Condemning postelection violence in Zimbabwe and calling for a peaceful resolution to the current political crisis.

I thank the gentlelady from New York. I rise today to thank Chairman Obey and thank the leadership, Speaker Pelosi, for addressing the question that confronts us in the most strategic way possible. But it is important to note that many of us have opposed consistently a war that continues to go on unbridled and misdirected.

We thank our soldiers. But it's important to note that now some $600 billion has gone to Iraq. We've lost 4,100 soldiers. Instead of having a military surge, we should have a diplomatic surge. We now give $165 million unrestricted to this White House. But I do rise in support of amendment 2 that provides for the GI Bill that acts as a good Samaritan to those who have been unemployed for 13 extra weeks of unemployment, that provides for elimination of six Medicaid provisions that will help restore partially the health care that Americans need. But I believe we should have had provisions in this particular appropriation that would indicate that the dollars should be used to redeploy our troops, thank them and grant them the success that they have had because they are successful.

But we need to bring our troops home. And we need to indicate that the authority for military force has expired. The GI Bill is a ``thank you'' to our soldiers. Let's bring them home safely. And let's provide the investment that it needs. I am grateful that we had the disaster relief for all of those suffering in the Midwest, but that we've not forgotten the Katrina victims and survivors that now are still homeless. It is important, as we move forward, to begin to look at domestic funding.

This is a first start. But we need to have legislation that acknowledges the honor of those who have fallen, declare a military success and allow Iraq to invest. And I am grateful for the two amendments that require Iraq to invest in its own domestic development. This is the time to redeploy our troops.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to Amendment #1, and in strong support of Amendment #2 of the bill H.R. 2642, Making appropriations for military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes. While I am supportive of the portions that contain provisions beneficial to the American people designed to improve our economy and protect

our young men and women, I remain adamantly opposed to this legislation because it continues a disastrous policy of providing unrestricted funding to continue the Bush Administration's war in Iraq.

Amendment #1--Iraq War Funding

Mr. Speaker, I oppose Amendment #1 because I stand with the American taxpayers, who have paid over $600 billion to finance the misadventure in Iraq. I stand with the 4100 fallen heroes who stand even taller in death because they gave the last full measure of devotion to their country. In May, I was proud to vote against amendment #1 to the previous version of the supplemental spending bill that would have provided funds for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, which included a timetable for the redeployment of U.S. troops. I was extremely pleased that the House did not pass this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I must oppose this legislation as it provides a total of $165.4 billion for the Department of Defense for FY 2008 and FY 2009, funds that are handed over without any strings. This legislation does not withhold funding for the Iraq war, a war that so many of my colleagues in Congress oppose, and which only 32 percent of Americans now support. The bill we are considering today does not require that war funds can only be used for the responsible redeployment of American troop's home from Iraq. Instead, it hands the President nearly $163 billion of virtually unrestricted funding, allowing him to continue a war that the American people do not support.

Mr. Speaker, I voted against the 2002 Iraq War Resolution. I am proud of that vote. I have consistently voted against the Administration's practice of submitting a request for war funding through an emergency supplemental rather than the regular appropriations process which would subject the funding request to more rigorous scrutiny and require it to be balanced against other pressing national priorities. I cannot support legislation that provides the President with the resources to prolong his ill-advised war effort unrestrained. As a Member of both the Out of Iraq and the Progressive Caucuses, I am proud to vote for legislation that, like other measures passed by this Congress, begins the process of withdrawing U.S. men and women from Iraq.

The congressional authorization providing for the use of military force in Iraq has expired. The 2002 Resolution authorized the President to:

(1) Defend the national security of the United States

against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council

Resolutions regarding Iraq.

Specifically, the resolution called for the disarming of any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, removal of the rogue Iraqi regime, the capture of any al-Qaeda operatives in Iraq, as well as the promotion of democracy in Iraq. All of these objectives have been met.

Mr. Speaker, our troops have achieved extraordinary military success in Iraq, toppling the regime of Saddam Hussein in only 21 days, assuring the world that Iraq does not possess weapons of mass destruction, assisting the Iraqis in holding free elections, and setting the nation on a path toward democracy. However, while our troops have achieved the objectives for which they were sent to Iraq, they are now caught in the midst of a sectarian conflict. Unfortunately, there is no military solution to Iraq's ongoing political and sectarian conflicts. This is a war without end. Though President Bush continues to rely on a strategy that seeks to stabilize and reconcile Iraq by force, only the Iraqi government can secure a lasting peace. Thus far, the Iraqi government has demonstrated an inability or an unwillingness to deliver on the political benchmarks that they themselves agreed were essential to achieving national reconciliation, which was the rationale and stated objective of the surge.

