you are asking for something that is not a final document to be released?
Mr. WEXLER. Well, the same so-called final draft was sent to The Washington Times.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Isn't a final draft still a draft form and not a final document?
Mr. WEXLER. Well, it was final enough. I am not going about—final enough for the Secretary of State.
Page 19 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. ROHRABACHER. That is my question.
Chairman HYDE. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, for 5 minutes. And will the gentleman yield to me?
Mr. ROHRABACHER. I certainly will.
Chairman HYDE. I thank you. The last thing in the world I would want to do would be to ascribe political motivation for anything that anybody does in this Committee, the last thing I want to do. However, as long as we are quoting media as our sources, there are some media today that say:
''Representative Robert Wexler is so anxious to see a secret Joint Chiefs of Staff report that he is forcing two committees to vote on whether the House should formally request a copy. One thing he has not done is just asked for it. Wexler spokesman Lale Mamaux said Wednesday that her boss did not relay his desire to the White House, the Pentagon or the Joint Chiefs of Staff before he and 40 other Democrats filed a resolution of inquiry to request on behalf of the entire House to see 'Operation Iraqi Freedom Strategic Lessons Learned.' ''
The report, as we are told not by the media, but the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is not ready. We are led to believe that the final briefing document will be completed by mid-December and will be provided to the House Armed Services Committee at that time and thus through that channel available to us. So if the gentleman really is interested in the information and not some lesser ignoble motive——
Page 20 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, will you yield?
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Reclaiming my time and I will be happy to let Mr. Wexler answer that. But let me say that I sympathize with the motive of trying to get the information out on every issue we deal with. I am not sympathetic with secrecy in government unless it is absolutely necessary. And this type of evaluation is not absolutely necessary that we keep it secret, but it is necessary that our government has a legitimate time period to complete a draft and to talk about it and to—I mean having worked in the Executive Branch—I have seen these things as a final draft and there are a lot of changes between the final document and what is labeled the final draft. And, of course, the Chairman has indicated, as Duncan Hunter has indicated, that we will get to see it when it is finally approved as the point of view of our Chiefs of Staff.
Mr. Wexler, I would yield the balance of my time to you.
Mr. WEXLER. My only motive, Mr. Chairman, is to have the report in whatever form it currently is in the hands of Congress so we can use and deliberate the information as we deem fit. But I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for pointing out to the Committee the article on the front page of Congressional Quarterly today because, as you may be shocked to learn, Mr. Chairman, the article is dead wrong. And you may recall that at a meeting of this Committee with Secretary Armitage, I asked him about the report. I did so specifically and I not only asked him about Congress and whether he had the report and then—I don't think I can go into it, because I think that was a classified report—but then amazingly in the afternoon after our meeting, that same report that apparently was not sent to the State Department was then stated later in the afternoon in a press release that was sent out by the Pentagon that they actually provided it to the State Department. So if we are going to start talking about motive, my motive is one simple motive: This Congress deserves a report about post-war Iraq, whatever it says, good, bad or indifferent. We are going to vote on $87 billion. We ought to know just make an informed decision. If that is partisan, so be it.
Page 21 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman HYDE. The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Paul.
Mr. PAUL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I am glad we are having the debate. I think this is important because it makes one important point and that is that Congress indeed does have authority and prerogatives over this issue, either financing it and it certainly has the prerogative over the issue of war. As most of you will recall, many months prior to the war I was strongly opposed to it and I was strongly opposed to the process because we did not declare war and we did not tell the President not to go to war. What we did last fall was we transferred power to the President to make his own decision, and I thought that was wrong procedurally, but also I thought it was ill-advised to go into Iraq.
But this resolution isn't exactly what I would draw up and I think the Chairman makes a very good point about the second part of the resolution asking for documents that are vague. I just don't think that is feasible. But I don't think that should distract from the effort for some of us to get a handle on things, the expenditures and the process and the policy. The Executive Branch doesn't operate in a vacuum, and I don't quite understand why Congress over the years, over the decades have been so anxious to transfer their responsibilities to the Executive Branch, and that is why I think this debate is very important and we should talk about coming together on asking for more information. I think that is legitimate.
For instance, I would like to know how many Iraqi civilians have been killed. And that might be bad PR or something, I don't know why, but generally in past wars, we have known this.
Page 22 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman HYDE. Would the gentleman yield? Has the gentleman asked that question at the weekly briefings by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Department of Defense?
Mr. PAUL. No, I haven't.
Chairman HYDE. Then I would suggest you do.
Mr. PAUL. It is available most weekly?
Chairman HYDE. Those are weekly briefings and you are certainly welcome.
Mr. PAUL. I want to know if that number would be available.
Chairman HYDE. I would say if it is not available, I would be very surprised. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have resources to get that.
Mr. WEXLER. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. PAUL. I will be happy to yield.
Mr. WEXLER. I would be happy to accept an amendment from the gentleman that stated that this resolution was limited to the report prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I would be happy to accept that and to put aside what is referred to by the Chairman as a vague request.
Page 23 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. PAUL. Okay. I am not about to make that amendment, but I am still quite willing to talk about the principle of the Congress having more oversight. For instance, not knowing the details of how many civilians have been killed—there are a lot of reports in the paper. And if the large number is true, 50,000—we never hear the correction coming from the Administration—this may be one of the reasons why there is a great deal of resistance in Iraq that we, at least the Administration, didn't anticipate, and I think that is very important.
But once again, I think the point I am trying to make is that we in the Congress should not be so anxious to give up so much of our responsibility and our authority and our prerogatives over very, very important issues such as war. And therefore I hope maybe I can give us some more thought about thinking and working with somebody coming up with something to get more information because I think there are still a lot of questions, there are a lot of hearings, even including today there will be a hearing with Bremer. So hopefully we can get more information. But I think it is very important and I may well take advice from the Chairman and find out how much information I can get.
It is just that this war has been treated somewhat differently. In other wars we have heard about the deaths and the civilian deaths and the destruction, but we do need to know an awfully lot more and why we are charging the people in this country to first, you know, destroy the infrastructure of a country and then we ask them to rebuild at the same time our own infrastructure is in shambles and we have unemployment growing. Yet we are worried about unemployment over there.
Page 24 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman HYDE. Does the gentleman know of any previous war where there have been more newsmen embedded with the troops?
Mr. PAUL. I would like to make a comment about that because that concerns me.
Chairman HYDE. I am sorry. Go ahead.
Mr. PAUL. I will answer the question. Probably not, but that doesn't reassure me because that to me was a sign that the situation was monitored more closely than ever before.
Mr. CHABOT. Would the gentleman yield?
Chairman HYDE. Without objection.
Mr. CHABOT. Just one point, Ron, and I have the utmost respect for your positions most of the time, but just one statement that you made I think ought to be clarified. You mentioned about we go in and destroy the infrastructure of the country. I don't think that is what happened. Inevitably there was some infrastructure that would have been damaged but I think we went out of our way to avoid power plants and all kinds of things. And although there was some damage, much of the damage that we are going to be repairing was the damage that was caused by 30 years of a corrupt totalitarian regime from the dictator Saddam and what he inflicted on his country and people. So I don't think it is damage from the United States that really needs to be overcome.
Page 25 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. PAUL. Would the gentleman yield? I think you made a good point and I don't think it is totally and completely accurate, but a lot more people have less electricity over there since the bombing occurred than occurred prior to it.
Chairman HYDE. The gentleman's time has expired. Mr. Lantos.
Mr. LANTOS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I believe the subject of this resolution is very important. I am a strong believer that studying the past is an absolute prerequisite for making the right decisions in the future.
Since it was reported publicly that the Defense Department had prepared a lessons learned document that dealt with various aspects of our operations in Iraq, I along with many of my colleagues throughout Washington have been interested in obtaining access to that information. Our interest, Mr. Chairman, is not sheer curiosity. Congress must be involved in overseeing closely all of our activities in Iraq and in learning from lessons. It is wholly appropriate for us to obtain information prepared by some of the best informed members of the U.S. military in order to evaluate what role Congress can play in improving our efforts both today and in the future.
I therefore regrettably must disagree with my esteemed friend and colleague, the Chairman, and urge my colleagues to vote against the motion to report this resolution unfavorably. I think this Committee is entitled to obtain this report. I think the Department of Defense has all the capability of speeding up the preparation of this report, and I hope that the mid-December date can be moved up so that within the next week or 10 days we can obtain the report.
Page 26 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman HYDE. Thank the gentleman. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak?
Mr. Janklow.
Mr. JANKLOW. Mr. Chairman, a report that discusses the problems involving the mix of active and reserve forces, the deployment of troops, problems with special operations forces, problems with finding bombing targets, attracting the whereabouts of friendly troops and joint service warfare involve things that deal with the protection of the existing forces that we have in that theater of operations. It also involves the strategic abilities of the United States Armed Forces. The report that we get should be a final, complete, thorough and well researched document and not something that at this point could not just give aid and comfort but may work against the interest of the strategic military interests of this country at the present time.
Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. Thank the gentleman. Mr. Menendez.
Mr. MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, first, I cannot let go a serious concern that I want to voice early that I do not believe that it is the proper decorum to question the motives of any Member in the pursuit of their exercise of their function of their office and not only as a Member of this Committee, but as the Chairman of our caucus. In the debate days ahead, there are those in the majority who will question our motives or our patriotism and think that is going to silence us. They are desperately wrong.
Page 27 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman HYDE. Would the gentleman yield? Would you extend the same protection to the President?
Mr. MENENDEZ. I would be happy to extend any protection to anyone who deserves it in the context of a public policy debate. The last thing I want to do is to ascribe political motives in opposition to this resolution in terms of hiding the Administration's fiasco in what may very well have been a major policy blunder. I don't ascribe that anyone who may oppose this resolution is doing it simply to protect the President at the cost to America's interest.
