Withdrawal of United States Armed Forces From Iraq Resolution of 2005--Homeward Bound

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, the chairman and I are prepared to deal with all members of the committee on their ideas. We have explored the issue of the appropriate level of economic and military aid to Egypt; and the committee, as well as the House, has acted on this matter. But as with all matters, we have an open mind to discuss additional and new ideas.

Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to the amendment, but I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, passport security is a critical issue, and we need to be sure that the administration is doing everything it can to ensure that only U.S. citizens receive U.S. passports. However, while we are prepared to accept this amendment, we hope we can make some modifications as the legislative process moves forward.

Birth certificates are used by the State Department to help establish the nationality of an applicant, not their identity, and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 establishes a Federal process to standardize U.S. birth certificates. The State Department is a full participant in that process, along with other Federal agencies, the States and the association that represents the registrars of vital statistics. That process should be allowed to run its course, and it would be counterproductive for the Department of State to establish its own criteria for evaluating birth certificates.

In addition, it is unclear whether the training mandated by this provision should be the responsibility of the State Department or the U.S. Postal Service, which employs most of the passport acceptance agents.

We hope to address these issues as this amendment moves forward.

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

Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to the amendment; I ask

unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Before I comment substantively on the gentleman's amendment, let me pay tribute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Chairman Smith) for his leadership in this House in our joined fight against trafficking.

Mr. Chairman, there is no disagreement among Members of this body as to whether overseas recipients of U.S. HIV/AIDS funds should be promoting prostitution or trafficking. They obviously should not. To this end, in the original HIV/AIDS legislation Congress required that any grantee or subgrantee legally certify that they have a written policy against prostitution and trafficking.

This amendment, if approved, will place an onerous burden on the thinly staffed administrators of the global HIV/AIDS program to prepare within 90 days a report listing hundreds of grants and subgrants and retrieving policy statements from each one to satisfy the amendment. If Congress wants to set forth specific and reasonable guidelines for NGOs to follow, that is a different matter and should be addressed appropriately.

Mr. Chairman, because I support the intent of this amendment, I will not oppose it, but I believe that there are less burdensome ways to achieve this end, particularly by allowing for a greater period of time to prepare this information. I hope we will have a chance to work out appropriate language in conference.

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

Mr. Chairman, I do not oppose this amendment, and I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I want to commend my friend from Iowa for offering this amendment. As the amendment soberly points out, 52 American citizens have been murdered by Palestinian terrorists since the PLO forswore the use of violence in the 1993 Oslo Accords.

This amendment acts, in effect, as a memorial, recording the name of each victim and offering condolences to their families.

It also demands that the Palestinian Authority work with Israel to protect all innocent individuals, of whatever citizenship, from terrorist atrocities. This is an important message at any time, but particularly now as Israel prepares to undertake a historic disengagement from the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority must do its best, and it certainly has not done so lately, to ensure that this disengagement takes place in an orderly fashion and not under a hail of grenades and Kassam rockets that would only cast doubt on the viability of a Palestinian controlled Gaza as a neighbor for Israel.

Mr. Chairman, I hope the Palestinian Authority takes the antiterrorist message of this resolution to heart.

Let me also say, Mr. Chairman, that as our distinguished Secretary of State, Dr. Condoleeza Rice, leaves for the region she could not be going at a more appropriate and urgent time, and she fully understands that her prime responsibility is to make it clear to the Palestinian Authority that it must guarantee order and peace by using its military forces in Gaza to break the back of militant terrorist groups.

I urge all of my colleagues to join in supporting this resolution.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I want to offer my sincere thanks to the chairman of the International Relations Committee (Mr. Hyde), my dear friend, for working closely with me in a joint effort to tackle the critical problem of declining rates of foreign students seeking to study in the United States.

I also want to thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum), who has worked with us on this problem for years.

Mr. Chairman, opening doors to well-intentioned foreign students is as critical to the security of the United States as is the task of identifying those who are engaged in terrorism and other hostile acts against us.

Foreign students who come to the United States to study and disseminate the core values of the American people as they relate their positive firsthand experience when they return to their countries of origin.

The education of foreign students is a critical part of the United States economy as well, and it is a key American export. Not many people know, Mr. Chairman, the United States earns $13 billion a year in tuition and expenses paid to us by foreign students.

Since 9/11, U.S. colleges and universities have faced great challenges in retaining their competitive position in the market for foreign students. These challenges have begun to erode our dominance as the world's leading and most desired destination for foreign students. During the 2003-2004 academic year, according to the Institute for International Education, the number of international students studying in the United States declined by almost 2\1/2\ percent. This was the first overall year-to-year decline in the number of international students since the 1971-1972 school year.

It appears, Mr. Chairman, that much of the problem stems from negative misperceptions by potential foreign students about new U.S. visa processes and fears that the United States has become a less friendly place for them to study.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment seeks to address this problem by encouraging the Department of State to work with the U.S. educational and academic community and with other Federal agencies to develop effective practices aimed at reversing these negative perceptions so that we may once again re-establish our competitive position as the choice destination for the world's best and brightest international students. I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my good friends, Chairman Hyde and Chairman Smith, for their words and their comments. I hope we can all support this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to the amendment. I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I commend my good friend from Florida for offering this important amendment to increase the flow of objective information about the United States and world events into Venezuela. Recently, Reuters reported that Chavez had launched a new television station, Telesur, to counter what he considers to be pro-globalization bias in European and American news networks, like CNN. Chavez has also reportedly entered into a $200 million deal with China's National Space Administration to launch a satellite into orbit from which he could beam his anticipated hateful media content into homes across Latin America, the Caribbean and beyond.