Amendment #2--Iraq policy provisions

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that Amendment #2 contains two important Iraq policy provisions. This amendment requires that funds spent by the State Department and USAID for Iraqi reconstruction be matched, dollar- for-dollar, by the Iraqi government. In addition, this legislation prohibits military construction funds from being used to establish permanent bases in Iraq.

Like many of my colleagues, I am also concerned that the United States has paid and continues to pay a disproportionate amount for Iraq reconstruction, especially when the Iraqi government reportedly has a $25-30 billion budget surplus this year. I am pleased that this legislation calls on the Iraqi government to share equally in the cost of rebuilding the country. To date the United States has appropriated more than $45 billion for Iraq reconstruction. American-funded reconstruction programs have included the training and equipping of Iraqi security forces.

Iraq is a resource-rich nation. Though still facing problems including a lack of technology, damage from previous mismanagement, the effects of looting, and water intrusion, Iraqi oil production is currently at around 2 million barrels per day. The price of oil has skyrocketed to over $100 a barrel and Iraqi oil exports are generating an estimated $56.4 billion this year alone, according to the GAO, yet it is U.S. taxpayers who continue to foot the bill for Iraqi reconstruction. The government of Iraq is stashing its money in global banks, including a reported $30 billion in the United States, instead of investing this money in the development of crucial Iraqi infrastructure.

I am also extremely concerned about the direction of U.S. policy in Iraq, and the future of U.S. commitments. I am also very worried about the Administration's apparent desire to circumvent congressional approval and oversight in the process of negotiating a long-term agreement with the Iraqi government, as well as the still-open question of the establishment of permanent U.S. bases in Iraq, to which I am strongly opposed. Today's legislation, crucially, continues a prohibition on permanent American military bases in Iraq.

Expanded GI Bill

Mr. Speaker, Amendment #2 of this legislation provides funding for much needed domestic programs and foreign aid. By extending unemployment benefits, expanding veterans' education benefits, and placing a moratorium on the Bush Administrations' six Medicaid regulations, this legislation gets us closer to where the Economic Stimulus package should have taken us. I am particularly pleased that this legislation expands the educations benefits that veterans receive under the GI, providing $50 billion over the next 10 years for veterans' college funding. This legislation restores the promise of a full, four-year college education, and will entitle veterans who enlisted after the Sept. 11 attacks and served three years or more to what amounts to four years of college education at a state university. By passing these provisions, we are making the veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan an integral part of an American economy recovery, much in the same way World War II veterans were incorporated under the original GI bill. I would like to see us go even farther to make an affordable college education a possibility for all those brave men and women who selflessly served our nation in Iraq and Afghanistan. Today's legislation does allow service members to transfer educational benefits to their spouses and dependents.

Extension of unemployment

In addition, Mr. Speaker, this legislation includes a 13-week extension of jobless benefits for long-term unemployed. The number of Americans looking for work has grown by 800,000 over the last year, and the number of American jobs has declined by 260,000 since the beginning of 2008. The extension of unemployment benefits will provide a crucial safety net to American workers who are feeling the strain of the sagging economy.

Emergency funding for the Midwest

This legislation also includes $2.65 billion in much-needed aid for the storm-ravaged American Midwest. Violent storms, bringing tornados and flooding, have been blamed for at least 24 deaths since late May. With damage still not fully assessed, what has been called the worst flooding in the Midwest in 15 years has ruined an estimated 5 million acres of farmland. According to the Army Corps of Engineers, 23 levees along the Mississippi have failed this week alone, and 48 more, which protect over 285,000 acres of cropland, are either overflowing or at high flood risk. Today's legislation provides critical resources to respond to these disasters, which are affecting millions of Americans.

Medicaid

In addition, this legislation also delays most of the destructive Medicaid cuts proposed by this President. The Bush Administration sought to cut services and payments to American families by adding seven different Medicaid regulations to the stimulus. This legislation places a much needed moratorium on six of these regulations, giving back to our seniors, families, and those with disabilities as well as cut payments to safety net providers.

Because I believe that fixing our health care system is one of the most important issues we currently face, I recently introduced the ``Medicare Efficiency and Development of Improvement of Care and Services Act of 2008'' (MEDICS Act), which provides a solution to the Medicare reimbursement problem as well as grows beneficiary access.

My bill increases the number of primary care physicians. It specifically requires that within one year of enactment, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in coordination with the Association of American Medical Colleges shall submit to Congress an effective plan to increase the number of primary care physicians particularly those practicing in counties, cities, or towns ``underserved'' or with a disproportionate number of Medicare-eligible and/or Medicare recipients. In addition, my legislation forces an examination of the disparities in our health system, particularly those based on race, ethnicity, and gender,

and begins the process of eliminating these discrepancies, and making health care an affordable reality for all Americans.

