Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, yesterday in debate over H.R. 2417, the intelligence bill, the chairman of the committee refused to commit to an Intelligence Committee audit of all telephone and electronic communications between the Central Intelligence Agency and the Vice President to determine whether or not the Vice President influenced intelligence produced by the CIA on Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, the cause of war. First, the chairman said the material may be classified and, second, working documents of the executive are respected and privileged. Some Members want the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to have jurisdiction over the issue which top committee members clearly do not want to investigate. If an executive official pressured or manipulated CIA analysts to disseminate false, raw, unreliable information to justify a war, that matter should be neither classified nor shielded nor privileged. My amendment to the intelligence bill would direct the Inspector General of the CIA to audit all electronic communications between the Office of the Vice President and CIA to get to the bottom of numerous public reports which raise questions as to whether or not the Vice President played a role in making false information to become the public reason the President went to war in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, everyone in America knows the price of drugs is too high. Seniors know it best. Proponents of H.R. 1 are not representing the seniors of America. They represent the biggest campaign contributors in America, the private health insurance industry led by drug makers.

The Rangel-Dingell substitute will bring down the cost of the drugs. It allows Medicare to buy drugs in bulk and negotiate for lower prices, which the VA already does. Skyrocketing drug costs are not only driving up health care expenses but are causing seniors to make cruel choices between prescriptions and food, prescriptions and clothing. Some seniors are even splitting pills to make prescriptions last.

Seniors are crying out for help, but their pleas are drowned out by the cash registers humming away at the majority party headquarters, while insurance and pharmaceutical company lobbyists rush to the great Medicare sell-out event.

Yes, some of our friends are indeed trying to take care of people in their old age. Themselves.

Mr. Speaker, today the House will consider an amendment to H.R. 2417 which will direct the Inspector General of the Central Intelligence Agency to conduct an audit of all telephone records and electronic communications between the CIA and the Office of the Vice President that relate to so-called weapons of mass destruction obtained or developed by Iraq preceding Operation Iraqi Freedom. I have introduced this amendment to obtain the Vice President's records in response to a June 5 article in the Washington Post which reported that the Vice President made multiple visits to the CIA by which some analysts felt pressured to make their assessments on Iraq fit with Bush administration policy objectives.

This administration has repeatedly claimed they had evidence which proved that Iraq had vast stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction that posed an imminent threat to the United States. Americans remember that this administration cited their evidence of Iraq's weapons as reason to go to war.

It has been over 3 months since the start of the war. No such weapons have been found. Has there been a massive intelligence failure on the part of all our intelligence agencies? Or has this administration deliberately misled this Nation to war? Either way, there needs to be an investigation.

My amendment would uncover the role the Vice President may have played to achieve a political translation of CIA intelligence about alleged stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in order to suit the Bush administration's campaign to push this country to war.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, we now know that there were not vast stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when the U.S. invaded and that, therefore, Iraq did not pose an imminent threat to the United States, as the administration claimed before the war.

The question remaining is whether the administration compelled the Central Intelligence Agency to release raw, undisseminated information they knew to be unreliable because it helped support the worst case scenario concerning Iraq's weapons program and, therefore, helped make the case, an erroneous case it turns out, that Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United States.

The administration has made numerous assertions. The President in his State of the Union said, The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production.

Number one, the claim about uranium from Africa was forged. Number two, the aluminum tubes were not suitable for a nuclear enrichment program. These assertions made by the President in his State of the Union to justify an immediate war with Iraq were false.

Did the Vice President play a role in making false information become the public reason the President went to war in Iraq? The Vice President, as reported in the Washington Post of June 5, 2003, Vice President Cheney and his most senior aide made multiple trips to the CIA over the past year to question analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which some analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives. That is from the Washington Post on June 5, 2003.

Number two, the Vice President knew or should have known that documents purporting to show that Iraq had bought uranium from Niger were forged. On March 7, the IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei reported the following to the U.N. Security Council: These documents which form the basis for reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger are, in fact, not authentic. We have, therefore, concluded that these specific allegations are unfounded. We have found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq.

It turns out that the forgeries were crude. Anyone with an Internet search engine could determine that these documents were forgeries. Yet on March 16, nine days afterwards, the Vice President repeated the falsehood on national television. He said, We believe, and he was talking about Hussein, has in fact reconstituted nuclear weapons.

