Iraq Supplemental Funding
Floor Speech
IRAQ SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING -- (Senate - May 01, 2007)
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Madam President, I come to the floor today to express my deep disappointment and the disappointment of so many people in my State with the President's expected decision to veto the supplemental funding bill delivered to him by the bipartisan majority in Congress. This bill provided our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan with all the equipment and the resources they need to continue the duties they have been so bravely performing for more than 4 years. The amount appropriated by Congress rose well above the amount the President requested to give our soldiers on the battlefield. Let it be clear: Congress has given our soldiers on the battlefield all the funding they need. It is the President who will now be blocking it.
A few weeks ago, I was driving in Minnesota. It was a beautiful spring day outside of Ortonville, MN, and as has happened too many times in my short time as a Senator, I called one of the mothers of the Minnesota soldiers who died in this war. Of the 22,000 troops the President has included in this surge, 3,000 of them are Minnesota Guard and Reserves who were expected to come home in January and February and now have been extended. Now the moms I am calling are the moms of these soldiers who would have been home in January or February.
I asked this mother: How are you doing?
She said: You know, people keep asking me that, and I don't really know what to say. Do you have any ideas about what I should say?
I thought, and I told her: Well, I can tell you what all the other mothers have been saying. They have been saying that they wake up every morning and they try hard to hang together for their family, and then something happens. They see a picture or they remember something, and they are never the same for the rest of the day. They have their good moments, but their lives will never be the same.
I told her that her son stood tall, and that now is the time for people in Washington to stand tall.
After 4 years of extensive American military involvement in Iraq, the President refuses to accept the prudent change of course recommended by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group and supported by a clear majority of the American people. By passing this bill, we in Congress fulfilled our constitutional duties to, first, continue funding for America's Armed Forces in harm's way and, second, to ensure that our Government pursues policies in the best interests of our soldiers and of our Nation.
As we work with the President in the days and weeks and months to come, we must continue to advocate for the necessary changes in our strategy in Iraq. It is with this spirit that we in Congress continue to reach out to the President for a responsible change of course in Iraq.
Last month, I visited Baghdad and Fallujah. I saw firsthand the bravery and commitment of our troops. The very best thing we can do for these young men and women is not only give them the equipment they deserve but to get this policy right. This means sending a clear message to the Iraqi Government that we are not staying there indefinitely. This means, as recommended by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, that we begin the process of redeploying our troops, with the goal of withdrawing combat forces by next year, while acknowledging that some troops may remain to train the Iraqi police and special forces to provide security for those who remain and to conduct special operations. This means not a surge in troops but a surge in diplomacy and economy and Iraqi responsibility.
When I was over in Baghdad and Fallujah, I saw many things, including the bravery of our troops. I was struck a few weeks later when another delegation of people from Congress went there, and one of the Congressmen returned and said he had been visiting a market there. He said it reminded him of a farmers market in Indiana.
Those are not the enduring memories of my trip to Iraq. My most enduring memory is standing on the tarmac in the Baghdad Airport with nine firefighters from the Duluth National Guard, who called me over to stand with them while they saluted as six caskets draped in the American flag were loaded onto a plane. As every casket was loaded on, they saluted. They were standing tall for their fallen soldiers that day. Now is our time for Congress to stand tall. Our troops have done everything they have been asked to do. They have deposed an evil dictator, and they gave the Iraqi people the opportunity to vote and establish a new government. It is now the Iraqi Government's responsibility to govern.
But stability and progress in Iraq depend on the political reforms Iraqi leaders have promised many times yet failed to deliver. After 4 years, despite many promises, Iraq has yet to approve a provincial election law. After 4 years, despite many promises, Iraq has yet to approve a law to share oil revenues. After 4 years, despite many promises, Iraq has yet to approve a debaathification law to promote reconciliation. After 4 years, despite many promises, Iraq has yet to approve a law reining in the militia. Our men and women in uniform cannot deliver these kinds of reforms to Iraq. This is up to the Iraqis themselves.
As the bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommended, Iraqi leaders must pay a price if they continue to fail to make good on key reforms they have promised the Iraqi people. After 4 years, what have we gotten? Benchmarks
without progress, promises without results, claims of accountability without any consequences. Why should we expect the Iraqi leaders to do any better when they know the President continues to accept their excuses for inaction and fails to impose any penalties for their lack of progress.
That is why the bipartisan Iraq Study Group made clear that ``if the Iraqi government does not make substantial progress toward the achievement of milestones on national reconciliation, security, and governance, the United States should reduce its political, military, or economic support for the Iraqi government.'' That report was issued 5 months ago. Meanwhile, the President has simply stayed the course he has continued to pursue for the past 4 years and, not surprisingly, little progress has been achieved in Iraq. The Iraqi Government will understand and finally take responsibility only when it is crystal clear to them that our combat presence is not indefinite and that American combat troops are going to leave. That is the responsible change of course we in Congress are seeking. The American people are looking to their leaders in Washington at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue to work together to get this policy right.