So I don't particularly care for ascribing to any of our Members questionable motives. They have the right to pursue and we have the right to debate and we have the right to know. The American people have a right to know whether this Administration had an effective plan in place before they started this war. It is that simple. And all this resolution does is require the President to send to Congress any documents relating to post-war planning, including a copy of a report drafted for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And that report that The Washington Times has marked ''Final Draft''—well, The Washington Times can have it, but those of us who represent hundreds of thousands of people and collectively millions of Americans in this country cannot have it? It is in fact highly, highly objectionable that we cannot have this opportunity. If the press can have it, then surely we can have the opportunity as well as the American public.
What we do know about the Administration's post-war planning right now is very little, but that which we know shows us that post-war planning helps explain the disastrous situation in Iraq today. That poor planning is part of the reason that blackouts plagued Baghdad and that the Administration had to scrap its energy strategy in mid-July. We know that according to media descriptions of this secret report, senior military officials gave the planning for post-war Iraq the lowest rating on their scale, the lowest rating. And according to the same media reports the planners simply didn't have enough time to put together a good plan for reconstruction.
Page 28 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
No wonder that plan isn't working. No wonder our soldiers now face a guerilla war that this Administration failed to predict. No wonder this Administration throughout their original plan last May had to start over. And no wonder possibly that we have such opposition to release this post-war planning to the American people and to the Congress. But if the post-war planning was rushed, if the post-war planning was flawed, then the Administration should be held accountable. It was this same Administration that urges to go directly into war. It was this same Administration that would not wait any longer for the U.N. to act. It was this same Administration that didn't have time to build a true international consensus and a true coalition so that our troops and our taxpayers wouldn't have to share the entire burden of the war in Iraq. Yet it turns out that this same Administration, that was in such a rush to go to war, may not have taken the time to effectively plan for post-war Iraq. And it is the same Administration that now comes to Congress asking for an additional $87 billion without a clear plan for the future.
Only yesterday, Secretary Rumsfeld told our colleagues in the Senate that the Administration does have a detailed plan for recovery, but that it is complicated and not readily absorbable or communicated through the television and the sound bite or a bumper sticker. The American public wants to see the detailed plan and is smart enough to understand whether their money is being used to effectively protect our troops. And the American public deserves to know whether or not this Administration had a well thought out plan for post-war Iraq.
That is all Mr. Wexler is attempting to do, and I urge my colleagues to support his inquiry.
Chairman HYDE. The gentleman from Oregon, Mr. Blumenauer.
Page 29 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I must say that as we are all making decisions each week on one of the most momentous issues that we are grappling with, it seems to me we would benefit from the favorable recommendation of the request by Mr. Wexler and getting an opportunity to review the draft report. I have huge respect for the Chairman and I don't want to talk about whether or not anybody is political in this regard, but I am one of the people who voted against authorizing this war because of some of the same elements that are now being tragically played out each and every day in Iraq.
Now I am not prepared to judge whether those who say the Administration was purposefully deceptive with the public and with some Members of Congress or whether we just simply were victimized by poor planning and poor intelligence or whether there is just an unfortunate circumstance of events. But there has been a steadily shifting pattern of rationale in dealing with the facts. We have had the members of the U.S. Government who at the outset accurately estimated the economic costs and the requirement of troop deployment being denied and dismissed by others in the Administration. And I note with interest that both these two spokespeople are now ex-government officials.
We are in a situation now, and I am mindful of what Mr. Rohrabacher said about how these reports have a way of changing from the time they are final draft. Lots of things happen within the machinations of an Administration. Absolutely the case. And I think that is one of the reasons why we ought to look at this final draft report, because we have seen with this Administration a pattern of pressure on government agents and officials who have tried to give the American public the truth, whether it is global warming, where all of a sudden the EPA is forced to delete references to it. My colleagues from New York can cite chapter and verse where the EPA was forced to give information from the White House that we now know was not substantiated about the quality of the air in New York City immediately after 9/11. We have seen a pattern of pressure on government officials either to discredit them or to force the reports to be rewritten.
Page 30 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I think we ought to see this final draft report. I think the last time we had a discussion like this, Mr. Chairman, I tried to make the point that the truth will come out whether we get it from BBC or The Washington Times or tragically from historians, the truth of this chapter will come out. The point is whether we will get the truth soon enough to inform our decisions to do a better job doing our job. And I think any objective review of what has happened this last year would suggest that if anything, Congress has been too lax, too accepting, not aggressive enough to deal with the problems of planning the consequences, whether it is in the Middle East or North Korea. I think a small step will be to approve Mr. Wexler's proposal. If The Washington Times can get the draft, it is going to come out. I think we would be far better served as would our constituents if it comes out sooner rather than later.
I appreciate the courtesy and yield back any remaining time.
Chairman HYDE. Thank the gentleman. Mr. Hoeffel.
Mr. HOEFFEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I support this resolution. I congratulate Congressman Wexler for bringing it up. He is absolutely right. We need this information and a whole lot more before we vote on the $87 billion request the Administration has made for spending in Iraq. I would say to my friend Mr. Paul we are not going to get the information he wants, I am afraid, before we cast that vote. The Chairman tells us we will get this report on strategic lessons learned by mid-December. I am sure that the President will want to vote on his Iraq supplemental well before mid-December, and we will not have the information we need to make an informed judgment.
Page 31 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We really need three things from the Administration and we have needed them all along. The first is we need the President to level with the American people and tell us about timetables and costs and his vision for what comes next and what he is trying to achieve and how he thinks he can achieve it. And giving this report to the Congress would be part of that process of leveling with the Congress and the American people that I believe is so desperately needed.
Secondly, we need a plan. We need to know how and when we can internationalize both the security and the reconstruction in Iraq, how that is going to be accomplished, what the future costs of reconstruction may be, what the timetable is for achieving that and how we can bring our friends in to help make that happen. We also need to know how we are going to get the Iraqis back in charge. That is everybody's goal to put the Iraqis back in charge of Iraq.
Well, what is the plan and how do we know it has been accomplished? If the United Nations won't step up to the plate and we have to be there by ourselves, when will we know when we have achieved our goals, what standards will we use, what is the plan? If the United Nations will step up to the plate how do we make that happen?
And thirdly, we need an exit strategy. It is all part of the same requirement. How do we know we have succeeded? When can America bring our troops home? We clearly can't leave a vacuum in Iraq. I voted for the military authority. Many voted no but we all agree we can't leave now. But when will we know when we can leave? What is the plan? What is the exit strategy? How much more than $87 billion are we going to need?
Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman HYDE. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOEFFEL. I will be happy to.
Chairman HYDE. I think the gentleman is very legitimate and they ought to be answered and will be answered. Again, I suggest that Members who really want the information rather than for some other reason, attend the briefings every week by the Department of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. However, there are questions and there are questions. I don't recall anyone asking Franklin Delano Roosevelt after Pearl Harbor how long is this going to take and what is it going to cost, Mr. President, and nobody knew. And the same situation applies here. And I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. HOEFFEL. I thank the gentleman for his comments. I can tell you I have attended a couple of those weekly briefings and Members of Congress learn very little at those weekly briefings by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and they certainly don't provide the answers to the kinds of questions that I am raising here. And I would respectfully suggest to the Chairman that the questions that he says were not asked of Franklin Delano Roosevelt are not the questions I am asking after we have won a military victory and now we need to know what comes next, how long will we stay and how will we know we have succeeded.
The Chair has expressed an interest in a modern day Marshall Plan. And many of us, myself included, have talked about a modern day Marshall Plan. But that is not the way that we are moving forward here. The Marshall Plan here was put together with requiring countries to plan for their future, to do the kind of strategic planning that could benefit from American investment. That is not happening here. If it is happening, Congress doesn't know about it. We are being asked to give another $87 billion with no end in sight.
Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
And I would ask the Chairman of this Committee, I would hope that he would be more aggressive in finding out information. I think that is the role of the International Relations Committee. I am disappointed that the Chairman is opposed to this resolution. We should be asking for more information, not allowing the Administration to push things off. They may never put the word ''Final Draft'' or ''Document'' on that report.
Chairman HYDE. Would my friend yield one more time? I hope the gentleman will attend Mr. Bremer's testimony at 4 o'clock today and ask those very questions.
Mr. HOEFFEL. I will be here.
Chairman HYDE. If I have anything to say, the gentleman will have adequate time.
Mr. HOEFFEL. That is a good deal.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Burton, the gentleman from Indiana.
Mr. BURTON. I want to follow up, Mr. Chairman, on the point that you made. There have been numerous briefings. The Secretary of Defense has been over here. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has been here. Members of this Committee have been at those briefings. There are questions that are allowed to be asked and it astounds me that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle continue to infer that information is being kept from them when all they have to do is go to the briefings. And if they have 10 questions, have 10 different Members ask the questions and they will be answered. I don't think the Secretary of Defense or the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is going to do anything to try to hide things from them. Quite the contrary, I think they will be as forthcoming as possible to make sure we don't have this kind of debate.
Page 34 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
It is unfortunate that a secret document was leaked to The Washington Times, but that doesn't alter the fact that the Defense Department is not keeping things from this Committee. It is a matter of Members coming to the briefings and asking the questions. If they ask the questions I am sure they will get the answers.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Bell.
Mr. BELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe that my friend Mr. Paul is correct when he points out that we all have questions and we should all have questions, a lot of questions have been raised. And in order to move forward in a prudent fashion from this point forward, we are going to need answers to those questions. And the suggestion has been made that my friend Mr. Wexler should have simply asked for the information and I would venture to guess that that sort of request would have been met with the same level of enthusiasm that his resolution has received from the Chair here today. We need this information and we need it as fast as we can possibly get it.
The Administration has obviously been way off its mark on its estimate on Iraq. We were not welcome with open arms as we were told we would be. U.S. soldiers continue to die from guerilla attacks on an almost daily basis, and the price for reconstruction continues to climb and climb and climb.