The Vice President knew 1 year earlier, it appears, that the documents were forgeries and, therefore, the allegations false. According to the New York Times of May 6, 2003, More than a year ago the Vice President's office asked for an investigation of the uranium deal. So a former U.S. ambassador to Africa was dispatched to Niger. In February 2002, according to someone present at the meetings, that envoy reported to the CIA and the State Department that the information was unequivocally wrong and that the documents had been forged.

So public reports indicate the Vice President made assertions which were unreliable, and the Vice President visited the CIA, making analysts there feel, according to the Washington Post, that a certain output was desired from here.

In summary, what this amendment seeks to do is to probe what role the Vice President played in causing the CIA to disseminate unreliable, raw, previously undisseminated, untrue information about Iraq's alleged threat to the United States.

Specifically, this amendment would direct the Inspector General of the Central Intelligence Agency to audit all electronic and telephone communications between the Office of the Vice President and the CIA which would answer the question about how extensive the visits by the Vice President to the CIA were.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I want to point out for clarification purposes, and I thank the gentleman for yielding, that the result of this amendment would be both a count of the number of communications and an inventory of the substance of the communications. The count would establish the number of times the Vice President took the unusual step of traveling to the CIA to meet directly with CIA analysts and the inventory would establish the nature of those visits.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Chairman, just to point out to the gentlewoman that I think it would be helpful if the committee supported the amendment because, at worst, if the amendment would be repeating the work of the committee, if it would be essentially redundant, then it could not hurt, and I would also want to point out that the gentlewoman is correct.

I mean, this amendment is narrowly focused, and it is aiming specifically at obtaining information relative to the relationship between the Vice President and the CIA. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. Under the gentleman's logic, there would be no reason at all for any amendments to be offered from this floor. We might as well dispense with the amendment process and move to a system in which the committees of Congress report bills for a simple up or down vote from the whole House. So we might as well extend the suspension calendar for all bills.

Well, Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for continuing to yield, and I would say that, first of all, the idea that it is the committee's jurisdiction and, therefore, should be left to the committee, I do not believe the gentleman is seriously proposing what I think is an absurdity, but the argument rests on the same absurd logic. All Members of the Congress have the privilege to offer amendments, and if a majority of the House agrees with the amendment, it passes. However, I do not believe it is legitimate or logical against my amendment to say that the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence should enjoy an exemption from the amendment process.

Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I would ask that the gentleman not take offense. This is certainly, I would hope the gentleman would agree, a salient issue of interest to the American people and that the public does have a right to know, and there have been published statements that provide contradictory information relative to what is really a question of a singular cause of war. So I respect the gentleman's right to make these statements, and I would ask the gentleman to respect my right as a Member of Congress to offer this amendment.

Reserving the right to object, I would be happy to grant the gentleman an additional 2 minutes if he would be happy to return the favor to me.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent for an additional 2 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I want to say to my friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood), that I would hope the gentleman would appreciate receiving clear direction for an inquiry. I can only assume that the gentleman does not want the direction of the whole Congress to get to the bottom of the Vice President's role.

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I would just tell the gentleman that as a member of the Committee on Government Reform I certainly appreciate the role of government oversight, and I certainly appreciate the role of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence as well. I would say that if the gentleman did not want to get to the bottom of the role of the Vice President, which has been a matter of public contest and controversy long before I have spoken here, that would indeed be a reason to oppose the amendment; but it would not be a reason for anyone else in Congress to vote ``no'' on the amendment.

And to the Members of Congress, I say if they want to demand a thorough investigation into the role that the Vice President may have played in offering the American public discredited intelligence reports of a nonexisting Iraqi weapons program, then they should vote ``yes'' for my amendment.

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I take great pride in serving in the Congress with the gentlewoman and the gentleman. I would say, though, that I do not see this so much as being a battle over turf as I see it being an assertion of the need for pursuing the truth. And I would expect that the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has the capability to do the job, but I also think that this particular matter is so unique that it receive the attention of the House, which is why I have offered this amendment and why I will continue to insist on it.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I think it would be useful as we begin these debates for us to reflect on the essential constitutional role of the Congress and on the importance of separation of powers and on the cause which took a Nation into war because we are not talking about just any other matter here, we are talking about a matter that resulted in the people of this country having their sons and daughters sent to Iraq.

Nothing less than the entire involvement of this Congress will do to be able to hold safe the constitutional prerogatives of separation of powers. No congressional committee can override the requirements of the Constitution and the role of this Congress.