Food aid and disaster assistance

I am also pleased that this legislation provides increased funding for international affairs. This includes $1.865 billion for food aid and disaster assistance, which is $745 million above the President's request. This sum includes $500 million above the President's request for PL480 Food Assistance and $245 million above his request for development assistance and disaster assistance programs meant to alleviate world hunger.

This additional funding comes at a crucial time. As my colleagues are aware, we are facing an international food crisis. According to the International Monetary Fund, IMF, global food prices have increased an average of 43 percent. In fact since March 2007, wheat has increased by 146 percent, soybean has increased by 71 percent, corn by 41 percent, and rice prices have increased by 29 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Sadly, approximately 1 billion people--or one-sixth of the world's population--subsist on less than $1 per day. Of this population, 162 million survive on less than $0.50 per day. Overall, increased food prices particularly affect developing countries, and the poorest people within those countries, where populations spend a larger proportional share of income on basic food commodities. It is simply unacceptable in this day and age that so many children are going hungry. We have millions of dollars to bailout Bear Stearns, let's find that same money to help our families and our children.

Refugee assistance

I am also extremely supportive of the provisions in this legislation that increase funding for refugee assistance. This legislation provides $696 million, a total $475 million above the President's request, to address the ongoing refugee crises in Iraq and elsewhere. This funding comes in the midst of a worldwide surge in the number of refugees, with Iraq and Darfur facing particularly severe crises. Having recently spent time on the ground with refugees living in camps in Darfur and Chad, I am pleased that the figures in this legislation represent the reality of the global refugee situation, and will make important strides toward meeting the needs of the growing number of people displaced by conflict, poverty, disaster, or other extreme circumstances, particularly those in Darfur and in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support amendment #2 to this legislation because it contains vital provisions that will directly benefit the American people. I must oppose amendment #1 because I refuse to support the continuation of a disastrous policy of providing unrestricted funding to continue the Bush administration's war in Iraq. It is pure fantasy to imagine that President Bush's military surge has created the necessary safety and security to meet economic, legislative, and security benchmarks. It is time for a new strategy, a new plan that will encourage Iraqis to take charge of their own destiny, seek constructive and sustained regional engagement, and substitute the ill- advised military surge for a thoughtful diplomatic one. It is time to be realistic and pragmatic, to recognize that our troops achieved what they were initially sent in for and that continued U.S. military engagement is not bringing about the desired results.

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

(Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I want to begin for the second time today by expressing my great appreciation to my very good friend and colleague, the distinguished Chair of the Committee on Rules, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, it was interestingly enough on February 5 of 2007, February 5 of 2007, which is exactly 500 days ago--500 days ago President Bush made a request of this Congress to provide supplemental funding for our troops to ensure that they have all the tools necessary to prosecute these struggles going on in both Iraq and Afghanistan, 500 days, a long period of time. But Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that I believe that we've finally gotten there.

As I listened carefully to the statement of my good friend from Rochester, the distinguished Chair of the Committee on Rules, I have to say that I completely concurred with the first third of her statement in which she went through a very accurate description of exactly what this supplemental appropriations bill consists of. I could not disagree with her more on the second third of her presentation, and on the last part, I have sort of a mixed view.

When it comes to the first third, I will say that, again, I completely concur. This measure is designed to ensure that we get to our men and women in uniform the tools that they need, the resources that they need to continue this struggle. It ensures that the request and the directive by Admiral Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, raising very serious concern about the prospect of not being able to have the resources necessary is addressed.

She also in her remarks talked about the need to deal with the economic challenges that we face, and I completely concur. When we saw the largest increase in the unemployment rate in 22 years, a half a percent increase in the unemployment rate, it's clear that we want to ensure that those Americans who are very much in need are going to be able to have their concerns addressed by providing with that 20-work week requirement, which we've gone back to and which we supported in the early part of this decade in 2001 and 2002, that that requirement will

continue to be in place. So I wholeheartedly support that effort for the 13-week extension.

And she also talked about the need to ensure that we provide the resources for the veterans. For those men and women who have been engaged in this struggle and have come home, it is absolutely crucial that we do everything that we can to provide those very important resources for those brave and courageous men and women who have served in our Armed Forces.

Now, Mr. Speaker, when it came as I said to the second third of Ms. Slaughter's presentation, I could not disagree more vigorously. She referred to the term ``political progress'' as being one of posturing. Well, I've got to say if we look at the independent assessments that have been provided by even some of the most harsh critics, some of the harshest critics of this war, there has been acknowledgment that this surge has worked.

All one needs to do is this week look at lead articles in both the Washington Post, hardly an entity that has been sympathetic with this effort, and the Associated Press. Both of those entities have strongly come forward and pointed to the tremendous progress that has been made not only, not only militarily but the political progress which has been made as well.