Having read the media accounts on the Pentagon's report that we are talking about today, and I think it is appropriate given the earlier statements to talk about media accounts, it has become clearer why the Administration has been so far off the mark simply because they didn't choose to listen. The Administration didn't listen to Lawrence Lindsey when he told them that the price of reconstruction would be $100 billion or more. In fact they fired him. The Administration didn't listen to Army Chief of Staff, General Shinseki when he said that this mission will require at least 200,000 troops. In fact they fired him as well.
Page 35 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
When our most respected military leaders were telling the Administration what the mission in Iraq would require, their advice fell on deaf ears. Now the Administration is asking for Congress to approve an $87 billion supplemental for reconstruction in Iraq without giving this body and the American people the overall big picture. We need a full accounting of where the billions of dollars Congress just appropriated for this mission went. We need to know exactly where the money we are being asked to spend now is going to go and we need to know the total cost of reconstruction moving forward. If we are ever going to get a clear sense of what our plan for an exit strategy is, we need to know what mistakes were made from the very beginning.
Releasing the Pentagon report is a first step in that direction and I applaud my friend from Florida, Mr. Wexler, for offering this timely and critical resolution of inquiry and I encourage all of my colleagues to support it.
Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. Gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Smith.
Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Mr. Chairman, very briefly, I align myself with the remarks of Mr. Burton. I would simply say that I think there is great danger in starting to politicize this situation. I think Congress needs the information. That is why I called both the White House and the Department of Defense yesterday. They said as soon as the report is done it is going to be made available to Congress and that satisfies me. That makes this resolution more partisan and more political than it should be, and with that I yield back the balance of my time.
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Brown.
Mr. BROWN. I thank the Chairman. The President is asking Congress, as we know, for $87 billion more in Iraq. This brings the total expenditures close to $160 billion. The American people aren't getting answers. They are asking us over and over in our mail and our town meetings. My friends on the other side seem to suggest that information is only forthcoming if we only ask. This is the third time at least this year that we have asked formally for answers.
In January Ron Kind and I were joined by over 100 colleagues. Ron Kind voted against the resolution in October. I voted for it. We were joined by over 100 colleagues in asking a series of questions to the President. We wanted to be sure the President would allow the U.N. weapons inspectors to continue their work and that all diplomatic options be exhausted before he started a war, but the President never answered that letter. He didn't have to. We now know he had decided to go to war a long time before that.
In February, 38 Members of Congress asked for answers a second time when I introduced H.J. Res. 24. This resolution would have required the President to answer the very same questions we continue and our constituents continue to ask today, 6 months later. What was the United States' plan just before we went to war? What was the United States' plan for achieving long-term social, economic and political stabilization of a post conflict Iraq? What are the full costs associated with the continued occupation of Iraq? What are the anticipated short-term and long-term effects of reconstruction on the United States' economy and on the Federal budget?
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
My friends on the other side of the aisle who say they are so forthcoming with information, the leadership on the other side of the aisle killed the bill. The President gave us and this Congress no answers, gave the American people no answers. But the answers to these questions, they are leaking out, but they are all too slowly leaking out.
First, it is obvious there was very little post-war planning even though most of us in this body on this side of the aisle asked for that information.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Would the gentleman yield for a question? Will you be here at the hearing later on this afternoon?
Mr. BROWN. Yes, I will.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Won't you get a chance to ask those questions?
Mr. BROWN. I will. But I have wondered what the answers have been the last 6 months and why the President didn't tell us and tell the American people a little bit about the post-war construction and reconstruction, because obviously they didn't have much of a plan.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Some of us are very sympathetic with the points you are making, and I believe all the information needs to be out. I am not sure whether or not this reflects a policy of the Administration or just how long it takes government to act.
Mr. BROWN. Reclaim my time. It didn't take them long to react when it came to going into Iraq with no planning. I think it is more an error of commission rather than omission. I think that is pretty obvious when you look at what Secretary Rumsfeld said when he said the overall costs would be under $50 billion, dismissing his, ''baloney estimates that it would cost hundreds of billions of dollars.''
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
My friend from Texas, Mr. Bell, outlined some of those comments. Larry Lindsey said it would be $100 to $200 billion. The Administration scoffed and then they fired him. Mr. Wolfowitz assured lawmakers that Iraqi oil revenues would pay for the reconstruction. And when the Administration did give us some estimates they were disastrously underestimated.
With Mr. Wexler's resolution now for the third time this year we are asking for answers. The report we are trying to obtain details a war plan that has been formulated as early as more than a year ago. The Washington Times, perhaps the most pro-Bush newspaper in the country, says the report reveals deficiencies in the planning process.
Congress gave the President the first blank check when it authorized the war resolution in October. Congress gave the President the second blank check when we voted for the Iraq war supplemental. Now the President is asking for another blank check of $87 billion. And my friends on the other side of the aisle said we will give you answers. It may not come until December, after the vote, but we will get answers.
The point is, Mr. Chairman, we want these answers before the vote. The American public wants to know how we are going to spend this $87 billion. The American public wants to be able to compare how much we are spending on Iraq electricity generation and transmission versus how much we are spending on our own infrastructure, electricity infrastructure. The American people want to know how much we are going to spend on school construction in Iraq and they want to know about the President's budget and school construction here. They want to know the same about police protection versus what we are spending on police protection in this country.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
We deserve those answers as Members of Congress. More so, the American public deserves those answers. That is why we should support the Wexler inquiry and oppose the Hyde motion.
Chairman HYDE. The gentlelady from Virginia, Ms. Davis.
Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I normally don't speak but I will make it quick, but I couldn't let it go by. As a Member of the House Armed Services Committee, I am at all those briefings and I have to tell you I haven't heard these questions asked in those briefings, and I really believe you could get the answer. If they don't have it, they will give them to you later in writing or what have you.
Unfortunately, right now I am missing an Armed Services briefing by Secretary Wolfowitz and General Abizaid and Ambassador Bremer. And I would like to suggest that some of the comments that have been made that we were not received with open arms like we were told, I would like to strongly suggest that any Member of Congress who has not been to Iraq that they go over there and that they visit the people, and they may find some contradiction between what the media reports and what is actually there.
And I thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman HYDE. I thank the gentlelady for that information.
Mr. Delahunt from Massachusetts.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. DELAHUNT. I thank the Chair for yielding and I do support the resolution. I think that there is something that we have missed in terms of the discussion, and that is what process has the Administration instituted in terms of the post major combat phase. There was the Garner plan and now we have the Bremer plan, and there are significant differences. I would like to know for one what occurred from the time that the initial plan, the Garner plan, was articulated and what caused that thinking and what actually goes on within the Administration in terms of that process because I do not see a coherent process in terms of the post-war phase.
I dare say, in terms of the Wexler resolution, it would be interesting, I believe, for this Committee and the American people to contrast whatever differences there may be between the final draft and the final report and what were the changes that were made and how were they achieved.
You know, my colleagues, we are creating an historical record that I think is very important in terms of future policy decisions by Administrations and the responsibility of this particular Committee.
Now the issue of politics has been raised. There is as much criticism being levelled by some prominent Republicans about the post-war phase as there are Democrats.
I am sure everyone here is familiar with the op ed piece that was drafted and written by Senator Lugar. He was extremely critical of the Administration.
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
It was Senator Hagel that described the Administration's relationship with the Congress and his perception of that relationship as seen from the White House as one that Congress amounted to little more than a nuisance.
Please look at this in terms of our institutional responsibility to reveal what went on, establish a correct and accurate historical record; and I would encourage my colleagues to support the Wexler resolution.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Meeks.
Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just in quick response, I attended a number of briefings and classified briefings, et cetera, particularly before the war where I was told we knew where the weapons of mass destruction were. We have yet to find them. Where I was told that there was in fact an imminent danger. That is yet to be seen. Where I was told that we knew exactly what we were going to do. That is what I was told pursuant to questions that were asked in private briefings, all of which proved not to be true. We don't know.
Here we are now. We still don't know whether weapons of mass destruction—when I had witnesses come before me to testify that we knew exactly where they were and that we were going to get them and that the inspectors that were looking for them were incapable of doing it because they were being blocked. But that was the motivation for us going there. Yet here we are now, and I don't know what I get out of those briefings. I will attend the briefing today, but my past history shows that they have not been accurate.
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So what I simply want to know, to be able to see and to have access to is what information that they have. Because clearly they are not sharing it with us. I would like to see the documents to see what the plans are, as Mr. Delahunt said, so that I can make an evaluation of what is going on. It is my, I believe, duty and responsibility as a Member of this House to do just that, not just to accept that this is what we are going to do.
Spending the people's money, we have got $87 billion now being requested. I have no idea what took place with the money that—the $76 or the $79 billion that we appropriated for. There is yet be an accounting for that money.
I have a responsibility as far as the constituency that I represent and the people of these United States to spend their money in a proper manner. At a time when we are sprouting down in debt and everything else, we have got troops over there that we have got to protect, we have got to figure out—I have got to be able to make an educated decision.
Obviously from the briefings that we have had in the past, I was not able to get the information or the correct information, or at least, I would like to know that they didn't have the correct information. At least they can admit that they didn't have the correct information but they made a judgment anyway.
We need to know what the facts are. The American people deserve to understand what the truth is. Because, as far as I am concerned, credibility has been lost with reference to these briefings. Credibility has been lost with reference to this Administration. And I cannot just go based upon a whim or a word of someone that we can just now give and appropriate this money.
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I was told by many at these hearings that people would be running around with American flags, and it would only take us weeks or months to resolve this issue. Weeks or months, that is all it would take. It wouldn't be a big thing. That was the impression I was left with.
And here we are. We don't know where we are, when we are going to get out and what is going to happen.