When Members of this Congress gave the President authority to pursue an attack against Iraq, they took upon themselves a serious and grave responsibility, and since information has been presented that raises grave questions about the cause of our action against Iraq, we have a moral obligation to get into this, and I take nothing away from the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, but I would tell Members, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence should take nothing away from Members of the House.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I would direct the gentleman from Illinois to an article in the Washington Post on June 5 which says that the esteemed chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence said there is ``no indication that analysts at DIA or CIA changed their analysis to fit what they perceived as the desire of the administration officials.''

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, it goes on to say the intelligence oversight panels have received no whistleblower complaints from the CIA or other intelligence agencies on the issue. I would maintain that this would not be a subject of whistleblowing, and only the Office of Inspector General or in this case the investigative agency would have an opportunity to be able to get this in an evenhanded way, and it takes it out of politics at a time when Members suggest this is only political.

I might further add that I did not make my reputation in this House by raising partisan issues, and I do not see this as a partisan issue, I see this as justifying the administration's claim that this country had to go to war against Iraq because there was imminent threat.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

The gentleman from Florida (Chairman Goss) is familiar with the amendment and the letter of the amendment, and I would ask if the chairman would be willing to commit the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to seeking specifically the information that I am asking here of the Inspector General. Would the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence be willing to conduct publicly an audit of all telephone and electronic communications between the Central Intelligence Agency and the Office of the Vice President as they relate to this matter?

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

I would suggest to the gentleman and I would not impugn his answer by stating that his unwillingness to clearly commit to gathering this information publicly would in any way reflect a partisan position on his part, just as my desire to have the Inspector General bring that information forward is not reflective of a partisan position on my part.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Chairman, it would be more than instructive. It would be classified information if the Vice President manipulated CIA analysts to disseminate false, raw unreliable information to justify a war in Iraq. I am hopeful no one is saying that and I am not aware that the administration has asserted executive privilege in an attempt to shield such information from the Congress. I am not aware of that at all. Maybe that has happened privately, but I am not aware that such an assertion can be private and that in fact such an assertion has been made.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

I would say in order for the test to be made to make the request first then imposes our responsibility as Members of Congress, and as a coequal branch of government, we are entitled to do that and the executive branch is entitled to assert executive privilege, if they so choose, and that would be illuminating, I think.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, this administration deliberately took this Nation into a war against Iraq based on false premises. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, with al Qaeda's role in 9-11, with the anthrax attack on this Nation; did not represent an imminent threat to the United States, had no usable weapons of mass destruction. That is why the weapons of mass destruction cannot be found.

This deception made America less secure. It cut the United States off from

the world community. It violated the U.S. Constitution, it violated the U.N. charter, it violated the Geneva Convention; and it continues to cost, because we are now losing our men and women in combat on a regular basis. We continue to lose them. It has cost the lives of countless innocent Iraqis. It has cost the taxpayers of this Nation over $100 billion, and it has cost tens of billions of dollars in damage to Iraq. It has strengthened religious fundamentalists in Iraq who now threaten the freedom of women in Iraq's society.

This manufactured catastrophe called ``foreign policy'' represents not only a failure of truth, a great credibility gap, but, more than that, America faces a crisis of legitimacy of this administration itself, which lied to the American people to get approval for a war.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to mourn the passing of Maynard Jackson. When I had the great privilege of serving as Mayor of the City of Cleveland, Maynard Jackson and I were contemporaries in his service as Mayor of the City of Atlanta. In working with him through the years and learning his dedication, not only to the people of Atlanta but urban America, I was able to see that there was a real opportunity for people of good will to achieve a synthesis of that good will, of urban policy, because Maynard Jackson made the cause of cities his cause and he spoke to the needs of the people of urban America eloquently, with deep passion and with a concern about the potential of urban America that was being ignored. But he infused the City of Atlanta with his own potential, and with his passion and with his heart he helped raise Atlanta to greater and greater heights.

Maynard Jackson was not only a servant of Atlanta and the State of Georgia, but of America and the world because his life was about bringing people together and his life was about the potential of not only minorities but of every individual to make a dedication to community. So today, as Maynard Jackson passes, we can reflect on that wise Latin saying translated into English that says, ``If you seek his monument, look around.'' And wherever you look, in urban America, where men and women are dedicated to building up cities, you are always going to remember and be reminded of Maynard Jackson.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognition of the 50th Anniversary of the School of Ukrainian Studies in Cleveland, Ohio.

For more than fifty years, the School of Ukrainian Studies has educated thousands of Americans regarding all facets of the Ukraine-- its language, culture, history, customs, religion and art. The School fosters a sense of diversity and continuity between the old country and new and reflects a vital cultural component that defines our Cleveland community--a community that is home to countless Americans whose lifelines originate from points around the world--reaching across borders, time and distance.