And so I have to say, Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleagues who have worked in a bipartisan way. I see Mr. Obey here. He just testified before the Committee on Rules and talked about his concerns, and he talked about the need to make sure that we move forward.

Our Republican leader, Mr. Boehner, has also worked very, very diligently on this, and I have to say it's interesting as we mark today the 500th day since the President made this request for supplemental funding for our troops, it's fascinating that this all came together within what is just about a maybe 28-, 29-, 30-hour period of time.

So I think that it's important for us to get this done. It's important for us to address these concerns which include the much- needed relief to those victims of the floods in the Midwest and the strengthening of the levees following Hurricane Katrina, and I believe that we have a wonderful indication of bipartisanship at its best here.

I am very pleased to finally take up a Rule for a Supplemental Appropriations bill that is based on bipartisan compromise that gets our troops the funding they need. And most important, it is a bill that the President can actually sign. I just wish we could have done this months ago.

Mr. Speaker, the request for supplemental funding for our troops came to us on February 5th of 2007--exactly 500 days ago. Since that time, we have heard hours of testimony from our military commanders, warning us in clear terms of the strains on our troops from the failure to fund them. For months, we have heard of impending layoffs of military contract employees. Of vital programs getting cut off or put on hold. The message was very clear: our armed forces in harm's way needed emergency funding in order to effectively continue their jobs.

But what did they get from the Democratic Leadership? Endless political posturing. Funding bills that were purely political documents, with no hope of being enacted. I find it very troubling that this partisan process could drag on for so long.

I find it very troubling that it took so long before there was an attempt at bipartisan negotiation to craft a good bill that provides for our troops and will be enacted into law.

After months of posturing, once the Democratic Majority finally reached across the aisle so that real progress could be made--how long did it take to reach a workable compromise? Mere hours. Once the dialogue began, Republicans and Democrats quickly came to a solution--a bill that funds our troops, while also addressing other priorities in a responsible way.

Today's underlying bill fully funds our armed forces. It will provide a new education benefit to veterans, without raising taxes. And it will extend unemployment insurance in these uncertain economic times, without eliminating key provisions to prevent fraud and abuse. This is a compromise that Republicans and Democrats can support, fulfilling our duty to the men and women who are in harm's way. This is a duty that we as a body must take far more seriously than the last few months have demonstrated.

When we are bogged down by the Democratic Majority's political gamesmanship, there are real-world consequences to these actions--or lack of action.

As we have heard from our military commanders over the past weeks and months exactly what these consequences are, one of the most troubling revelations came just last week. Adm. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified that our commanders had run out of funds to pay for development projects in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is perhaps the most perverse outcome of the Democratic Leadership's failure to fund our troops.

Regardless of where you stand on the war, we all know and agree that the fight against extremism demands more than a purely military solution. Our armed forces are working to provide a security environment that allows for development to take place--and they are succeeding. But if we squander this opportunity, we will never succeed in the long term. We will fail to win hearts and minds, and we will fail to provide an alternative to terror and extremism.

The people of Iraq and Afghanistan need to see that our fight is not against them. They need to see that we support democratic institutions and the good governance that ensures peace, liberty and opportunity. Without our development efforts, our military efforts can have no hope for sustainable success. By stonewalling the troops' funding, the Democratic Leadership not only shortchanges our troops, they are blocking our efforts to assist in the development of the foundation for lasting peace.

This is an unconscionable policy. Especially at the very time that the seeds of reconciliation are starting to take root. For months we have known that the surge has succeeded in reducing violence. Even the war's harshest critics have begrudgingly conceded that violence has been significantly reduced. But they called it an empty victory, saying that the improved security situation has failed to bring about political progress.

But today, that is changing. Monday's lead AP story was ``Iraqi violence down, confidence in government up.''

Tuesday's Washington Post announced ``Calm in Iraq Spurs Debate; Decline in Violence, Focus on Politics May Signal Turning Point.'' These are stories not just of reduced violence. They tell of the political reconciliation and progress that is now being made possible by the increased security. Iraqis are gaining faith in the Maliki government. And minority Sunni parliamentarians are heartened that a Shiite government would go after Shiite terrorists with the same zeal they go after Sunni terrorists.

Of course, this progress is fragile. Tuesday's terrible attack in Baghdad reminded us that while violence is diminishing overall, the danger of large-scale attacks remains very real. Furthermore, the political progress is still in its infancy. The Post story goes on to say ``analysts question whether the limited political accommodation among Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds can be sustained if the U.S. withdraws its forces quickly.'' It points out that Iran would love to fill any void that we create, and that Iraqis fear today's calm is simply the calm before the storm. Clearly, our mission is not complete.