As Chavez ramps up his information campaign, we should be prepared to present balanced news to the people of Venezuela so that they can be better able to make informed decisions about the activities of their government. I encourage all of my colleagues to support the amendment of my friend from Florida.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I do not object to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this amendment and urge all of my colleagues to do so as well. The bilateral relationship between the United States and China has become increasingly complex and nuanced over the past decade. A new generation of Chinese diplomats has come into power, fluent in the language of diplomacy and international negotiations.

Unfortunately, the comments made by Chinese General Zhu demonstrate that key elements of the Chinese military continue to live in the long forgotten past when the United States and China were bitter enemies. General Zhu's comment that China might launch a preemptive nuclear strike against the United States in the event of a conflict over Taiwan are the height of lunacy, recklessness and irresponsibility. A nuclear strike by China against the United States would trigger a nuclear exchange which would

leave hundreds of millions of casualties.

China's political leadership fully understands that fact of life, and it is my hope that they will quickly repudiate General Zhu's comments and ease him into a long overdue retirement. I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to briefly respond to the comments by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) on efforts to promote abstinence in Africa.

America's efforts to stop the transmission of HIV/AIDS overseas are firmly based on the ABC model: Abstinence, Being faithful, and Condoms. As we have seen in Uganda, the successful reduction in HIV/AIDS infection rates is dependent upon using all three elements of the ABC approach, not simply one.

Our committee has conducted extensive investigations into U.S. HIV/ AIDS efforts abroad, and we have seen no evidence whatsoever that abstinence efforts are being denigrated by NGOs receiving U.S. funds. Groups across Africa receiving HIV/AIDS funds from our country are effectively implementing abstinence programs as part of the ABC model, exactly as Congress intended.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding me this time, and I strongly support this most important amendment by the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson). I encourage all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do the same.

Mr. Chairman, there is no doubt in my mind that our friend and ally, the country of Nigeria, should transfer Charles Taylor to the Special Court for Sierra Leone without any delay.

Taylor has been charged personally with 17 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity. These charges include mutilations, rape, sexual slavery, forced recruitment of child soldiers, child abduction, and multiple killings. Many Members of this Congress witnessed the testimony of some of Charles Taylor's child victims, all of whom had amputated arms and legs, their bodies disfigured, and their lives transformed forever.

Mr. Chairman, there will be no justice for the people of Sierra Leone until Charles Taylor stands in the dock. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my friend for yielding me time.

Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson) for her continued leadership on behalf of the protection of intellectual property. The gentlewoman's amendment will provide a modest authorization of $5 million to assist less developed countries in their efforts to draft and to enforce laws aimed at protecting intellectual property in compliance with international treaties and agreements. This authorization would also be available to train judges and prosecutors in these countries in the proper application of new and existing statutes related to the protection of intellectual property.

Mr. Chairman, this is a very worthwhile amendment. The potential benefits to the American economy in terms of the protection of intellectual property of our artists and of our inventors that could result from this amendment passing are enormous, far outweighing its modest costs.

Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my colleagues to support this thoughtful measure.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the Franks amendment. This amendment strikes an important provision of our legislation that requires the Department of State to report to Congress on the possibility of offering consular and visa services at the U.S.

office in Pristina, Kosova. Although the United States maintains a robustly staffed mission in Pristina, those Kosovars wishing to visit the United States must travel out of Kosova to receive consular and visa services.

Mr. Chairman, this is both inconvenient and expensive for the average Kosovar, who is not very wealthy, because many visa applications require multiple visits to a consulate outside of Kosova to places as far off as Skopje, Tirana, and Podgorica: three different countries and three different capitals.

The State Department says the current layout of the U.S. office in Pristina makes it difficult to provide adequate security to handle consular and visa matters there. The authorization bill, as written and passed by a vote of 44 to nothing by the Committee on International Relations, demonstrates the importance Congress places on providing consular and visa services in Pristina and having the State Department detail its plans for the future. It mandates no changes, but merely requires the Department of State to report to Congress on the matter as part of our oversight responsibilities.

Nor does it threaten to change the status of Kosova, as some proponents of this amendment may believe. In fact, the State Department affirms that there are no political or legal obstacles to opening a consulate in Kosova.

I urge all of my colleagues to defeat this needless amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment on behalf of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes).

Yes.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes).

The Rio Grande, which separates El Paso in Texas from Ciudad Juarez in Mexico and is often dry, has been filled with the tears of countless families who grieve for a lost daughter, sister or mother who have fallen prey to a mastermind of murder and the reckless indifference of local Mexican law enforcement.

Since 1993, over 400 women have been murdered in the border region around El Paso and Ciudad Juarez. In the last year alone, over 30 women have been killed. According to Amnesty International, Mr. Chairman, at least 137 of the victims, more than half of whom were between the ages of 13 and 22, were sexually assaulted prior to being murdered.

Realizing the deliberate ineptitude of local law enforcement under whose jurisdiction these cases would normally fall, the Mexican Federal Government has begun to implement measures to prevent these abductions and murders in Ciudad Juarez, including by establishing a commission to coordinate Federal and State efforts, crafting a 40-point plan of action and appointing a special federal prosecutor.

Unfortunately, these efforts have not been enough to close the killing fields around this border town. Our own ambassador to Mexico has declared the area to be a public security concern and advised United States citizens against traveling there.

The amendment of my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes), the Chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Task Force on International Relations, is a constructive provision that aims to raise the profile of these tragic cases and provide forensic assistance to our Mexican neighbors. I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes), the author of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes).

Mr. Chairman, I do not oppose the amendment, but I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Speaker, I am joined here this evening by two of my colleagues, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan). In the past, since the commencement of military action in Iraq, four of us came together and created what we called the Iraq Watch, which was an effort to assess the situation in the Middle East with a particular focus on Iraq and Afghanistan, and the global implications for our national security and for the role of the United States in the world.