The School of Ukrainian Studies ensures that the culture of the Ukraine remains a conscious and vibrant aspect of the fabric of our American community, handed down through the children of each new generation. For decades, Ukrainian immigrants have understood the significance of assimilation, yet they also share an equally strong focus on preserving the ideals and tradition of their beloved Ukraine.

Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring the administrators and students of the School of Ukrainian Studies of Cleveland, as they celebrate fifty years of Ukrainian education. Cultural diversity is the foundation and light of America--adding color; depth and life to our Cleveland community--bridging old world and new, connecting our past to today. As Americans, our shared commitment to celebrate and preserve our many lands of origin unites us.

Mr. Speaker, protection of the truth and the constitutional role of Congress as a coequal branch should not be a partisan matter. Yet yesterday Republicans on the House Committee on International Relations participated in the cover-up of the Bush administration's false claims which sent America to war against Iraq.

The resolution of inquiry, backed by 40 Members of the House, sought to protect Congress' role in asking the administration where is the proof that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction; where was proof of an imminent threat.

Unfortunately, as panic sets in over the realization that this administration misled the American people in the cause of war, Republicans are refusing to hold public hearings, refusing serious oversight, open oversight. Republicans just will not make Republicans accountable. That is the problem with one-party rule.

Our democracy is in danger if we do not make this administration accountable. They sent this country into war based on lies and in doing so have damaged the legitimacy of their own government. Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Where was the imminent threat? Why did America go to war?

Madam Speaker, the Committee on International Relations is at this very moment reviewing a resolution of inquiry submitted by me and cosponsored by 36 Members of the House of Representatives asking for the administration to provide whatever evidence to this Congress that caused them to send this country on a path towards war against Iraq.

The American people have a right to know why their sons and daughters were sent to war. They have a right to know whether or not this administration provided the American public with information that was false.

We need to know on what basis did the American people learn from this administration that there was an imminent threat, and, in fact, was there an imminent threat coming from Iraq, did Iraq have weapons of mass destruction that posed an imminent threat.

It is up to the Committee on International Relations of the House to provide the American people with an opportunity to get that information from this administration. This Congress exists to provide a balance to administrative power, and it is time that this Congress stood up to its responsibility. The people have a right to know, was there an imminent threat and where are the weapons of mass destruction.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of Cuyahoga County

Prosecutor William D. Mason as he is being honored by the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party on May 18, 2003.

Mr. Mason graduated from Cleveland-Marshall College of Law in 1986. Shortly thereafter, he began working with the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor's Office as an assistant prosecutor. In 1993, Mr. Mason was elected to hold the office of Law Director and Chief Prosecutor for the City of Parma. During his six-year tenure as Law Director, Mr. Mason maintained and implemented high standards within all areas of Parma's legal department--from working with County agencies to prosecute criminals, to saving the City thousands of dollars in the reduction of legal fees.

Since January of 1999, Mr. Mason has held the elected position of Chief Prosecuting Attorney for Cuyahoga County--the twentieth largest county in the United States, and the largest county in Ohio. In this capacity, Mr. Mason and his staff are responsible for the indictment and prosecution of more than 25,000 criminal felony and juvenile delinquency cases every year. Additionally, Mr. Mason is the Chairman of the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force. The Task Force is a team effort, comprised of local, state and federal authorities whose focus and goal is the apprehension and prosecution of Internet child molesters. In addition to his professional accomplishments, Mr. Mason continues his significant service to his community as coach, mentor and volunteer.

Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor of Mr. William D. Mason, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor, as we recognize his significant expertise, dedication and contribution--all focused on the safety and welfare of every citizen within our entire community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and remembrance of Mayor Walter F. Ehrnfelt, Jr.--devoted family man, accomplished community leader, and admired friend and mentor. Mayor Ehrnfelt's vision, integrity and love for his community led the City of Strongsville through an amazing journey that lasted more than 2 decades--from a quiet, farming village to a thriving, family-oriented suburb--all without compromising the City's rustic charm.

Mayor Ehrnfelt was born and raised in Strongsville and reflected a life-long commitment to his community his entire life. From his childhood on, Mayor Ehrnfelt was instilled with a clear focus on family, faith and community. His deep work ethic and high level of integrity was reinforced daily while he worked as a butcher at the family-owned meat stand at Cleveland's West Side Market. Mayor Ehrnfelt was content to work in the family business and did not seek elected office--it sought him.