But demonstrable progress is being made. After years of terrible violence, setbacks and enormous challenges, many of us have become desensitized to any signs of progress and improvement. But they are there. The tragic part is that any delay in providing critical funding puts this fragile progress in jeopardy. Today's underlying bill is urgently needed. While I am deeply sorry it has taken this long, I am truly pleased to finally have a bipartisan bill that will deliver our troops the vital resources they need.

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

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I'm very happy to yield 3 minutes to my thoughtful and diligent colleague from Irvine, California (Mr. Campbell).

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I'm happy to yield 2 minutes to my friend from Monticello, Florida (Mr. Boyd).

Mr. Speaker, I'm happy to yield my friend an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I am happy to yield 4 minutes to our very thoughtful and hardworking colleague from Columbus, Indiana, an area that has been victimized by the floods and will be assisted in this package that is coming forward, Mr. Pence.

(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I'm happy to yield my friend 1 additional minute.

I'm happy to yield 2 minutes to my very good friend from Brooksville, Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite).

At this time, I am very happy to yield to one of our top experts on Veterans Affairs, the distinguished ranking member of the Appropriations subcommittee that deals with this issue, my friend from Chattanooga (Mr. Wamp).

Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 3 minutes to a hardworking member of the Committee on Appropriations, my friend from Ames, Iowa (Mr. Latham).

I am happy to yield my friend an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, at this juncture I would like to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds, and I do so to simply congratulate my friend on his very thoughtful statement. The fact that we have been able to come together in a bipartisan way to ensure that the Sean Walshes and the other men and women in uniform who have sacrificed for this country are going to have what they are due is, I believe, a great testament to what we are doing in this House.

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

Mr. Speaker, it was February 5, 2007, February 5, 2007, exactly 500 days ago, that President Bush made a request for supplemental funding for our men and women in uniform to ensure that they have the resources necessary to successfully prosecute this war. That is what we are here doing this evening now.

We are here because we have actually seen, based on reports that have come from some of the harshest critics of this war, that we are making progress. All one needs to do is look at the Washington Post the day before yesterday, the Associated Press story that has been referred to by a number of my colleagues. Time and time again we hear of the success that is being made in our effort to ensure that we are able to continue to enjoy our freedoms and that we have a world that has a greater degree of stability. Only the United States of America, only the United States of America, is in a position to do this.

Sacrifice has been made. Time and time again our colleagues have talked about the number of lives that have been lost.

As I listened to my friend from Chicago (Mr. Emanuel), he was referring to one of his constituents, I was immediately reminded of one of my constituents whom I refer to on a pretty regular basis here.

It was in the battle of Fallujah in November of 2004 that J.P. Blecksmith tragically was killed. His father, who was a former Marine from San Marino, California, has, on repeated occasions, to me said if we don't complete our mission, my son, J.P., will have died in vain.

War is an ugly thing, but it's not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war is worse. Those were the words of a very, very famous writer who wrote them following the Civil War. We are in the midst of a painful struggle.

But on this issue, I am very happy that we have been able to come together in a bipartisan way to deal with this. I congratulate my colleagues, Messrs. Obey and Lewis, for working together on this, and Mr. Boehner, who has provided great leadership in this effort.

We need to ensure that our men and women in uniform not only have everything that they need to successfully prosecute this war, but we also need to make sure that they have the tools necessary as they come back into our society. We have for years seen great warriors come back to the United States of America and work to make their country an even better place, and I believe that the provisions that we provide in here with these GI benefits will go a long way towards doing that.

The American people are hurting. We saw, as has been repeatedly said, the largest increase in 22 years in the unemployment rate, going up a half a percent. That's why, again, we have come in a bipartisan way to ensure that those who are truly in need, those who through no fault of their own, have lost their jobs, are able to see an extension in their unemployment benefits.

Again, I think that what we are going to be doing here in the next few minutes is we are going to be casting a bipartisan vote which will be done in the spirit of what the American people want us to do, and that is to get things done, deal with very, very important issues and problems that we face.

I urge my colleagues to support this rule and to support the underlying legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.

I will say that I never said anything about ``affording.'' I said that only the United States of America can do this job of ensuring this struggle for freedom around the world.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1284 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

I yield myself such time as I may consume and also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1284.

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 1284 provides for consideration of the Senate amendments to the House amendments to the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 2642, Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2008. The rule makes in order a motion by the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations that the House, one, concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment numbered 1, and two, concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment numbered 2, with the amendment printed in the Rules Committee report.

The motion is debatable for 1 hour and controlled by the Committee on Appropriations, and the Chair shall divide the question between the dispositions of the two Senate amendments.

Mr. Speaker, the issue to be debated today could not be of greater consequence to the future of our Nation or the citizens of this body and all of this country. For that reason, the Rules Committee has reported out a rule that gives each Member the opportunity to vote his/ her conscience on the most pressing issue of our day: funding for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as critical domestic spending to bring relief to the American people and provide our veterans with access to higher education.