What I see is, you know, for me and my age—I turn 50 today—I am smelling Vietnam all over again, because there are records that are coming out today about Vietnam and how the government changed things then. So I want to make sure on my watch—the camera of history continues to roll—that on my watch I have got all the information that I can possibly get so that when they review history someone won't come back and say, well, you just did not have the proper information, you didn't get the right answers, you didn't do anything.
The only way we can do it is by supporting—or the first step of doing it is by supporting Mr. Wexler's resolution.
I yield back.
Chairman HYDE. The Chair wishes the gentleman a very happy birthday—very happy, extremely happy, terminally happy.
The gentlelady from Florida, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen.
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
Just this morning I had the wonderful privilege and honor of going to Bethesda Naval Hospital where I visited with Lance Corporal Alejandro Fernandez, a constituent of my congressional district. Alejandro is a Lance Corporal, a very proud Marine, not happy to have been wounded but very happy to have done his share for this country for the opportunity that this country gave to his refugee family.
He was injured in Operation Iraqi Freedom, was about to undergo his 16th operation since being wounded. His mom Rosa has been at his side for 5 1/2 weeks at Bethesda at great personal sacrifice, but the pride that he feels to be in the service of our country is stronger than ever.
He said, I am proud of what I did. I am proud of what my unit did. I would go back there tomorrow and do it again.
It is because of young men like Alejandro Fernandez that Congress has on a regular basis held briefings with Administration officials, with everyone at every level in every agency where we have had the opportunity to ask all of these probing questions that are being brought out today regarding our activities in Iraq. Just as Lance Corporal Alejandro Fernandez had his duties and his responsibility, so have we in the United States Congress.
That information and those notices have gone out to all Members of this Committee. We have held joint hearings with the Senate and with different Subcommittees to remind our colleagues. We have sent notices and e-mails and faxes. This Committee, in fact, has held approximately 20 hearings, markups, briefings, classified sessions between the Full Committee and different Subcommittees on Iraq since early March. The Joint Chiefs have held about 30 briefings during the same time period. Other Committees have also exerted their oversight responsibilities.
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So there is truly no reason for any Member that is deeply interested in this issue to argue that the Administration is not making it official or information available to the United States Congress, nor that Members have not had an opportunity to ask why—to delve further into these important issues.
Mr. HOEFFEL. Would the gentleman yield?
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I will be glad to yield. Yes, sir.
Mr. HOEFFEL. I thank the gentlelady.
Do you feel confident that you know what our exit strategy is? Do you feel confident that you know what the timetable is? Do you feel confident that you know what the additional costs will be?
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Reclaiming my time, not only do I feel confident, but I feel that we, more importantly, are going to have the opportunity to ask every Administration official that you would like to have before you, you will be given that opportunity to ask. You will be given that opportunity today at 4:00 if you do not feel comfortable. Next week, there will probably be three more briefings and hearings and classified sessions in which we will be able to ask those questions.
Mr. HOEFFEL. Would the gentlewoman yield?
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. And these have been the ongoing questions that we have had, as I say, in the dozens. So I would hope that after those 40 more briefings that we have had—perhaps the Member has been present at those 40 sessions. I don't know. I don't take attendance.
But certainly we have an oversight responsibility, just as Alejandro has the responsibility in Iraq. He fulfilled his duty, and we fulfill our duty by asking those probing questions. And I think it behooves us to ask them—if you believe that you do not have enough information, I think of course you should ask, and you always will have that opportunity. Our Chairman will always give you that opportunity. I will be glad to yield.
Mr. HOEFFEL. I don't want the right to ask the questions. I have got that. I want the answers.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Reclaiming my time. And they will give you as much information as they have. They would like to have a perfect situation in a war where you know the outcome, where you know what is going to happen tomorrow, where the enemy gives you his battle plan, where you know where they are going to operate next. Unfortunately, it is not a drama series on television. It is real life.
You can ask people like Alejandro Fernandez whether they are proud to be in that theatre of operations, whether they are proud of their service, and whether they have faith in this Administration and whether they have faith in their commanders. And many of them I know will tell you yes. I have faith also in our Commander in Chief; and, more than that, I have faith in our Chairman, that he has given this Committee and all of the Members of this Committee ample opportunity to ask those important questions which must be asked and demand answers to those important questions. And we will continue to demand that. This Committee is not shirking its responsibility whatsoever.
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman HYDE. The gentlelady's time has expired, but I would hope when the gentlelady is holding those hearings you can get some answers on the Bay of Pigs and the Cuban missile crisis, a lot of unanswered questions on those, too.
Ms. Lee of California.
Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First, let me just say I would strongly support this resolution, and I want to thank Mr. Wexler for his efforts in drafting it and for bringing it before our Committee today. I want to thank him for his leadership and really trying to just provide this Congress and the American people information that they really deserve to know.
As of yesterday, 304 Americans have died in Iraq, and over 1,200 have been wounded. Now that is according to DOD figures. Over half of these deaths have occurred after the so-called end of the war. This is just one more sign of the deeply flawed planning process we are witnessing in this really growing, unbelievably huge quagmire.
Another sign of just how wrong things are going is the $87 billion second installment that Congress is being asked to pay without being given a clear accounting of how the first $78 billion was spent or of what the final price tag might be or of when Americans might expect their troops to come home.
The American people are being asked to pay for another $87 billion to finance the cost of the Administration's foreign policy doctrine of preemption, and the mission is changing, and it is changing every day. First, of course, it was weapons of mass destruction; and then, of course, regime change was in that. I am not sure if that was the second goal or part of the first goal. Then, of course, it is now the war on terrorism.
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
When will this end? This war is siphoning tens of billions of dollars away from a badly failing economy right here at home and into, of course we know, no-bid contracts for a handful of corporations.
Now I believe that the American occupation of Iraq is really a disaster, and now of course the Joint Chiefs of Staff have commissioned this report that we are trying to receive a copy of today which this resolution is asking for. We want to see this report. I have been to many of these briefings also; and, quite frankly, the information presented in the briefings oftentimes is on CNN even before the briefing ends. None of that information that has been reported as a result of The Washington Times receiving a copy of this either draft preliminary report or whatever it is stamped, none of that information that the press has been reporting has been in any of these briefings. So how can The Washington Times be privy to a report that the United States House of Representatives cannot be privy to?
With an $87 billion installment payment due, Congress has every right to know what lessons we need to know and what lessons have been learned. We have certainly seen mistakes that have been made, a war that we really didn't have to have and an occupation that is poorly planned.
So what are the lessons learned?
According to press accounts, this report to the Joint Chiefs concludes—and this is press reports that we have to rely on. That is the point. The press reports conclude that the Administration's post-war planning reconstruction effort and the search for weapons of mass destruction are rated as, ''falling short of expectations or needs.'' Now that is what the press tells us, but we want to see this report to see what else it says.
Page 49 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
With Americans dying almost every single day, with the costs skyrocketing and really with no exit or transition strategy in sight, this is information the Congress must have before voting on the supplementals.
Americans have the right to know why in many communities our infrastructure is in shambles, yet how resources can be found on a moment's notice to spend billions in Iraq for reconstruction efforts. Americans want to know how billions of dollars can be found. I mean, where is this money? People want to know how these billions can be found for housing and health care and education in Iraq when there are budget cuts in many of our communities in these same areas. We need these badly needed resources also, and the American people need to really know how money can be found and how it is being used. That is just basic. Taxpayers are paying for this.
So, Mr. Chairman, I do not believe that this resolution is premature. In fact, I believe that it is very timely and long overdue. And, again, according to the media reports, a copy was obtained by The Washington Times. So it is really about time that Members of Congress have access to this report. Short of that, I believe that we are abdicating our responsibility, because we need to make prudent decisions based on information.
Chairman HYDE. The gentlelady's time has expired.
Ms. LEE. Thank you for the time, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman HYDE. I would just advise the gentlelady that The Washington Times says The Washington Times got the report. The Washington Post has never conceded that.
Page 50 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. McCotter.
Mr. MCCOTTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to start with an observation I find rather ironic, is that we expect the Administration, from which we have heard has been nothing but mistaken and duplicitous, to somehow issue a report that will be frank and honest about how they have been mistaken and duplicitous. So I find that rather contradictory.
It seems to me that the lessons that need to be learned for me were things I learned a long time ago. I am not a Baby Boomer, so maybe I have some distance from Vietnam, but it seems clear to me that the Iraqis have learned lessons in the last war that America lost, and that was Vietnam. And it seems that, at the time, Ho Chi Minh and his council of advisers believed that that war cannot be won militarily in Vietnam, that it will be won psychologically in the streets of America, that eventually if you delayed long enough and inflicted enough pain on American soldiers abroad that the American public would lose the stomach and bring them home. And that was proven to be correct.
What we face today is we are in a war on terrorism, which I also believe is a war for civilization. We have a theatre called Iraq in that war. Within this theatre we have passed the major military conflict phase, and we have now entered the guerilla phase, which I believe is the Iraqi-Saddam Hussein's regime attempt to drag us into the myriad of circumstances we faced in Vietnam. In short, I don't believe Baghdad was a surrender. It was a tactical retreat.
While this is occurring and we are still at war within that theatre and within the overall war itself, the reconstruction effort is beginning. We are trying to help reconstruct a country while we are in the middle of a war with that country with handful of extremist elements. That was not done in Germany. That was not done in Japan, and there is also something very important to remember, is that as Secretary Rumsfeld has pointed out, we are not nation building for the Iraqi people. We are facilitating nation building for themselves.
Page 51 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So the timetable and the goals and the money that will be spent is not entirely within our hands. We cannot enforce a timetable on the Iraqi people, for they control their own destiny in their own hands. And what we will do if we demand timetables and explicit instructions and details is we will begin building benchmarks for the terrorists, for the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime to target, to make America lose its willpower to facilitate the Iraqi people. We will be the strategic retreat, and we cannot be the strategic retreat, because if we do, if we leave Iraq now hanging in the lurch, we will guarantee that all the wonderful infrastructure improvements we hear so much about with those $87 billion, we will have the best front parlor when the barbarians are at the back door. I personally would rather see this through and build a peaceful Iraq in their backyard.