For some 19 months, we would convene here on the floor and have a dialogue among us. Some of our colleagues are not here this evening, but our regulars include the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), the same State that is represented by Mr. Ryan, who is a welcome new addition to the Iraq Watch. So we welcome the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

I would like to begin by just examining the current security situation in Iraq and reporting to my colleagues and to the American people.

Through July 17, 1,764 U.S. soldiers have died, and 13,483 have been wounded in Iraq since the invasion. Now, I know many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have visited our wounded military personnel in the naval hospital in Bethesda and at Walter Reed. It is, to say the least, a moving, poignant, and profoundly disturbing experience; and I know we share, all of us share the absolute best

wishes for them as they move forward in their lives. We know that they have many hurdles and many obstacles ahead of them, but that same courage and that same heroism that they displayed in the war we know will be with them as they proceed through life.

But it is our obligation here in this Congress, in this House to make sure that they have every single benefit that they deserve and that all of our programs are fully funded. I know the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) serves on the Committee on Veterans' Affairs and has been a leader in that regard, and I congratulate him.

Since June 2003, 2,642 Iraqi soldiers and police have died. Estimates of Iraqi civilian deaths since the beginning of the invasion range up to 60,800. The New York Times recently cited Iraqi government figures reporting that an average of 500 Iraqis are killed each month by so- called insurgents. Over a 10-month period ending in May, that rate had escalated to some 800 a month.

So those are the statistics. Those are the cold, hard statistics.

Now, I know that my colleague, the gentleman from the State of Washington (Mr. Inslee), has an obligation in about 20 minutes, so I am going to call on him and ask him for his observations to begin our conversation.

I think it is interesting to go back a bit and to remember that the Department of State had worked for months on a plan, a plan that was fleshed out by bringing in experts from outside, by bringing in those with different perspectives. And yet, because there was some suspicion on the part of the Pentagon that State was not enthusiastically in support of the military invasion of Iraq, that that had to be put aside. And now we find ourselves, obviously, in a real mess

I would like to make an interesting observation, because during the debate tomorrow and during the debate today, and during the course of our committee hearings, we constantly hear of a profound concern by this administration and this government about Iran. If you remember, Iran was described as a charter member, if you will, of the Axis of Evil club. And there are legitimate concerns about the development of nuclear weapons by Iran.

And here we are in Iraq, we have already appropriated in excess of $330 billion. That is $330 billion. Estimates range that by the time we have discharged our obligation, which is difficult to quantify, we will be looking at $1 trillion from American taxpayers.

However, while we are expressing this concern about Iran, a story appears in the Washington Post dated Tuesday, July 12, and the headline reads as follows: Iraqi official says Iran will not train troops. But there appears to be some confusion because the Iraq defense minister reached an agreement, a military agreement with Iran the previous week. And he claims it does not include any provision for the Iranian armed forces to help train Iraqi troops. But this was contradicted by his Iranian counterpart.

So here we are, America. We now have a military agreement between Iraq, where we have expended billions, hundreds of billions of dollars, and the blood of more than 1,700 Americans killed in action, and yet what do we have? We have a military agreement between Iraq and the Republic of Iran. And tomorrow, I can assure you, as we debate the reauthorization legislation in terms of the Department of State, there will be much said about Iran. There will be a pounding of fists and there will be considerable consternation about Iran.

And yet, here we are, it is publicly disclosed, the Iranians and the Iraqis have reached an accord in a military agreement. So maybe that will take care of the training of Iraqi troops so that Americans can learn. The Iranians can attract them.

Of course I yield to my friend from Hawaii and one of the original members of Iraq Watch.

Those numbers are mind boggling. And before I yield to my friend from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), I have a question. And I need someone to at least assist me in trying to understand how Iran, again, and a charter member of the axis of evil, is now a military ally of Iraq. And we are promoting democracy in Iraq.

It also should be noted again, according to this Washington Post story, that while the Minister of Defense in the interim government claims that, no, the Iranians are not going to train troops, but he did acknowledge that Iran has pledged $1 billion in reconstruction aid to the Iraqi government, some of which would be to the defense ministry. Is this Allies in Wonderland? Is up down and down is up? The Iranians and the Iraqis are engaged in a military accord?

This is the kind of information that we tried to bring out during the course of our conversations once a week. We have just begun them again after a hiatus of some 6 months. But that to me is inexplicable because that will give Iran, Iran, that many on the floor tomorrow will say is a potential enemy and something has got to be done. What is happening?

The burden is being carried almost exclusively by the American military and the American taxpayer. And we have been joined by 2 colleagues, our friend, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson), and, again, one of the original members of the Iraq Watch, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland).

I yield, since he is one of the originals I have to yield first of course, to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland) and welcome him.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson).

No, the gentleman's remarks are excellent, and, Mr. Speaker, they are on point. The tragic reality is that this is an American war, with some help from the British. This is becoming every day almost an exclusive American venture, both militarily and in terms of the reconstruction phase.

A recent report indicated that Italy is prepared to withdraw its 3,000 troops come this fall. This fall is 2 months away. The coalition of the willing is ``getting out of Dodge.'' That is the tragic reality here. Because they are hearing from the people in their societies who are saying we do not want to participate.

We find ourselves in a real conundrum. And my colleague was absolutely right, in the aftermath of 9/11 every single one of us stood here and voted in favor of going after al-Qaeda, in Afghanistan, along with the Taliban, and we prevailed. But then, then we became distracted and we took resources from Afghanistan. What is happening in Afghanistan? It has become a narco state. President Karzai has a terrible situation on his hands.