This legislation meets the spending requirements made by President Bush

with the exception of the $2.65 billion in disaster relief for the aftermath of the tornadoes and floods that hit the Midwest which was added at the President's request.

In addition, the bill includes the $5.8 billion that President Bush asked for to strengthen the levees in New Orleans and does not include a single earmark except those explicitly requested by his administration.

Mr. Speaker, in order to bring the legislation forward today, the Democrat majority had to make very difficult decisions. However, making difficult choices is appropriate when deciding issues of great importance such as the war in Iraq, a war that has placed unprecedented strain on this Nation.

At no time in our history has America fought a war of this magnitude, or one that is this difficult, with an entirely voluntary military force composed of only 1 percent of the general population. And no one in this country has been asked to sacrifice as our troops and their families have.

Our soldiers are well aware of what the current situation means for them, two, three, four, sometimes five deployments of duty, while their political leaders casually use words like ``political progress'' to justify their redeployment.

However, these extraordinary individuals know full well that they return again and again to a conflict that has taken the lives of over 4,000, almost 5,000 now, of their fellow soldiers and 28 from my district alone.

They know that tens of thousands of American men and women are returning home wounded and physically disabled, many suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and a host of other mental health issues.

They know full well that they are redeployed to a civil war that has left millions of Iraqi men, women and children dead and millions more in refugee camps or fleeing to other countries that will accept them.

Our soldiers already know quite a lot, and by that I mean, they've come to learn that terms like ``political progress'' are little more than political posturing and empty rhetoric, and that is not how a Nation shows respect for its military.

Unfortunately, such disrespect is what our brave men and women in uniform are accustomed to. Our troops were repeatedly promised that they would have the equipment they needed to do their jobs. Yet we all saw the reports of desperate searches through junk heaps to refit ill- equipped armored vehicles. We all heard the stories of struggling families frantically emptying their savings accounts to purchase adequate body armor for their children going off to war.

Our troops were repeatedly promised that they would be taken care of when they came home from combat. Yet once again this administration's promises turned out to be nothing more than rhetoric. Remember the disgraceful images of Walter Reed Hospital, and that is not how a grateful Nation shows respect for its troops.

Mr. Speaker, it is with this in mind that we proceed today with this legislation. While some pieces of this bill required difficult decisions before it could be brought to the floor, others were easy to make.

The bill provides immediate resources to our troops currently in the field, and nothing is more important than their safety and security. And in addition, the bill keeps our promises to our veterans.

Part of the cost of waging war is ensuring that those who fight receive the resources that they need to resume their lives when they return home. Given all the sacrifices that our troops have made for this Nation, it is simply unconscionable to nickel and dime them when it comes time for us to keep up our end of the bargain.

The underlying legislation includes a dramatic expansion of the education benefits provided to our veterans. Not only do our troops deserve this benefit, the same one provided to veterans of World War II, but for every dollar we spend on education today, we will see a return that will bolster our economy tomorrow. And frankly, our economy needs bolstering.

Far too many hardworking Americans are feeling enormous pressure with skyrocketing gas and food prices, unaffordable health care costs, rising college tuition rates, home foreclosures that are far too commonplace, and a terrible job market.

Last month's atrocious unemployment numbers highlight the urgent need for assistance to millions of struggling families calling out for relief. In fact, the number of Americans looking for work has grown by 800,000 over the last year, and the number of American jobs has declined by 260,000 since the beginning of 2008.

This bill takes immediate action to extend unemployment insurance for workers who have exhausted their benefits by up to 13 weeks in every State.

Furthermore, the American people are feeling the pain as their hard- earned tax dollars finance the rebuilding of a foreign Nation while their country's own economy and infrastructure are falling apart at the seams. To that end, this legislation removes the unfair burden placed on the American taxpayer by requiring the Iraqi government to pull its own weight and match U.S. reconstruction money dollar-for-dollar.

In addition, it prohibits, once again--and we have to look out for those signing statements--but it prohibits once more the establishment of permanent bases in Iraq, blocking this administration from saddling the American people with a costly occupation long after their soldiers are home.

Mr. Speaker, the underlying legislation deals with some of the most important issues of the day, our fellow citizens who have been sent to fight in a conflict far away from home, as well as critical domestic spending that will give relief to the millions of Americans struggling just to survive.

The structure of the rule we consider today provides each Member the opportunity to cast his or her vote according to their values and their priorities. I am proud to support the rule, and I ask my colleagues to do the same.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I'm happy to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts, a member of the Rules Committee, Mr. McGovern.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).

(Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

And, Mr. Speaker, let me add an additional minute to that.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, a member of the Appropriations Committee, Mr. Edwards.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Braley).

(Mr. BRALEY of Iowa asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 additional seconds to the gentlewoman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis).