I yield my time.
Chairman HYDE. Thank the gentleman.
Ms. Watson of California.
Ms. WATSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want you to consider the remarks I am going to make as my search for truth. Everything I will say, it is a search for truth, because that is who I am. That is what I am about.
So it has been a year since the President began pressing to invade Iraq. At the time many of us called upon the President to fully account for the cost of his planned war. It is plainly evident that the President was not forthcoming with the American people or with us here in Congress.
Page 52 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I heard something about the ''imminent danger'' of weapons of mass destruction. Imminent, that is the key word. In search of truth. So the American people were not told about the cost of this war. Neither were we.
We now know that $154.5 billion, the Administration will in short spend in Iraq, is just a down payment on a bill of goods that the House Budget Committee Democratic staffers say could rise to as much as $400 billion over the next few years. Let's search for truth.
The continued reluctance of the world community to support the United States in the post-war reconstruction of Iraq underscores the dire predictions of the Budget Committee.
Let's get the truth. It is equally evident that the Administration has not been forthcoming with the American people in calculating the resources in terms of planning, manpower and money needed to prepare Iraq for the return to a civil society.
The current situation our troops face in Iraq is every bit as dangerous, in fact more dangerous than the situation United States troops faced during the period of so-called major hostilities, the shock and awe. And I believe the strategy on the part of Saddam Hussein was to allow us to come in and do shock and awe and then get us in a guerrilla war afterwards.
The rising loss of American lives in Iraq alone demonstrates the relevance and importance of this bill—or this resolution, H.R. 364, and the fact that this Administration has refused to provide all pertinent information to Congress and the American people.
Page 53 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I have attended every one of the classified hearings. By the time they get to me, the bell goes off, well, we have to go to vote or it is too late. I have never been able to ask Rumsfeld a question and get a straight answer. Searching for the truth. If somebody can tell me how to do it, I would like you to sit next to me in the next classified hearing. I will be here. I have never gotten a straight answer from anyone, even close.
So we need more information if I am going to vote on the $87 billion. We need to know what the plan is. I do not accept, oh, it will come by and by, because they told us there were weapons of mass destruction. My question was why don't you tell the inspectors where they are and let them find them?
So you see, I search for the truth. Maybe you don't, but I do, and so how will we proceed to reconstitute a civil society and in particular how does the Administration plan to spend any additional dollars in Iraq, which is estimated to be costing Americans $1 billion every week? Is this not true?
So this resolution is an important step in providing that information that I need to make a decision, because I go home like you do, and my constituents who have seen us close down a community clinic want to know why we are going to build one in Iraq when their own hometown does not have one.
Chairman HYDE. The gentlelady's time has expired.
The gentleman from California.
Page 54 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. WATSON. That is what usually happens. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman HYDE. It was our pleasure.
Mr. Schiff of California.
Mr. SCHIFF. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The remedy of a resolution of inquiry is a truly extraordinary remedy that is seldom used and even more seldom successful, and it is extraordinary I think for good reason, but I think in the case of the resolution of inquiry before us today that there is good reason to approve this resolution, and I would like to address a couple of points and in particular respond to some of the objections that have been raised by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
The most important reason why I think the resolution is necessary is the very important conclusions contained within the report. If the press account is accurate, the report states that weapons of mass destruction elimination and exploitation planning efforts did not occur early enough in the process to allow CENTCOM to effectively execute the mission. The extent of the planning required was underestimated. Insufficient U.S. Government assets existed to accomplish the mission. That is one of the important conclusions of this final draft according to press reports.
Second, the interagency process such as between the Pentagon and State Department was not fully integrated prior to hostilities. Another key point.
Page 55 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Third, that capabilities fell short of expectations or needs in the area of the mix of active and reserve forces and the troop deployment to the region.
These are all extraordinarily important issues, and those of us that have attended—and I have attended, I think, almost every briefing that we have had on this subject through the Armed Services Committee, or this Committee. These are extraordinarily important items, and also for those of us that have been to Iraq and talked with the commanders and with the ground-level troops about rotations and troop levels.
Now, it has been maintained that we have had plenty of hearings on this, and that is true. We have all had the opportunity to ask questions. That is not the issue, though. The issue is—and the reason why I think there is such importance behind this request is not that we haven't had the opportunity to ask the questions we have nor that we haven't gotten answers. We also have. The problem is the answers we have received are not the same answers in this report.
How many of you have heard someone from the Joint Chiefs of Staff or behind the Administration say that the weapons of mass destruction elimination and exploitation planning did not occur early enough in the process? How many of you heard the Administration acknowledge that the interagency process between the Pentagon and State Department was not fully integrated prior to hostilities? How many of you heard acknowledgments from the Joint Chiefs about inadequacies in troop deployment and the mix of active and reserve forces?
I have not heard these acknowledgments or criticisms or self-reflections from the Administration. That is why this is so essential, not that we haven't had the opportunity to ask. We have, but we have not received these answers.
Page 56 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Now, what is the significance of the fact that this is a final draft? The objection was made that this is not the final report, this is just the final draft and we should wait till a final report is done. Well, I think that part of the concern for many of us is that too often the final report has failed to recognize the concerns of those on the staff below the final vetting. If we look in the intelligence area, the most graphic example, my guess is that the intelligence reports, the staff-level reports had a different flavor to them than the ultimate conclusions that we heard either in the State of the Union, or in representations to Congress. And sometimes you learn more from the draft than you do from public consumption copy.
Now, I understand that this report will ultimately be made available to the Armed Services Committee, and the question I would like to leave on that I would pose to the Chairman, we have an $87 billion request before the Committee. It is extraordinarily important I think that we have this information in the context of this request, and what I would like to pose is will we have an opportunity to be able to question the Administration on this report and on the draft report prior to this Committee or the Members of this Committee having to vote on the appropriation?
And I would yield to the Chair or yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LEACH [presiding]. Let me say to the gentleman I cannot speak for the Chair. I am in his place for the moment. Clearly that is a series of questions you can commence asking this afternoon. Whether or not this is the appropriate party to ask, I don't know.
Page 57 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I share the gentleman's concern. I think they are very fair questions, and I would personally be hopeful that the appropriate opportunity would be provided.
One of the awkwardnesses of this dilemma is that, as you know, there is a commitment to share it with the Armed Services Committee and all Members of Congress. On the other hand, it is on a classified basis, and so that is a dilemma we as Members of Congress always face, and so whether all of the questions are appropriate in public session or classified session, you know, is a challenge. I am confident there will be classified briefings possible. Whether you will get the response you want, as you know, as some Members have expressed that there is an opaqueness in response that sometimes comes to define events and so I can't speak with surety but I am sure there will be the opportunity to ask questions. Whether the responses will be adequate will be up to the gentlemen to assess themselves, but I will pass on to the Chairman the possibility that the Committee might hold a fuller hearing on the subject. But that will be for the Chairman to determine.
Mr. SCHIFF. I thank the Chair.
Mr. LEACH. Mrs. Napolitano, you are recognized.
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In listening to all the comments from my colleagues, I believe more strongly than ever that only by studying and being able to have access to all the information can we truly make informed decisions. I strongly support this resolution, House Resolution 364.
I get questions in the district, Mr. Chairman, from individuals who are asking us for information that we do not have, we are not privy to, that—and I truly have not attended all the meetings. I have attended a few, but I can tell you from this humble servant, I understand very little, because there is very little given to us. I can read it from the newspaper faster than I can get it from those sessions.
Page 58 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
So I would concur, I believe that we need to learn what those lessons are so that we don't go through them again, and I strongly urge and regrettably differ with my esteemed friend and colleague, the Chairman of the Committee, that this motion should go through, and be voted favorably.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman HYDE [presiding]. The gentlelady from Nevada, Ms. Berkley.
Ms. BERKLEY. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you all know, I voted in favor of the resolution. I went back home, strongly supporting the resolution. I went on all of my radio talk shows and my television shows explaining to my constituents why I voted to give the President authority to go into Iraq. I don't believe that failure is an option. I am not demanding timetables or any information that is going to jeopardize our troops in the field, but I am very uncomfortable with the information that we have received. I have attended most of the classified briefings. I couldn't swear on a stack of Bibles that I attended all of them, but as many of my colleagues have stated before me, I go home at night and I turn on CNN and I learn just about as much, if not more, from watching TV than I do by sitting in those so-called classified ''your eyes only, give your beeper, give your cell phone, sign an agreement that you are never going to breathe a word of what they say,'' and I walk out of there scratching my head.
I am not looking for information to attack the Administration. I am looking for information that will justify my vote and keep me on the path that I started to continue supporting this effort.
Page 59 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
My job as a Congresswoman is to vote based on accurate information. I think that is all of our jobs, and I haven't been here all that long, but it is just unconscionable to me that Congress isn't up in arms demanding to know everything possible with this war so that we can go back to our constituents, and not only speak with authority, but be able to vote with authority and conviction as well.
There was a similar request a number of months ago regarding the intelligence information, and we—the Chair, with all due respect, Mr. Chairman, were against this, saying that the Intelligence Committee was going to get all the briefings and everything else. And as an added bonus, we could all go off to the fourth floor of the Capitol and see all the information that we could possibly want to see.
So I said, well, that is a pretty good deal. So I went up to the fourth floor. I had never been there before, and I asked the gentleman at the door when I gave him my cell and my beeper and everything else that there were so many boxes of information. The wealth of information that I was given made it impossible to read or impossible for me to figure out, and I think that was a deliberate attempt to keep information from us.
I would like to know what is in that report. I think it is important, and whether it is called final draft, almost final draft, final, it is important that we get this information so that we can decide for ourselves and vote in a meaningful way.