And I know we all remember here that the day after 9/11 the entire world was with us. The French, their leading newspaper Le Monde, summed it up when it said ``Today We Are All Americans.'' We had that good will. And now? And now what do we see because of these policies? Well, I will tell you what we see. According to the independent nonpartisan Government Accountability Office, and the American people should know that that is an arm of the U.S. Congress, this is what they had to say just this past April:

``Recent polling data show that anti-Americanism is spreading and deepening around the world. Such anti-American sentiments can increase foreign public support for terrorism directed against Americans. It impacts the cost and effectiveness of military operations, thereby escalating the cost of supporting our troops in the multiple venues that they presently patrol, and it weakens the United States' ability to align with other nations in pursuit of common policy objectives and dampen foreign publics' enthusiasm for U.S. business services and products.''

This has huge implications for the American people. It is absolutely stunning to see some of this polling that has currently become available. When posed this question, ``Please tell me if you think each of the following are having a mainly positive or mainly negative influence in the world,'' and they single out the United States, in Great Britain, our most staunch ally, 44 percent say it is mainly positive, with fifty percent saying it is mostly negative. That is Great Britain.

In Australia, 40 percent say it is mostly positive and 52 percent say American influence in the world today is mostly negative. Our neighbors to the north, in Canada, 34 percent say American influence in terms of the international order is mostly positive, 34 percent, and 60 percent say it is mostly negative. Germany, 27 percent positive, 64 percent negative. Japan, 24 percent positive, 31 percent negative. Mexico, our neighbors to the south, 11 percent mostly positive in terms of American influence in the international community, and 57 percent mostly negative.

I could go on and on and on.

And hopefully that will also staunch that rising virulent, anti-Americanism that does such harm to our national security, that breeds terrorists and directs their anger toward the United States.

We saw what happened in London. Again, we hear from those in the Islamic world that by virtue of what we are doing in our policy, why we speak of democracy and our rhetoric is comprised of the most noble of word, we are not seen that way because our actions belie them.

If I may go to that issue of anti-Americanism once more, it was interesting during the course of the debate today on the reauthorization of the Department of State when during consideration of the rule an amendment put forth by myself and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett) was not made in order because I would suggest that the seeds of that anti-Americanism is a perception that the United States operates on two different standards, and that is interpreted by many in this world to be rank hypocrisy.

It was the President that said during his inaugural address that the United States ``will persistently clarify the choice for every ruler and every Nation: The moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom which is eternally right. America will not pretend that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies. We will encourage reform in other governments by making it clear that success in our relations will require the decent treatment of their own people.''

Noble words, a noble cause, and we all of course embrace that. Yet when we put forth this amendment which would have admonished and required a certification by the President that the thug, the bully, if you will, that rules Uzbekistan would change his ways, it was not made in order. One of our partners in this coalition of the willing is the thug, and I will take a moment here and put his picture up so Members and the viewing audience can see. This is Islam Karimov. This victim here was boiled alive in water, scalding water. This is a member of the coalition of the willing.

According to our own State Department, Karimov heads a regime that does not allow freedom of speech or religion, that makes a mockery of elections, that holds thousands of political prisoners, and where security forces routinely use torture. This is the product of the thug Karimov's security forces utilization of torture, torture that goes back to the medieval times.

And then 2 months ago his troops massacred hundreds of civilians who were simply protesting for justice and for liberty. And yet we continue to give him military assistance, some $400 million to date. The amendment that was offered by myself and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett) would have terminated that aid unless Karimov changed his behavior.

Exactly.

Mr. Speaker, just think of the message that this sends to the rest of the world. When crowds were demonstrating in the Ukraine, we were cheering. We approved. We welcomed the so-called Orange Revolution. And we speak about bringing the fire of freedom to dark corners of the world, and yet here is one dark corner of the world where there is no light, there is no hope, and we do not bring the fire of freedom. And we wonder why polling data indicates that country after country, our traditional allies, look at us as having a mainly negative influence in the world, all because of the war in Iraq. That was the genesis.

Mr. Speaker, it will have implications for us.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

The Acting Chairman. Is the gentleman from New Jersey acting as the designee of the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King)?

Mr. Chairman, I am.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment simply requires that the State Department submit a report to Congress that one, identifies by name all NGOs receiving funding under the President's emergency plan for AIDS relief, the date that the funding was provided, and the date on which the NGO filed the statement certifying its policy explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking.

Number two, it describes the Department of State's plans to audit the compliance by nongovernmental organizations receiving U.S. funding under the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS relief to have and adhere to an explicit policy opposing prostitution and sex trafficking and a description of the plan of the Department of State to transmit the results to the appropriate congressional committees.

Mr. Chairman, I would just note for my colleagues, this is a very simple amendment. When the Hyde historic legislation on HIV/AIDS was considered by the committee, I offered the amendment that was included in that bill to ensure that the NGOs, to which we provide considerable amounts of money and, in many cases, we are talking tens of millions of dollars, are not in any way complicit in sex trafficking nor in the promotion of prostitution and its legality.

I would point out to my colleagues that by way of historical background, I am the prime sponsor of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 and the Trafficking Victims Protection Act Reauthorization and Expansion Act of 2003. We take very seriously our obligation to ensure that we as a government, we as a provider of significant Federal funding, in no way are enabling this modern-day slavery called sex trafficking or prostitution, which is its very close cousin.

I would hope that Members would realize that this is a very simple amendment. It just requires that we get basic information, which I think in our oversight capacity we have an obligation to do as a Congress and as certain committees of the Congress.

So I hope that Members will support this.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King), who is actually the prime sponsor of this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in very strong opposition to the Kucinich amendment. A key element in a robust defense against ballistic missiles is the deployment of space-based weapons to intercept them in flight. We are talking about in all cases nonnuclear interceptors to stop an incoming nuclear device.