Mr. Speaker, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

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

Mr. Speaker, I just want to make one brief remark and that is in answer to what my dear friend and colleague Mr. Dreier said about only the United States of America could afford this war. I'm not sure what kind of bookkeeping allows him to say that. Obviously the fact we are in such extraordinary debt, as one speaker on your side already pointed out today, this is an unprecedented debt. In the history of the Republic we have never been so far in debt and to say that we can afford to continue to do this, not just in money, not just in treasure, but what we are losing in lives and young people whose lives will never be the same because of the life-threatening wounds that they are bringing home.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

If I may reclaim my time, I think doing this job probably says we can give enough soldiers to die or to be maimed and that we have the money to pay for it. At least that would be my interpretation of what you had said.

I urge my colleagues to vote for the rule and for this bill and I hope a ``no'' vote when we get to final passage on amendment 1.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1230) condemning postelection violence in Zimbabwe and calling for a peaceful resolution to the current political crisis, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution and yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, let me begin by expressing my appreciation to the unanimous support of the Congressional Black Caucus, all 21 other Members, who have joined as original cosponsors to this resolution condemning post-election violence in Zimbabwe and calling for a peaceful resolution to the current political crisis.

Madam Speaker, assertive U.S. diplomatic engagement has contributed to conflict resolution in many African countries, especially over the past decade. Zimbabwe is one of the few exceptions, unfortunately. While many African countries moved to embrace democracy and rule of law, the dictatorship in Zimbabwe has taken the once promising country to a state of anarchy and haplessness.

President Robert Mugabe has been in power in the country since it got its independence in 1980, along with Joshua Nkomo, one of the great freedom fighters. The two joined in building Zimbabwe in its early days. Great strides were made, especially in education, and Zimbabwe became a leader in that area throughout Africa.

The country began to progress during those early days; however, when multiparty elections were introduced, the Mugabe regime began to lose its prominence. The Movement for Democratic Change, MDC, became an alternative to ZANU-PF.

In reaction to the winds of democracy, the Mugabe regime cracked down on the opposition party and thwarted democracy. The people of Zimbabwe have suffered since that time under the brutal dictatorship of the Mugabe regime.

The recent elections in Zimbabwe in March were a clear signal by the people of Zimbabwe that they wanted real change. Yet, Mr. Mugabe once again is in the process of crushing the democratic aspiration of the people of that country.

Instead of stepping aside, his regime has been engaged in a brutal crackdown against opposition elements. Dozens of people have been killed, and leaders of the opposition have been imprisoned.

The international community has done very little to help bring about change in Zimbabwe. We should not allow one dictator to ruin the way of life for millions of innocent civilians. Enough is enough.

The 1990s saw the spread of democracy across the continent of Africa, once dominated by military dictators and authoritarian leaders. The ghastly civil wars in Sierra Leone and Liberia have finally come to an end. Cote d'Ivoire now is moving in the right direction.

The DRC crisis, which erupted in 1998 and threatened to disintegrate the entire subcontinent, actually ended after a long and dedicated effort by African leaders that came up with a solution to that war of many countries in the DRC. In 2006, the Democratic Republic of Congo held its first democratic elections in years. Yet Zimbabwe still suffers from a brutal dictatorship.

The African Union, despite limited resources and capacity to deploy peacekeepers to a number of countries, have done so in several instances without delay. The African Union deployed an African mission to Burundi back in May of 2003 after an agreement was signed in order to support a cease-fire accord and to ensure implementation of the agreement. Troops have been deployed to Sudan in the north-south dispute and even to the Darfur region. Actually, in Somalia, Ugandan peacekeepers are there under the auspices of the A.U., even though there is a controversial intrusion of Ethiopian troops. Yet the A.U. has not been as vocal as many believe it should have been in the support of the suffering people of Zimbabwe. African leaders must speak out.

Prime Minister Odinga of Kenya, a long-time democracy advocate, said it right. He recently stated, ``It is sad that many African heads of state have remained quiet when disaster is looming in Zimbabwe.'' We must act now to end the suffering. We must do what we can to protect and support the people of Zimbabwe.

My resolution, H. Res. 1230, calls for an immediate end to the violence, harassment and destruction that is ongoing in Zimbabwe at the expense of a once vibrant population.

It calls on the government of Zimbabwe to create an environment conducive to a peaceful transition.

It encourages the political parties to commit to forming a government that reflects the will of the Zimbabwean people and promotes national unity, the restoration of the rule of law, and genuine democracy.

It advocates a mechanism such as a Truth and Reconciliation Commission through which to ensure accountability of all groups and individuals who are found to have orchestrated or committed a human rights violation in the context of the election.

It urges the United Nations, A.U. and SADC to dispatch special envoys to Zimbabwe without delay, with a mandate to monitor the run-off elections and to come up with a peaceful resolution to the problem.