Also if I could, I have a great affection for the Chairman. We feign a lot of civility here, and people say my wonderful best friend from Nevada and the gentlelady and this, but the reality is that I do have great respect and great affection for the Chair, but I felt very uncomfortable at the beginning when, Mr. Chairman, you read that article about Mr. Wexler. I would hate to think that if I was going to introduce a resolution that somebody would read something like that about me that attributed negative motives to what I do in Congress, and I would hope that that couldn't and wouldn't ever happen again.
Page 60 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
And I thank you, and I say that with the greatest of affection.
Chairman HYDE. I thank the gentlelady, and I receive her admonition in the best of spirits. As I said, the last thing I would do would be accuse anybody on this Committee of a political thought, ever.
Ms. BERKLEY. Yes, but I thought you were tongue in cheek when you said that, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman HYDE. We are getting down to the witching hour. We have another bill after this, and then—we do have another bill, and we have at 4 o'clock with Mr. Bremer, who will answer face to face such questions as you choose to put to him.
In any event, the next speaker is Mr. Payne of New Jersey.
Mr. PAYNE. Thank you. I guess I am bewitched. We are reaching that hour. Let me say that I would like to certainly support this resolution. I think it makes a lot of sense. I think that we have heard and I am very pleased that I had the opportunity to have two 12-hour days of debate in opposition to the preemptive strike and giving the authority to the President to do what he wanted to do. I think that I was clear in my decision before the debate and was clear and very happy as I reflect on my vote of opposing the preemptive strike, because we were in imminent danger of weapons of mass destruction that could reach our shores at any time.
I think that it was a disservice done to the American people to mislead them to believe that if we destroyed Baghdad and did away with Osama bin Laden, that we would not have to worry about—Baghdad and Saddam Hussein, that we would not have to worry about Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. And I think that is why so many Americans were so supportive of going into Iraq, because the feeling was that because the Administration made the argument that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda are all one and the same and if we do away with Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden would disappear. It was lies. We sent out wrong messages. People had a false feeling of security by doing away with the leadership of Iraq that that would have therefore an impact on al-Qaeda.
Page 61 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Al-Qaeda is our number one enemy. It has been that way right along. They are the ones that are on our shores, and we diverted the Americans' attention to someone else who we decided we wanted to have a regime change. Hans Blix and the fellows were looking around for these weapons of mass destruction. We had no-fly zones. We had all kinds of manned and unmanned satellites. We knew everything that was going on. Yet and still we led the American people to believe that we were in imminent danger. I think it was a disservice to the American people. When will it ever end? I would like to know what did they know and when did they know it.
Before my time expires, I think that I would be—even though I have a lot more to say, I will yield the balance of my time to Mr. Wexler for any concluding remarks.
Mr. WEXLER. I thank Mr. Payne, and I would simply like to offer an observation as to where we are after this debate, and I applaud the fact that I believe this Committee has engaged in a very worthwhile debate. And after all of the expressions are stated, essentially where we are is that the vote that will be taken is a vote that determines whether or not the Congress will receive the report prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff within the next 2 weeks, or whether we will receive it—if Chairman Myers is to be held to his word, which I have no reason to think otherwise—whether we will receive it in December.
We all know that this Congress is likely to be in recess in December, probably the bulk of January. So the question is whether this Congress will get to consider what may be the most illuminating report prepared not by Democrats, not by some Democratic presidential campaign, not a political report, but an internal report from our military analyzing what our strategy is in Iraq. Are we going to have the benefit of that report and the analysis before we vote on the $87 billion supplemental request? Or are we going to have it at the end of the year, at best, when essentially, at least in terms of the next 4 months, all of the decisions will have already been made?
Page 62 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I will respectfully argue that this institution and the American people are served best if we have that information in classified form now before we vote so that we all can make the most informed decision possible. I thank Mr. Payne for yielding.
Chairman HYDE. The gentleman's time has expired.
And there being no amendments pending, the question occurs on the motion to report the resolution, H.R. 364, adversely. All in favor, say aye. Opposed, no.
The Chair is in doubt. The Clerk will call the roll.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Leach.
Mr. LEACH. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Leach votes aye.
Mr. Bereuter.
[No response.]
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Smith of New Jersey.
[No response.]
Page 63 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Burton.
Mr. BURTON. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Burton votes aye.
Mr. Gallegly.
[No response.]
Ms. RUSH. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen.
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen votes aye.
Mr. Ballenger.
Mr. BALLENGER. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Ballenger votes aye.
Mr. Rohrabacher.
Page 64 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Rohrabacher votes aye.
Mr. Royce.
Mr. ROYCE. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Royce votes aye.
Mr. King.
[No response.]
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Chabot.
Mr. CHABOT. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Chabot votes aye.
Mr. Houghton.
Mr. HOUGHTON. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Houghton votes aye.
Page 65 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. McHugh.
[No response.]
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Tancredo.
Mr. TANCREDO. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Tancredo votes aye.
Mr. Paul.
Mr. PAUL. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Paul votes aye.
Mr. Smith of Michigan.
Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Smith of Michigan votes aye.
Mr. Pitts.
Page 66 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. PITTS. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Pitts votes aye.
Mr. Flake.
Mr. FLAKE. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Flake votes aye.
Mrs. Davis.
Mrs. DAVIS. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mrs. Davis votes aye.
Mr. Green.
Mr. GREEN. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Green votes aye
Mr. Weller.
Mr. WELLER. Aye.
Page 67 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Weller votes aye.
Mr. Pence.
Mr. PENCE. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Pence votes aye.
Mr. McCotter.
Mr. MCCOTTER. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. McCotter votes aye.
Mr. Janklow.
Mr. JANKLOW. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Janklow votes aye.
Ms. Harris.
Ms. HARRIS. Aye.
Page 68 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. RUSH. Ms. Harris votes aye.
Mr. Lantos.
Mr. LANTOS. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Lantos votes no.
Mr. Berman.
Mr. BERMAN. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Berman votes no.
Mr. Ackerman.
[No response.]
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Faleomavaega.
[No response.]
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Payne.
Mr. PAYNE. No.
Page 69 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Payne votes no.
Mr. Menendez.
Mr. MENENDEZ. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Menendez votes no.
Mr. Brown.
Mr. BROWN. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Brown votes no.
Mr. Sherman.
Mr. SHERMAN. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Sherman votes no.
Mr. Wexler.
Mr. WEXLER. No.
Page 70 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Wexler votes no.
Mr. Engel.
Mr. ENGEL. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Engel votes no.
Mr. Delahunt.
Mr. DELAHUNT. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Delahunt votes no.
Mr. Meeks.
Mr. MEEKS. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Meeks votes no.
Ms. Lee.
Ms. LEE. No.
Ms. RUSH. Ms. Lee votes no.
Page 71 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. Crowley.
Mr. CROWLEY. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Crowley votes no.
Mr. Hoeffel.
Mr. HOEFFEL. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Hoeffel votes no
Mr. Blumenauer.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Blumenauer votes no.
Ms. Berkley.
Ms. BERKLEY. No.
Ms. RUSH. Ms. Berkley votes no.
Page 72 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mrs. Napolitano.
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mrs. Napolitano votes no.
Mr. Schiff.
Mr. SCHIFF. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Schiff votes no.
Ms. Watson.
Ms. WATSON. No.
Ms. RUSH. Ms. Watson votes no.
Mr. Smith of Michigan.
Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Smith of Michigan votes no.
Ms. McCollum.
Page 73 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. MCCOLLUM. No.
Ms. RUSH. Ms. McCollum votes no.
Mr. Bell.
Mr. BELL. No.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Bell votes no.
Mr. Hyde.
Chairman HYDE. Aye.
Ms. RUSH. Mr. Hyde votes aye.
Mr. BEREUTER. I would like to vote aye.
The CLERK. Mr. Bereuter votes aye.
Mr. Smith?
Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. Aye.
Page 74 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes aye.
Mr. MCHUGH. Mr. Chairman, how am I recorded?
The CLERK. You are not recorded.
Mr. MCHUGH. Aye.
The CLERK. Mr. McHugh votes aye.
Chairman HYDE. The Clerk will report.
The CLERK. On this vote there are 24 ayes and 20 noes.
Chairman HYDE. The ayes have it. The motion to report adversely is adopted, and without objection staff is directed to make any technical and conforming changes.
Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, can we have additional views?
Chairman HYDE. Yes. Pursuant to the rule, you certainly may. I think it is 3 days—it is 2 days, I guess, I am informed by the Parliamentarian.
The next item on the agenda is H.R. 3145, ''To amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to reauthorize the Overseas Private Investment Corporation,'' for purposes of a markup and move its favorable recommendation to the House. Without objection, the bill is considered as read, open for amendment at any point, and the Chair recognizes Mr. Bereuter for 5 minutes for purposes of a statement.
Page 75 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
[H.R. 3145 follows:]
89533b.AAB
89533b.AAC
89533b.AAD
89533b.AAE
Page 76 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
89533b.AAF
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, with respect to the OPIC legislation, as you may know, colleagues, the reauthorization expires very shortly. The OPIC is a self-sustaining Federal agency. It provides assistance to American businesses in developing countries where, in fact, there is no commercial credit or financing or capital available or where insurance is needed for the businessman to conduct operations.
When I say OPIC is self-sustaining, it has had a net profit in each year of their operation. For the last fiscal year, the net profit was $110 million. The current reserves are substantial. Indeed, OPIC's projects have generated $65 billion in U.S. exports and created an estimated 254,000 American jobs.
Based on United States development and foreign policy priorities in fiscal year 2004, OPIC will place special emphasis on the following areas: Small business; Russian and Central Asia, including Afghanistan and Pakistan; sub-Saharan Africa; Mexico; and, on a sectorial basis, housing.