I think the amendment, while well intentioned, and I respect the gentleman from Ohio, is very counterproductive and puts our cities and our population at risk. I strongly oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to defeat it.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding.

I want to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde). This is a very creative amendment; 9/11 should not mean that the welcome mat has been pulled. As the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) points out in the amendment's findings, $13 billion every year is earned from foreign students coming in. But it is not the money, per se, although that helps our colleges and universities. It is the fact that these students have the opportunity to learn what democracy is all about, to learn what a capitalist system can produce for their people when they return. They can also learn skills that will save lives in the area of medicine as well as in law and so many other areas.

It is a very, very creative amendment, I think, and will lead to best practices that will result in more students taking the good infection back to their respective countries. I again want to congratulate the gentleman on this excellent amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) for his outstanding work on this issue, and I rise in strong support of the gentlewoman from California's (Ms. Watson) very important amendment.

Mr. Chairman, in August of 2003, the Government of Nigeria, at the urging of the governments of the United States and Great Britain, gave asylum to then-Liberian President Charles Taylor. The purpose was to prevent further bloodshed and to allow for a transition back to a democratically elected government in Liberia. The deal was struck in spite of the indictment of Taylor by the Special Court for Sierra Leone in June of that year on 17 counts of war crimes, including mass murder, sexual slavery, rape, hostage-taking, amputations, forced conscriptions of children and adults, arson, looting, and many other abuses of human rights.

Nevertheless, the action by the Nigerian Government likely saved thousands of lives and is providing at least a chance for free elections in Liberia in October. However, the deal was not without conditions, and there is ample evidence that Charles Taylor has violated this asylum agreement.

For example, Taylor is alleged to be cooperating with international terrorist organizations. He is engaged in illicit trade in blood diamonds in violation of U.N. sanctions and is linked to the proliferation of small arms throughout the region. He has also destabilized the entire subregion of West Africa, leaving thousands dead and millions displaced in its wake.

Nigerian President Obasanjo refuses to end the asylum agreement, however, unless there is irrefutable evidence of violations by Taylor. I would point out to my colleagues that on March 17, Kofi Annan reported to the Security Council that Taylor's former military commanders, party leaders, and business associates maintain regular contact with him and are planning to undermine Liberia's return to democracy.

I urge strong support for this amendment. It is an outstanding one.

A few days later, Jacques Klein, the UN Special Representative to the Secretary-General on Liberia confirmed that Taylor is ``still very, much involved'' in Liberian politics.

Outgoing Chief Prosecutor for the Sierra Leone Court, David Crane continues to accuse Taylor of ``ruling the country from his house arrest in Calabar'' In southern Nigeria.

So, yes President Obasanjo, there is plenty of evidence that Charles Taylor has violated the terms of his asylum. Has he continued to destabilize not only Liberia, but also Cote d'Ivoire and Guinea? That has yet to be proven in court, but there is enough evidence for him to be sent to the court in Sierra Leone to find out.

President Bush raised this issue with President Obasanjo at a meeting in May, but U.S. policy must consist of more than a brief discussion. Whatever evidence we have must be shared with the Nigerian government, and then they must make up their mind if they want to continue in the direction of helping West Africa to heal or if they want to close their eyes to continued interference and further upheaval.

Surely, the time has come for Charles Taylor's reign of terror in the region to reach its final, conclusive end.

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the majority of the committee, I want to express our strong support for this amendment.

This amendment, the Watson-Issa amendment, will continue to support programs similar to those that were begun in fiscal year 2004. The State Department has designed programs to target areas of the world that have significant rates of intellectual property rights piracy with unique law enforcement assistance. This assistance has been tailored to particular activities in various regions of the world. It is critical to support the intellectual property rights community, Mr. Chairman, as the United States is the world's single largest creator, producer and exporter of copyrighted materials.

Rampant piracy of creative works poses a significant risk to U.S. creative work products, including music, movies, video games and other software. As the U.S. copyright industry alone accounts for nearly 6 percent of this Nation's GDP, it is an economic security issue as well for the United States.

Mr. Chairman, I commend my two colleagues for offering this very important amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition, although I support the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, we appreciate the concern of the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza), and for their strong statements here. The problem of the Chaldo- Assyrians has been brought to the attention of the committee. The committee has brought these concerns to the attention of the administration.

I have met with people myself who have expressed concerns about this, and believe that they should not get short shrift when it comes to U.S. foreign aid and efforts being made in Iraq. The administration has prepared materials attempting to show it has been fair and inclusive in its distribution of assistance, but this amendment puts every one of us on guard that we need to watch this very carefully to make sure that they are not shown the door or in any way denied the kind of assistance that we are capable of offering and I think we are obligated to provide to them. I appreciate the gentlewoman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for crafting this very important amendment. It is creative as an amendment, and it also will get the job done.

The U.S. Interests Section, if this amendment were to be enacted, will get the information out that there is a bounty on the heads of these people who have committed serious crimes in the U.S. According to the FBI, 74 U.S. citizens convicted of felonious crimes in the U.S. are currently living in Cuba under the protection of the Castro regime.

Joanne Chesimard was convicted, and one of those who is living in Cuba. She was convicted and sentenced to life in prison in 1977 for the 1973 execution-style slaying of New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster on the New Jersey Turnpike. Witnesses said she fired two bullets into his head as he lay on the ground. This is a very commonsense approach to try to get the message out, and hopefully it will empower everyday, ordinary Cubans to take action to bring these people to justice.

I thank the gentleman for his amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his courtesy.

Mr. Chairman, I do oppose the amendment. It is merely an amendment authorizing a study to determine whether or not the U.S. Office in Pristina ought to provide consular services. There are about 15,000 people that make that trip to Skopje every year. It is a burdensome situation for them.