It urges the international community, under the leadership of the U.N., A.U., SADC and the SADC Parliamentary Forum to deploy teams of credible persons to serve as monitors to ensure that the outcome of the presidential run-off elections reflects the will of the Zimbabwean people.

We conclude by commending the people of Zimbabwe for their continued courage in the face of systematic prosecution and intimidation and abuse, and commit to providing continued humanitarian assistance until the economic crisis is resolved.

It commends the actions being taken by activists, civil society, churches, people who are in support of human rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe, and we stand in solidarity with the people of Zimbabwe.

I urge my colleagues to support the resolution and support this peaceful reconciliation, national healing, and let's restore democracy to Zimbabwe and lead this country back to the greatness that it once had.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve my time.

Madam Speaker, let me express my appreciation to the ranking member of the Africa Subcommittee, Mr. Smith from New Jersey, for all the good work that he continues to do in the human rights area, and to the former Chair of the Africa subcommittee, Mr. Royce, who continues to maintain a very strong interest in the continent.

We owe it to the people of Zimbabwe. The inflation rate is over 165,000 percent, worst in the world, almost impossible to calculate. Several weeks ago, Mr. Mugabe expelled the remaining international humanitarian aid groups from his country, therefore making it even worse for his people. And so we must see a change.

With that, Madam Speaker, I urge passage of H. Res. 1230 and urge my colleagues to support it.

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

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and in support of most of this bill, and certainly appreciate the spirit with which it has come together.

I certainly strongly support the military funding portion of the Iraq/Afghanistan supplemental appropriations bill. It will speed roughly $165 billion in emergency funds to our men and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it will do so without imposing artificial timelines and timetables for withdrawal.

Far away from Washington D.C., our brave troops are focused on doing the job we've asked them to do, continuing our progress in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Earlier this week, the headline of the Indianapolis Star, the leading newspaper in my home State, simply read, ``Iraq May Have Reached Turning Point.'' In a national Associated Press story the following words were written, ``Signs are emerging that Iraq has reached a turning point. Violence is down, armed extremists are in disarray, government confidence is rising, and sectarian communities are gearing up for a battle at the polls rather than slaughter in the streets.''

Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve to know that these headlines would not be possible if most Democrats in Congress had had their way, if they had passed any of the measures over the last year and a half that are brought to this floor again and again which would have cut off funding to our troops and facilitated a retreat and defeat from Iraq. And these headlines would not be possible if Republicans in Congress had not stood with our soldiers in the field, stood with our Commander in Chief, supported the new strategy and the new tactics that have brought about what the Associated Press describes as ``a turning point in Iraq.''

And so I strongly support the military supplemental funding in this bill. And I commend the leadership, most especially my colleagues who have stood with our soldiers and our Commander in Chief, for bringing this clean bill to the floor.

Also, Mr. Speaker, I was heartened, as the gentleman from California just alluded, the ranking member, that after weeks of some of the most devastating weather in Indiana history, that this legislation will include $2.65 billion in disaster relief funding to ensure that critical resources are available to respond to the tornados and flooding across the Midwest.

I've spent a great deal of my time with Hoosiers that are hurting. And my heart goes out to families across the Midwest and to those government agencies that are responding with such effectiveness. But I must say that in this emergency military spending bill, when we fund these emergencies, be they at home or abroad, we still need to do so in a fiscally responsible manner.

I've said before and will say again that we must ensure that a catastrophe of nature does not become a catastrophe of debt for our children and grandchildren. I support this funding for true emergencies. But I still believe, as others have said before, that it should be offset by reductions in other government spending.

And let me say emphatically, military emergency funding bills ought to be about military funding and emergencies. Our war funding is emergency military spending. The GI Bill improvements in this bill are meritorious and military. Flooding in the Midwest is an emergency. But I say with respect, what does $178 million for the Bureau of Prisons have to do with military or emergencies? What is $210 million for the Census or $400 million for scientific research doing in an emergency military funding bill?

I support this expansion of the GI Bill. I support funding FEMA during a

time of crisis. And I certainly support our troops.

I believe, as we go forward with the spending bill, the American people deserve to know where credit is deserved, to those who have stood in this body for a clean war funding bill, stood by our troops, stood by the surge, and they also deserve to know that despite all the promises to the contrary about putting our fiscal house in order that here we are again with a massive amount of increased domestic spending, with nary a thought of how we're going to pay for it, passing the burden along to future generations of Americans.

So I will not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I will support this bill, because on balance I believe it funds urgent national needs in various respects. But I rise, as others have before, to say that emergency funding bills for the military ought to be about military funding and emergencies. And supporting those aspects of this bill will bring me to the floor and to an ``aye'' vote today.