I have looked at the cumulative historical data for their activities. I find that a growing amount, in fact, has gone to sub-Saharan Africa—not as much as they would like or I know various Members would prefer. The number of projects going to small businesses last fiscal year was 69 percent for 31 projects. It is not that these were absolutely minuscule projects assisting American small business families and their employees because in total volume of dollars last year, it was a little over 22 percent.
Page 77 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
This is a very important agency for American businesses. It is not foreign assistance. It is not aimed primarily at developing countries and assisting them. OPIC makes sure that American businesses are able to operate in some of the business climates that would not otherwise draw commercial credit or finance. OPIC has taken the right steps to try to diversify the kind of assistance it provides and focused primarily on some of the poorest countries in the world.
For those reasons I think it is important that we reauthorize the OPIC legislation, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman HYDE. The gentleman from Oregon, Mr. Blumenauer.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just like to identify one element that I would like to work with the Chair and the Ranking Member. I am somebody who has historically supported OPIC. I think there has been some significant progress made. I appreciate some of the report language that deals with their environmental responsibilities. I think there is real progress.
I have consulted with OPIC about the possibility of amending their charter to have an environmental representative on the board. I think they would welcome it, Mr. Chairman, but I didn't get a chance to get that back in writing, and I would respectfully just mark this as something that may be offered in the form of a friendly amendment that might be able to help smooth the passage of this through the House and ultimately the reauthorization. And it is offered in the spirit of somebody who both cares deeply about the environment, appreciates some of the progress that has been made, but I think this would be something that would institutionalize a practice that would be beneficial, and I just wanted to signal it.
Page 78 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BEREUTER. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Absolutely.
Mr. BEREUTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Does the gentleman have an amendment or is he prepared to do it on the Floor?
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I would like to work between now and when it gets to the Floor.
Mr. BEREUTER. As the gentleman describes it, I would be pleased perhaps to be a cosponsor of the amendment on the Floor.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. I will follow up.
Chairman HYDE. I would like to assure the gentlemen of my interest in working with him, too.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Bereuter.
Chairman HYDE. Very well.
Ms. Lee.
Page 79 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk.
Chairman HYDE. The Clerk will report the amendment.
[The information referred to follows:]
89533b.eps
89533c.eps
The CLERK. Amendment by Ms. Lee: Add at the end of the bill the following——
Chairman HYDE. Without objection, further reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The Chair accepts the amendment, finds it to be in addition to the bill, and if the gentlelady doesn't mind short-cutting extended discussion, prolixed discussion, we will be happy to accept her excellent amendment.
Ms. LEE. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for accepting the amendment. I think this will just enhance OPIC's really major kind of goals that they seek to accomplish in terms of the inclusion of additional businesses, specifically small, minority-owned, women-owned businesses, and I yield the balance of my time. Thank you for accepting the amendment.
Page 80 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman HYDE. Thank you. The gentleman from California, Mr. Lantos.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend my friends Mr. Blumenauer and Ms. Lee. I strongly support both of their amendments, one yet to be born, and I request permission to submit my prepared statements. For the sake of saving time, I yield back the balance of my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lantos follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENTS OF THE HONORABLE TOM LANTOS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
H.R. 3145
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for scheduling today's markup of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation Amendments Act of 2003.
The reauthorization package we have before us is sound. Not only does the bill reauthorize OPIC through September 30, 2007, but it reflects a comprehensive, bi-partisan compromise between the Committee, OPIC, and all of its stakeholders.
I am particularly pleased that our package will address the concerns, shared by a number of our Members in recent years, about the effectiveness of OPIC safeguards to ensure that its projects support the interests of American workers, protect the global environment and support human rights.
Page 81 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your willingness to work with us to address these concerns. The report language we have agreed upon directs OPIC to establish a robust and independent accountability mechanism on these matters, which in the long-term will broaden Congressional support for this important institution.
I know you share my hope, Mr. Chairman, that we can get this bill to the floor in the near future. Swift action by the Committee and the House is necessary as the deadline for OPIC's current authorization expires September 30, 2003.
Chairman HYDE. The Chair appreciates the gentleman's remarks as always.
Are there any further amendments?
Mr. Rohrabacher.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I have decided not to—I have worked out an arrangement with your staff, and I have decided not to put my amendment forward. Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. We are running out of gold medals here today.
The question occurs on——
Page 82 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Crowley.
Mr. CROWLEY. Move to strike the last word.
Chairman HYDE. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CROWLEY. I won't take the 5 minutes, Mr. Chairman. I want to walk out of here with a gold medal at some point. I would just like to state for the record that I was contemplating an amendment dealing with the BTC pipeline route from Azerbaijan to Turkey that would bypass the country of Armenia, literally go around it in order to build that pipeline, using OPIC in that process and American taxpayer dollars to support that pipeline and attempt to circumvent the Armenian people and its country.
The most direct way to build this pipeline would be a straight pipeline from Azerbaijan, its capital of Baku to Ceyhan in Turkey. A straight line would lead it directly through Armenia, but because of the politics of that region, the Azerbaijanis and the Turks have an embargo against Armenia, and we are agreeing to that embargo in some ways by having this pipeline built not through Armenia but around it.
It has been estimated that a pipeline from Baku to Ceyhan that traverses Armenia would save approximately $600 million over the current proposed route. If they went through Armenia, it would actually be less expensive. American taxpayers are being asked to help cover hundreds of millions of dollars in increased costs for the BTC oil pipeline route that would bypass the more economic and commercially viable route through Armenia. If the Caucasus region, in my opinion, is to move forward, we must ensure that all countries move forward together at the same time. Choosing favorites in the Caucasus will not promote regional stability, economic integration and peace.
Page 83 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
And I, Mr. Chairman, had the opportunity to be in Armenia at the end of August, and I understand our relationship with Turkey is an important one. And I support them as an ally, but taking note of the situation which Armenia finds itself in today, it is an isolated country, landlocked. Two countries on either side of it have an embargo against them. The country of Georgia to its north is politically unstable. Their only course is to trade through Iran, which we look down upon. It is an isolated country. They need help and support from this country, and I believe that here is an opportunity to highlight the circumstances that Armenia finds itself in today.
It is unfortunate that they build this pipeline around it, but I think that it needs to be noted that I believe it is wrong, and I think many in this Committee believe it is wrong as well.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman HYDE. I thank the gentleman.
If there is no further discussion, the question occurs on the motion to report the bill, H.R. 3145, favorably as amended. All in favor say aye. Opposed, nay. The ayes have it. The motion to report favorably is adopted, and without objection——
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Bereuter.
Page 84 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to register that I hope to have report language that the Chairman and the Ranking Member may consider. Thank you.
Chairman HYDE. Thank you. Without objection, staff is directed to make any technical and conforming changes, and without objection the bill will be reported favorably to the House in the form of a single amendment in the nature of a substitute incorporating the amendments adopted here today.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to request consideration of the following bills under suspension of the rules, H. Con. Res. 274, commending the National Endowment for Democracy; H.R. 2264, to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 to carry out the Congo Basin Forest Partnership; H. Res. 372, expressing the condolences of the House of Representatives in response to the murder of Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh; and House H. Res. 356, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the man-made famine that occurred in Ukraine in 1932 and 1933.
[The information referred to follows:]
89533c.AAB
Page 85 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
89533c.AAC
89533c.AAD
89533d.AAB
89533d.AAC
89533d.AAD
Page 86 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
89533d.AAE
89533d.AAF
89533d.AAG
89533f.AAB
89533f.AAC
Page 87 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
89533f.AAD
89533e.AAB
89533e.AAC
89533e.AAD
89533e.AAE
Page 88 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Chairman HYDE. All Members who wish may place statements in the record, and without objection——
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object.
Chairman HYDE. Mr. Engel.
Mr. ENGEL. Reserving the right to object—and I won't object, and I take note of the fact that you said that we can place statements in the record. I just want to very briefly say that I certainly support all the resolutions. The National Endowment for Democracy certainly has done wonderful work. It also is important the House take note of the man-made famine in Ukraine and certainly the murder of the Swedish Foreign Minister.
I just want to very briefly comment on the resolution about the Congo Basin Forest Partnership, because the Wildlife Conservation Society, also known as the ''Bronx Zoo'' in my home county of the Bronx, is a founding partner of the Congo Basin Forest Partnership. They have done wonderful work, the Wildlife Conservation Society. They helped conceive and established a partnership, and they are planning to implement one-third of the Partnership's current funding.
So I just want to very quickly say that they have done a wonderful job, And they save wildlife and wildlands through careful science and international conservation, education and management of the world's largest system of urban wildlife parks led by the flagship Bronx Zoo. They manage more than 350 conservation projects in 53 countries around the world and including more than 120 projects in 20 countries across sub-Saharan Africa.
Page 89 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I will submit the statement and remove my objection.
Chairman HYDE. The gentleman's full statement will appear in the record. Without objection, it is so ordered, and the Committee stands adjourned with my thanks.
[Whereupon, at 3 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE TOM LANTOS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
H. CON. RES. 274
Mr. Chairman, I support H. Res. 274 and urge all of my colleagues to support it.
The National Endowment for Democracy has been incredibly successful during it's twenty year mission to promote democracy throughout the world.
With each new wave of democracy since its establishment, the Endowment, and its institute partners, the National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute, among others, have been at the forefront each time.
Page 90 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Together, they have seeded the new fertile soil in Eastern Europe and Latin America, which have bloomed into regions where democracy, not tyranny, now dominate.
Democracy is often the precursor of and is also inextricably linked to the development of human rights and personal freedom, causes that I have championed for my entire life.
Recognizing this, NED has not only pushed forward democracy but has supported human rights activists on every continent, with financial grants, with personal awards, and tremendous moral support.
All of us should express our profoundest gratitude for the men and women who have worked tirelessly to support these goals, which are central to the success of U.S. foreign policy goals in this era of change.
I am proud to have co-sponsored this resolution with my good friend, the Chairman of the Committee, and I urge all my colleagues to support it.