Two weeks ago, I went to the White House and met with the President, along with three other Senators, including two Republicans. I appreciated the time he took to honestly discuss our points of agreement and disagreement on the war. I told him that now is the time to forge cooperation with our Democrats in Congress. But the President has chosen instead to veto this bill.
As we move forward on the funding of this war, we in Congress will do nothing that threatens the safety of American soldiers in the field. But we must continue to fulfill our constitutional duty to exercise oversight of American policies in Iraq. A critical part of this oversight must be demanding accountability for the way in which funds are spent on the reconstruction projects in Iraq.
For the past 4 years, the administration has demanded--and received--a blank check to spend in Iraq. Now we are seeing the consequences of this lack of planning, management, and responsibility.
On Monday, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction released a report that details widespread failures in the most basic reconstruction projects. The report finds that, in many cases, Iraq's infrastructure and utility systems are worse off than they were before the war.
On closer inspection, it turns out that even projects which were declared ``success stories'' were considerably less than that. In fact, seven out of eight of these projects which were called success stories were not operating properly due to plumbing and electrical failures, improper maintenance, possible looting, and the fact that expensive equipment was available but never used.
Prior to the 2003 invasion, Iraq's power system produced 4,500 megawatts a day. Today, the same system produces 3,832 megawatts a day. In Baghdad, the city enjoys an average of 6.5 hours of electricity a day. A year ago, Baghdad received 8 hours of electricity a day. Before the war, the city received an average of 16 to 24 hours a day.
Congress has provided $4.2 billion for reconstruction of Iraq's power system, and the result has been a more than 50 percent decrease in the length of time the citizens of Baghdad have access to electricity on any given day.
Congress has provided nearly $2 billion to provide clean drinking water and repair sewer systems. But according to the World Health Organization, 70 percent of Iraqis lack access to clean drinking water.
The Defense Department has estimated that the unemployment rate in Iraq is anywhere between 13.6 percent to 60 percent. In a recent survey, only 16 percent of Iraqis said their current incomes met their basic needs.
So after 4 years, we are facing a security situation that continues to deteriorate, an economic situation that continues to stagnate, and a reconstruction effort that cannot provide even the most basic services.
My colleagues and I have been asking the difficult questions and demanding answers from this administration. The supplemental bill demonstrates that Congress is reclaiming its rightful role in setting Iraq policy and, more broadly, in our system of government. The President's veto only strengthens our resolve.
Madam President, I also wish to speak briefly in support of a few other provisions in this bill that I believe respond to critical challenges our Nation faces and that the administration has deemed unnecessary.
The White House and many of my friends on the other side of the aisle have argued that this bill should not contain funding for anything other than the current war. If we were sacrificing funding for our troops in order to meet domestic priorities, I would agree. But having given our troops all they need and continuing to ignore crises at home would be irresponsible.
Veterans funding is one of the key parts of this bill. This bill adds an increase in veterans funding that was long overdue. In the last 2 years in my State, veterans would come up to me--particularly from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars--and they would tell me about how they had difficulty getting treatment. They clearly had mental health issues. I didn't know if there was truth to this. I wasn't sure, because of the state of their minds, whether this was true. Then I got here, and I started looking at the numbers.
In 2005, the Department of Defense estimated that about 24,000 soldiers coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan would need health care. The actual number is four times that amount. Last year, they were 87,000 soldiers short in their estimate of how many soldiers would need help coming back from this war. Now I know why those people were wandering around asking for help. It is because they weren't getting the help they deserve.
Another critical problem that has been ignored by this administration--and one that is particularly important to the people of my State--has been the tremendous damage recent national disasters have been inflicting on our farmers and ranchers. The supplemental spending bill was a combination of a 2-year effort to secure disaster assistance for America's farmers. Minnesota farmers have been hit with heavy losses for 2 consecutive years--storms and flooding in 2005 and, again, drought in 2006. All told, they lost more than $700 million in crop and livestock losses.
The supplemental funding would have provided $3.5 billion to compensate farmers for a portion of their crop and livestock losses over the past 2 years. Our farmers have waited too long for this disaster relief. I am deeply disappointed that the President has turned his back on the urgent need for their assistance.
The bill we sent to the President of the United States provided the resources and support our soldiers need on the battlefield and after they return home. A few months ago, I attended a funeral of one of the brave men who was killed in the line of duty. The priest stood up, and he said to the thousand people in the cathedral: You know, this was a good kid. He was 6 feet 2 inches tall, but he was still our child.
When we send our kids to war and they are 6 feet tall, they are still our kids and they are standing tall. We need to stand tall.
The traumatic brain injury victims I have seen at the veterans hospital in Minnesota, even in their wheelchairs, are standing tall.
Those moms whom I talked to on the phone, as they struggle every day just to get out of bed to deal with the loss of their kids who were killed in this war, are standing tall.
Now it is time for the President of the United States to stand tall.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source