But let me also point out there is some value to this debate in the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks), because it underscores the clear and nonambiguous intent here that we do not want to prejudge or predetermine the final status with regard to Kosovo. That is to be left to the negotiations.

Even if the State Department makes a recommendation that it is going to be left to a status negotiation, I think the gentleman's amendment and the fact we have had this debate helps to bring some light to that. This amendment would merely facilitate and expedite those individuals that would like to get their visas and to come here.

I thank the gentleman for yielding, I oppose the amendment, and I respect the gentleman.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to take the time in opposition, even though I support the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes) for his very compassionate and important amendment. It should be supported, and the majority on this side of the aisle supports it.

Since 1993, almost 400 women and girls have been murdered and more than 70 remain missing in Ciudad Juarez in Mexico. This commonsense amendment simply seeks to provide congressional authority and funding to the Secretary of State to make independent technical and forensic expertise available to the families of these young women and girls.

The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes) represents, as we know, the El Paso area across the border from this area. His amendment extends a helping hand to these grieving families. I want to commend the gentleman for his compassion in offering this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Ms. ESHOO asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer this amendment expressing the sense of Congress that our government should recognize the unique challenges facing Iraq's indigenous Christian communities, including the Chaldeans, Jacobites, Armenians, Assyrians and Greek Orthodox Christians.

I am a first generation American of Assyrian and Armenian descent. My grandparents fled their ancestral homeland in the early part of the 20th century. In fact, my mother received her First Communion in Baghdad in 1919. I am the only Assyrian American serving in Congress today, and one other did many years ago, the distinguished Adam Benjamin of Indiana.

There are approximately 250,000 Assyrian Americans in the United States, representing the largest population of Chaldo-Assyrians outside Iraq. All Chaldo-Assyrians are Christian. Because they are, they have been subjected to persecution in their homeland.

Today, there are between 1 to 1.5 million Christians remaining in Iraq,

mainly in the Nineveh plain in the north around Mosul. They live in villages that can trace their history back over 2,000 years. And a large number, because of their geography, have now come under the authority of the Kurdistan Regional Government.

Among indigenous Iraqi Christians, the Chaldeans represent the oldest rite under Rome. Along with the Assyrians who worship with the Holy Apostolic Catholic Assyrian Church of the East, they represent the oldest surviving Christian population in the world and one, without help during this critical transition period, that could be on the brink of extinction.

These communities have welcomed the opportunity before them since the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime to move toward greater prosperity and stability by cooperating in the development of a democratic, pluralistic state. Unfortunately, religious and ethnic tensions as well as discrimination continue to plague these Christian communities. I continue to receive troubling reports from religious leaders indicating that Iraq's Christian population is not receiving their fair share of development assistance. Because they are such a small minority, the indigenous Iraqi Christian population has one independently elected Chaldo-Assyrian in the entire Iraqi National Assembly, Younadam Kanna, whom I have met with and hold in high regard. Within the Kurdistan Regional Government in northern Iraq, representatives from Iraqi Christian communities hold five out of 100 seats. Because the Assyrian community is so very small, such a minority in Iraq with one representative in national politics, funding for reconstruction, housing and education are parceled out to those who control the villages and the regions where they reside without sufficient transparency to ensure the proper parity.

The visible result of these misallocations has been the emigration of as many as 80,000 Iraqi Christians since the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime. The majority of these individuals, approximately 50,000, have fled to Syria, while others have spread out to Jordan, the Gulf Emirates and Turkey, all living in desperate circumstances as refugees from their homes.

This needs to be dealt with. If a fully functioning and sustainable democracy is to emerge in Iraq, the basic rights and needs of all minority groups must be safeguarded. My amendment seeks to affirm that commitment by ensuring that all relevant U.S. Government agencies and departments pay special attention to the needs of this minority and ensure that they will continue to reside and thrive in their ancestral homeland.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I want to particularly thank Tim Carey of my staff for the very hard, diligent and closely held sincere belief in this issue. Without him, I do not think I would be on the floor today with this amendment.

Iraqi Christians Find Safety in Syria--Religious Violence Prompted Many

To Flee Homeland

(By Joshua E.S. Phillips)

Damascus, Syria.--Seated in his parish office, Father

Sarmad Yousef reflected on his hard choices: to disobey his

archbishop by remaining in Syria or to return to Iraq, where

his name has appeared on a death list. ``After the Americans

came, I was one of the people telling the Iraqi Christians

not to leave,'' he said. ``After the violence started, I

stopped telling them that.''

Christians all over Iraq face a similar dilemma as

relentless violence engulfs the country, some directly

targeting them. Staying in the midst of the threats is

dangerous, yet leaving means abandoning communities, church

property and a heritage with centuries-old roots.

Before the U.S.-led war, roughly 750,000 Christians lived

in Iraq, out of a population of 25 million. Most were

Chaldean and Assyrian, but there also were Armenian, Jacobite

and Greek Orthodox Christians and a small number of

Protestants. Most of them lived either in Baghdad or in

northern Iraq around Mosul.

Since then, 15,000 to 20,000 Christians have fled to Syria,

according to Christian groups, out of ``about 700,000''

Iraqis, most of them in flight from the war, according to the

U.N. high commissioner for refugees.

Yousef, a 30-year-old Chaldean Catholic who came here in

August 2004, was the parish priest of Baghdad's St. Pathion

Church, with 800 families under his stewardship. Today, he

occupies a simple office in Damascus, decorated with small

portraits of St. Therese, the patron saint of his new church,

cradling a bouquet of pink roses.