H.R. 2264
Mr. Chairman, I strongly support H. R. 2264 and urge my colleagues to vote in support of it.
I want to thank Secretary of State Colin Powell and Congressman Clay Shaw for making the preservation of the Congo River Basin a priority. The Congo River and its tributaries make up the most extensive network of navigable waterways in Africa and carry a volume of water second only to the Amazon River.
Page 91 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The massive canopy forests are home to an amazing array of wildlife including the lowland gorillas and other endangered species. The yet untapped plant bio diversity may hold genetic and biochemical information key to medical and agricultural technologies to transform Africa's future.
Mr. Chairman, the stewardship of the Congo River Basin is the joint responsibility of Central African countries and the international community. Together, we must end the deforestation and wildlife depletion and support the appropriate use of forest resources.
I support this bill and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of its passage.
H. RES. 372
Mr. Chairman, I strongly support H. Res. 372 and urge my colleagues to do so as well.
I am grateful to my lead cosponsors, Mr. Hyde, Mr. Wexler, and Mr. Bereuter and the other 26 cosponsors who are supporting this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, many of our colleagues on this Committee will remember our meeting a year ago with Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh. We had an extraordinarily pleasant and lively discussion of international issues. We disagreed on some issues and agreed on others, but I believe all of us found her to be a charming and intelligent person.
Page 92 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
At the NATO Summit in Prague last November, my wife Annette and I enjoyed her company again at the state dinner given by President Vaclav Havel.
As my colleagues know, just a few days ago Anna Lindh was murdered by an assailant in a Stockholm department store.
Her untimely and tragic death was a shock to her countrymen in Sweden and to all who know her and have worked with her since 1998 when she began her service as Foreign Minister.
Her death was a blow to the peace-loving people of Sweden. The shock had an even greater impact because former Swedish Foreign Minister Olaf Palme was murdered on a Stockholm street in 1986 in a similar and still unsolved murder.
Mr. Chairman, House Resolution 372 expresses the condolences of the House to the family of Foreign Minister Anna Lindh, condemns all such senseless acts of violence against public officials, and expresses our support for the people of Sweden at this difficult time.
Mr. Chairman, I strongly support H. Res. 372, and I urge my colleagues to do so as well.
H RES 356
Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this resolution, and urge my colleagues to do so as well.
Page 93 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I would first like to commend the Chairman for introducing this timely resolution which exposes Stalin's atrocities against the Ukrainian people. We must never forget that Joseph Stalin killed more citizens of the Soviet Union through his inhumane and misguided policies than any foreign invader.
I also want to give commend my friend and colleague from Michigan, Sandy Levin, for introducing a similar resolution.
The Ukrainian people have sustained incredible suffering and loss in the 20th Century. While the official estimates of the number of Ukranians killed during famine are in the five million range, the unofficial estimates go as high as seven million.
The Soviet government deliberately confiscated grain harvests and prevented Ukrainian rural population from leaving the area by sealing the borders.
This was done to force the Ukrainian rural population into collective farms and to destroy any national aspirations the Ukrainians might have for independence.
The Soviet Government successfully hid this famine from the West and only after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 have we obtained access to documents confirming the deliberate and premeditated nature of this famine.
Mr. Chairman, again I commend all my colleagues who have enabled our consideration of this resolution, and urge my colleagues to support its passage.
Page 94 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE EDWARD R. ROYCE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
H.R. 2264
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
H.R. 2264 authorizes the Administration's Congo Basin Forest Partnership. The Africa Subcommittee held a hearing on this initiative in March; this authorization stems from that hearing.
The tropical forests of Central Africa's Congo Basin are a key economic resource for an estimated 20 million people. These forests play a critical role in sustaining the environment. The Congo Basin contains the most diverse grouping of plants and animals in Africa, including rare and endangered species. These plants and animals are invaluable for so many reasons, including their genetic and biochemical information, which could spark technical advances in medicine, agriculture, and industry.
This is all threatened, though, as Congo Basin forests are coming under growing pressures. Ten years ago, these forests were virtually untouched. Today, logging operations are shrinking these forests. One estimate has logging taking out Congo Basin forest areas at a rate of twice the size of Rhode Island every year. Meanwhile, the construction of logging roads is putting intense hunting pressure on wildlife. At current levels, most species of apes, large antelope, and elephants will disappear from the Congo Basin, with some becoming extinct.
Page 95 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Last September, Secretary of State Powell launched the Congo Basin Forest Partnership in Johannesburg. This Partnership is focused on eleven key landscapes in six countries. It aims to support a network of national parks and protected areas and well-managed forestry concessions. The Partnership is working to combat illegal logging and poaching and other unsustainable practices, and to give local populations an economic stake in the preservation of the forests, including through the development of eco-tourism. This is a true partnership, with European and other countries making financial contributions to it.
I should note that the most dramatic move toward conserving Congo Basin forests has been taken by Gabon. Last year, President Omar Bongo announced the creation of 13 national parks. Previously, Gabon had no national park system. There is real African ''buy-in''.
Conservation isn't easy. What Americans take for granted, Yosemite and Yellowstone and our magnificent national park system, took great foresight and political commitment to make a reality. We led the world. It will be a major challenge to establish and maintain effective regimes to control logging and hunting in the Congo Basin. But with the Partnership, the U.S. is bringing its unique experience and talents to these efforts. I'd ask my colleagues for their support of this forward-looking initiative.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE RON PAUL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS
H. RES. 364
Page 96 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. Chairman: I understand the intentions of the minority side in bringing up this resolution and I strongly agree with the desire and demand for more comprehensive Congressional oversight of the war on Iraq and its aftermath. However, I intend to vote with the majority to report this resolution unfavorably. I will vote this way because what could have been a useful and appropriate demand for certain specific information on the war on Iraq, its planning, and aftermath unfortunately has been turned into a rather pointless political ploy on the part of the minority side. It is a shame, as this is yet another missed opportunity for Congress to assert its Constitutional oversight responsibilities.
The problem with this resolution is that it is at the same time too specific and too broad. The demand for access to the Joint Chiefs of Staff report, ''Operation Iraqi Freedom Strategic Lessons Learned,'' is a legitimate one, but we have already been informed that this report will be made available to interested Members—as has the material requested by the two previous resolutions of inquiry which have come before this Committee thus far this year. The demand for ''documents in [the president's] possession on the reconstruction and security of post-war Iraq'' is an unrealistically vague political move at the expense of a proper need for Congressional access to information produced by the Executive Branch relative to the war on Iraq. Were this a request for delivery of specific documents or groups of specific documents relative to this topic, I would likely have voted to report this resolution favorably.
We will soon consider the administration's request for another $87 billion dollars, much of it to fund our continued occupation of Iraq. This on top of $79 billion dollars we appropriated earlier this year. Yet we have been provided little real information on what the administration plans to do with this money, we have been provided with no exit strategy from what is in enormously expensive—and I believe ultimately futile—attempt to remake Iraq and perhaps the entire Middle East in the image of the United States. So while the minority side complains—appropriately—over the administration's refusal to provide a detailed plan for how it intends to spend the tens and ultimately hundreds of billions of US taxpayer dollars, they have yet to express any reservations about the enormous expenditure itself. They have yet to complain about billions for health care and job training and nation-building in Iraq. Until the real issue is addressed—that our policy toward Iraq was mistaken from the beginning and that no amount of treasure or American lives will make a failed policy work—I will be forced to conclude that resolutions like this are meant only as political maneuvers at the expense of real and legitimate concerns over our continued occupation of Iraq.
Page 97 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE BARBARA LEE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
H.R. 3145
Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
Mr. Chairman, let me just begin by saying that I support this bill and OPIC's mission to encourage the expansion of U.S. business investment in developing countries. OPIC has supported a number of innovative projects that have helped to improve infrastructure and stimulate growth in developing countries, while correspondingly helping businesses here at home to grow and prosper.
While OPIC conducts a number of different outreach programs in order to make U.S. businesses aware of foreign investment opportunities that it can support in developing countries, it does not currently collect information on just exactly what kinds of businesses are participating in its investment, financing, and procurement programs.
As a result, Congress is unable to exercise its oversight authority to ensure that OPIC conducts outreach programs that draw in our traditionally underutilized minority and women owned businesses that want to participate in development projects overseas.
Page 98 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
I've talked with a number of these businesses that operate in my district in California and throughout the country, who say that they have head little, if anything at all, about opportunities for foreign investment through OPIC.
I'm appreciative that under the leadership of Dr. Peter Watson, OPIC has moved to do a better job reaching out to minority and women owned businesses. For example, at my invitation, Dr. Watson will be appearing tomorrow during the Congressional Black Caucus Annual Legislative Conference at an issue forum that I am co-sponsoring entitled ''New Opportunities for Africans and African Americans in International Markets.''
PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE BETTY MCCOLLUM, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
H. RES. 364
Due to a scheduling conflict on September 25th, I was unable to vote on a motion by Chairman Hyde to report adversely to the House H Res 364, of which I am a cosponsor. Had I been present, I would have voted ''No''.
I was also unable to vote on the following series of bills approved by the House International Relations Committee. Had I been present, I would have voted ''Yes'' for Unanimous Consent agreements to approve each of the following:
Page 99 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
H.R. 3145, to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to reauthorize the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.
Representative Barbara Lee's amendment to HR 3145, adding a section regarding minority- and women-owned businesses.
H. Con. Res. 274, Commending the National Endowment for Democracy for its contributions to democratic development around the world on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the National Endowment for Democracy;
H.R. 2264, To authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 to carry out the Congo Basin Forest Partnership;
Res. 372, Expressing the condolences of the House of Representatives in response to the murder of Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh; and
H. Res. 356, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the man-made famine that occurred in Ukraine in 1932–1933.
I ask unanimous consent that this statement be inserted into the record at the appropriate place.