Disapproving of any formal agreement emerging from the "Declaration of Principles for a Long-Term Relationship of Cooperation and Friendship Between the Republic of Iraq and the United States of America" unless the agreement is approved through an Act of Congress.

Madam Speaker, I come to the floor this evening to join Congresswoman Woolsey in her 250th special order on the ongoing quagmire in Iraq. I just want to take a moment to commend Congresswoman Woolsey and thank her for her leadership and her commitment to ending this occupation of Iraq and bringing our troops home. It was her resolution several years ago that we were able to begin, actually, the debate on this floor with regard to bringing our young men and women home. So I do have to salute you, Congresswoman Woolsey, and thank you again very much for your commitment and your tenacity and your willingness to be a voice that is so desperately needed to be heard.

Madam Speaker, it's really, though, unfortunate that Congresswoman Woolsey, myself, Congresswoman Waters, and all of our colleagues have to come even once to this floor and speak out against the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq. But the reality is, we are in Iraq. And the reality is, also, that the cost of our invasion and the subsequent occupation of Iraq have been very high.

As of February 10, 2008, according to the Defense Department, 3,955 of our brave young men and women have given their lives, nearly 30,000 United States troops have been injured, and countless thousands of Iraqis have been killed. We've committed a half trillion dollars and gotten what in return? We are still occupying a country which has undermined our standing and credibility in the world, what we have done as it relates to our occupation of Iraq.

And so we have an opportunity once again to talk about why we do not believe funding the President or giving the President another blank check for waging war in Iraq makes any sense. We have the opportunity to turn this around in the coming war supplemental, which I understand may be once again before us next month. We must insist that the only funds that the President should get should be to protect our troops on the ground and bring them back home safely, not one more dime to continue the occupation, nor one more dime to continue the combat that is taking place in Iraq. And of course we call that, and it is better known as a fully funded redeployment.

Equally as important, when our troops come home, we must ensure that they all come home. And that's why we continue to work with our colleagues to include provisions to prohibit permanent military bases in Iraq. We have been successful, in a bipartisan fashion, in including language in a number of authorizing and appropriation bills, as well as a stand-alone bill, H.R. 2929, which passed the House in July of 2007 by an overwhelming bipartisan vote.

In spite of the fact that the President has signed these provisions into law, I believe it's six times since 2006, he issued a statement as he signed the fiscal year 2008 Department of Defense authorization bill signaling his intention to ignore the provisions banning permanent military bases, to ignore that provision. Sadly, unfortunately, this is a pattern coming from the White House that really does seem intent on cutting Congress out of any decisions relating to the permanent stationing of the United States military in Iraq.

At the end of last year, without formal congressional input, this declaration of principles for a long-term relationship of cooperation and friendship between the Republic of Iraq and the United States of America was discussed between Prime Minister Maliki and President Bush. Now these ``principles'' will set the stage for future agreements on the disposition of United States troops in Iraq. To make certain that this does not end up being a backdoor way to keep our troops in Iraq indefinitely, which of course many of us are worried about, I recently introduced H.R. 5128, which will require that any formal agreement emerging from this declaration of principles has the approval of both the House and the Senate. Further, it states a sense of Congress that the Iraqi Parliament should put their seal of approval on any agreement as well, which just makes sense.

Finally, it will prohibit funding for any agreement that may emerge from these principles that does not have the approval of the House and the Senate.

There's no denying that a majority of the American people are with us. A recent CNN Opinion Research Corporation poll has found that nearly two-thirds of all Americans oppose the occupation of Iraq.

Madam Speaker, we need to end this occupation and bring our troops home as safely and as quickly as possible. And it is because of the courage and fortitude of Members such as Congresswomen Woolsey and Waters, who come to this floor each and every day. When the history of this period is written, historians will look back and say that there were some who opposed this and wanted it to end and end quickly.