He says he actively supported the United States when

coalition troops first entered Baghdad in April 2003 and

helped organize community meetings on their behalf. Such

support came with grave risks, and he narrowly missed two

drive-by shooting attacks. But when the Abu Ghraib prison

scandal came to light, Yousef says, his view changed. Nor was

he alone. ``Before that, Iraqis loved Americans,'' said

Yousef, his eyes lowered. ``Directly after that--those

photos, that scandal directly destroyed the dignity of

Iraqis.''

Muneeb, an Iraqi Christian parishioner of St. Therese who

didn't reveal his last name because he said he did not want

to attract local attention, said general resentment toward

the Americans was transferred to Iraqi Christians.

``Americans are Christians,'' he said, ``so we're

automatically considered to be part of them.''

Christian-owned liquor stores and beauty salons were

attacked. While kidnapping has soared--both for terrorism and

financial gain--Christians felt particularly targeted since

they are often associated with successful businesses and

financial support of families living abroad.

With the rise of Islamic militancy, Muneeb said, his

sister, a doctor, was ordered to wear a veil outside her

home--a requirement that didn't exist, he said, when Saddam

Hussein was in power. ``I never thought of leaving Iraq,''

Muneeb said. ``But as a minority, we have no support.''

Emmanuale Khoshaba, a member of the Assyrian Democratic

Movement, who regularly commutes back and forth to Iraq, is

more optimistic. Through his job as the movement's Syrian

representative, he promoted Iraq's Jan. 30 elections among

absentee voters in Syria.

``Don't see the glass half-empty,'' said Khoshaba, who is

the organization's Syrian representative. ``Now, we have

rights: We have our names, we have members of the National

Assembly, and we have 35 schools that teach Syriac.'' Under

Hussein, teaching Syriac--the language used by Assyrians and

other Iraqi Christians, and one of the Middle East's oldest

languages--was strictly forbidden.

``We have coexisted for thousands of years,'' Khoshaba

said. ``The problem was the repressive regime, and today we

are in a transitionary stage. But one has to stay and

sacrifice something for it.''

There have been many examples of such sacrifice.

One Sunday last August, a spate of bombings that struck

five churches in Baghdad and one in Mosul left 11 dead and

scores wounded. Yousef's church was spared, but he said Iraqi

Christians increasingly had started to leave soon after.

When Yousef took a previously planned trip to Damascus, he

learned his was one of 18 names on a death list. Thirteen of

those people had been killed the previous month. ``I decided

not to go back--I felt that I was too young to die,'' said

Yousef. He left behind friends, family and his parish. The

archbishop of Baghdad instructed him return to his post, but

he stayed in Damascus to fill an opening at St. Therese.

Yousef's new church, wedged within Danlascus' Old City of

cobblestone streets and crumbling houses, overflows with

worshipers during Sunday Mass. Of the 2,000 families now

connected to St. Therese, 90 percent are recent Iraqi

refugees. Just outside the church doors, a group of

parishioners from Yousef's old Baghdad parish discussed how

their lives have changed.

``Life was better--we didn't have any problems,'' said

Jamila Tama, referring to the relative peace between

religious sects under Hussein. ``There's killing, bombing

and kidnapping. We have nothing now--even our house is

sold.''

Her son, Bassam Bahnam, was grateful for the haven in

Syria. ``But I have three boys who worked in Baghdad, and

they're all unemployed now,'' he said.

Bahnam and his family want to return to Iraq--when the

violence ebbs. ``Of course there's no place like home,'' said

his younger brother, Hisham Bahnam. But he criticized

Christian leaders' calls to stay in Iraq. ``They're asking us

to stay, but they're not giving us any solution,'' he said.

``Even Christian leaders need an army to protect them

whenever they go outside.''

George Abona, a former priest who attended a seminary with

Yousef, agrees. ``When my Christian leaders say, `Don't leave

your heritage,' what are they going offer me?'' he said.

``What will heritage do for me and my son?''

In Iraq, Abona worked for the United Nations for seven

years, before and during the war, and was in its Baghdad

compound when it was bombed in August 2003. He survived, but

the blast killed his brother, along with the top U.N. envoy

in Iraq, Sergio Vieira de Mello, and 20 other U.N staffers.

Then last October, he was kidnapped for 19 days. He was

released after another brother paid a $20,000 ransom. Despite

all that, he said, ``The security issue is not a big issue--

it's that I'm not ready to raise my son in an extremist

Islamic society.''

Syria has relaxed immigration rules for its Arab neighbors.

But aside from Palestinians, refugees are not allowed to hold

jobs in Syria, forcing most Iraqi newcomers to live off their

savings. Government assistance--especially health care--is

limited, and the refugees must return home periodically to

get their temporary visas renewed.

Yousef tries to provide his new community in Syria with

food and money for medical needs. The main reason he and

other Christians have fled Iraq, he said, is ``because we

don't feel it is our country any more.''

``I have bad memories now,'' he said of events since the

invasion. ``Most of my friends were killed there, and we only

saw cruelty and blood. I don't think I'll ever be able to go

back.''

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza), who represents a very large community of Assyrian Americans in his congressional district.

Will the gentleman yield on the question of the cost associated with the points you made?

The publication Inside Defense of July 6 reports, with regard to your estimations as to the cost, this was just prior to the advent of the meeting between the Iraqis and the Iranians. A group of advisors, I am now quoting from this July 6 article in Inside Defense. A group of advisors to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is preparing a report warning that the huge costs associated with prolonged bloody operations in Iraq and Afghanistan may become part of a U.S. adversary's strategy. U.S. led operations in these two countries, quote, have tapped out the ground services active and reserve components, unquote, stated June 29, briefing slides prepared for the working group of the Defense Science Board. The Defense Science Board, as my colleagues know, is the group designated to report to the Secretary of Defense on these issues. Quote, we therefore find ourselves without resources for any other campaign at this scale, a prospect not long lost on our adversaries, unquote.

The panel was part of the larger Defense Science Board which is doing a study for the Defense Department on transformation. Further quotation, the requirements U.S. forces face in the global war on terrorism to not only prevail in the traditional combat phase of the military operation and restore stability afterwards, but also to establishing a functioning free economy and robust democracy are significant and expensive. Quote, these new goals, that is to say, establishing the economy and the democracy, these new goals dwarf the complexity cost and scope of achieving victory on the battlefield, unquote.

Now, last summer the incremental additional estimated cost for stabilization and reconstruction in Iraq was estimated at $72 billion according to the Defense Science Board Panel. That was the previous estimation.

Now these costs are likely to be at least $500 billion and perhaps close to $1 trillion, unquote. Total military spending on operations in Afghanistan and Iraq from 2001 through this September 2005 is $252 billion according to Steve Kosiak with the Center For Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Spending on non military aid in these missions at the same time period is $27 billion in addition to the $252 billion.

The Congressional Budget Office in January estimated that between the fiscal year 2006 and 2015, the costs of supporting these operations could total $393 billion.

I never said, of course, that we are going to get any value received for this money. We are going to spend the money, but as the gentleman well knows and I think the record shows that what we are getting for the money is corruption, thievery, failure to significantly alter the infrastructure of Iraq in any significant way.

It does not surprise me in the least that there would be an accord or an attempt at an accord being undertaken between Iraq and Iran. After all, they live in the same neighborhood. We do not. What we are engaged in right now is another one of these false premises that somehow a military in an inherently insurgent situation is going to be able to provide political answers through military activity and subsequently having the military take on the task of helping to provide a civil infrastructure. It cannot be done. It will not be done.

The only victims of that will be the Guard and Reserve and active duty military forces of the United States so that the numbers of wounded, grievously wounded and dead will continue to rise.

Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield on that point, my intention is not to take up time

necessarily on Iraq Watch on the question of H.J. Res. 55, the joint resolution number 55, but that is the tangible substance of the commitment of the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) and others at this point, including myself, to try to put legislation forward that will respond precisely to the commentary that the gentleman from Connecticut found in his West Hartford meeting.

The resolution asks the President to develop and implement a plan for the withdrawal of the United States Armed Forces from Iraq. It makes a reference, the short version of it, joint resolution 55, as Homeward Bound. The principal point here, rather than going over it point by point, the principal point in the context established tonight, and I am referring to one of two findings here, is that the United States has in place a timetable for training, equipping and employing Iraqi security forces to take over the counterinsurgency mission from coalition forces. That is a statement of fact.

Speaking as a member of the Committee on Armed Services, I can say to you in all candor and openness that we do have timetables. We do have timetables. We do have benchmarks. We do have indications and timelines for those indications of what constitutes success, what constitutes a capacity for the counterinsurgency mission to be taken from coalition forces by Iraqi forces of all kinds; from border police to interior ministry, to defense personnel police and armed forces.

In order to explicate that clearly to the American people, this House passed, in overwhelming numbers, an emergency supplemental appropriations for defense, the emergency supplemental appropriations act for defense on the global war on terror and tsunami relief. Public Law 109-13. In that, a joint explanatory statement accompanied the conference report, which required the Secretary of Defense to report not later than July 10.

As we speak, it is now approximately 8:45 p.m. on the East Coast on July 19, some 9 days past the deadline established by the Congress of the United States, passed by Democrats and Republicans in overwhelming numbers. Not with this Member's vote, to be sure. But nonetheless, my position as enunciated then in opposition to it, to the bill, because I felt we were not carrying forward on what we said we were doing, nonetheless the overwhelming majority gave the Secretary of Defense the opportunity to report to us no later than July 10 and every 90 days thereafter on measures for security, political, and economic progress in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, I received a letter from the Secretary of Defense yesterday indicating they were working hard on this report. I have no doubt. But we are already 9 days late. We are already 9 days of more killings, more murders, more terrorism, more grievous wounding, more terrorism worldwide, and yet we do not have this report from the Secretary of Defense.

My plea is that other Members and the audience that may be listening to us tonight take a look at House Joint Resolution 55 that has been developed on a bipartisan basis with one of the leading advocates being the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) and other Members of the Republican Party and Democratic Party as well. This is not an ideological construct, this is not a resolution made to embarrass the President. On the contrary, House Joint Resolution 55 in some respects has been characterized by some as saying what are you doing helping President Bush? We should be in opposition to President Bush, but I feel the politics will take care of itself in time to come. There is no question about that. We can make that point later. This resolution is about backing up our troops now on the mission they have accomplished, and to get the political side, the economic side, the civilian side of this moving forward the way we say it should be.

So we set in this resolution the opportunity for the President to enunciate a plan commensurate with the time tables he has set for the establishment of a government in December, and to move forward with the troops that the Secretary of Defense himself has said are being trained so we can begin to withdraw, bring homeward bound our troops.

So when people inquire of you what is it Congress is doing, we can look at H.J. Res. 55. It is not perfect. It is a legislative project. The only perfect set of rules, the only perfect legislation was the Ten Commandments, and I understand Moses took 40 days to do them. And as he came down the mountain he said, Well, I got them down to 10. That is what the legislative process is. You talk things over.

So House Joint Resolution 55 is not a perfect vehicle, but it is a legislative vehicle to join with the President and make an offer to the President to join with us in the Congress in setting a timetable and plan for the withdrawal of these troops commensurate with the mission as enunciated by everyone.

Mr. Speaker, we do no service to the support of our troops by continuing to have them engage in military activity which undercuts that which they have accomplished to this point.