In 1973, Mayor Ehrnfelt's neighbors and friends urged him to run for the office of City Council. He ran reluctantly, and won. Just 5 years later, Mayor Ehrnfelt was appointed Mayor. In 1979 he won his first mayoral race by a landslide, and served as Mayor ever since. He quickly became the most popular and beloved Mayor in the history of Strongsville, and successfully served as Mayor for 25 years.

Mayor Ehrnfelt's unwavering integrity, kindness and humble nature reflected his character and defined his tenure as Mayor. Yet his gentle and humble nature belied his deep intellect, vision and keen business savvy. His work is clearly evidenced within the significant growth and carefully-planned development of his beloved City. From the smallest to the most significant civic endeavor, Mayor Ehrnfelt offered the same respect and consideration to everyone involved--regardless of their status or political affiliation.

Titles and accolades did not hold significance for him--care for his family and service to community did. Mayor Ehrnfelt was a true leader in every sense--a genuine individual whose modesty and strong sense of self cast a rare and steady beacon of light across the dark game of politics. He consistently disregarded political pressures and kept focused on his community--working tirelessly on behalf of Strongsville. Mayor Ehrnfelt expected others to do their best--and he brought out the best in everyone.

Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor, gratitude and remembrance of Mayor Walter F. Ehrnfelt--an exceptional man and caring leader whose life profoundly impacted the lives of thousands. His passing marks a deep loss for countless who called him friend-- including me. Mayor Ehrnfelt's brilliant and flawless legacy of community progress tempered with preservation will be remembered always by the people of Strongsville--and far beyond. Moreover, it was the power of his kindness, grace, tenacity and heart that uplifted every level of the Strongsville community.

I extend my deepest condolences to Mayor Ehrnfelt's beloved wife, Anne; his beloved children, Walter F. III, Susan, Robert and Judy; his beloved grandchildren and his beloved great-grandchild. Mayor Ehrnfelt's life will serve as an ageless example of leadership, service to others and heart--and his legacy will forever resound throughout the City of Strongsville and throughout our entire community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognition of the Ukrainian Bandurist Chorus as they celebrate 85 years of promoting Ukrainian arts and culture through their historic and significant musical achievement focused on the bandura--the ageless instrument and melodic voice of the Ukraine.

The bandura, an instrument that connects acoustic principles of the lute and harp, produces a sound that is both strong and fragile; it is a sound that has echoed the culture, spirit and people of Eastern Europe for thousands of years--a sound kept alive by the artistic talent of the bandurists--a sound that signifies a nation's struggle for freedom--a sound that is taught to every new generation--a sound that reaches across oceans and spans centuries.

The heart and soul of the Ukrainian Bandurist Chorus encompasses ideals of faith, freedom and the human spirit--reflecting the soul of the Ukraine. The Chorus also represents survival and renewel of a persecuted people. Like countless individuals and groups seeking freedom from the dark days of European oppression and war during the 1930's and 1940's--the artists and musicians of the Ukraine were persecuted for their art, faith, and love of country. But their music and heritage would survive and grow--in the Ukraine, and in communities across North America, as Ukrainian artists and musicians sought refuge in the United States and Canada.

Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honoring the internationally reknowned Ukrainian Bandurist Chorus, as they celebrate eighty-five years of Ukrainian culture and history by blending the ageless sound of the bandura with voices of song--resounding Ukrainian history, faith, and struggle for liberty. The Ukrainian Bandurist Chorus symbolizes triumph over oppression and the bandura serves as a stark historical metaphor--lest we forget--the strength in our struggle for freedom, and the fragility in our struggle to preserve it--as fragile and strong as the melody of the bandura.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of the administrators, staff and residents of the Westerly Apartments and Barton Senior Center, as they celebrate 40 years of uplifting the lives of senior citizens in Lakewood, OH. I also rise in honor of the founding members, DeArv G. Barton, Frank Celeste, Gertrude Nelson and Wallace Teare.

The concept of the Barton Senior Center of the Westerly Apartments- combining affordable senior apartments with a social center that offers a variety of social, educational, recreational and health related activities and programs for seniors-was the first of its kind in the country, and has served as the inspiration and model for similar projects in Lakewood and across the Nation ever since.

The Barton Center came to fruition in 1963 when the first residents of the newly-built Westerly Apartments realized their need for a common social area. With help from government loans, foundation gifts and individual donations, a full service senior center was built, complete with a spacious lounge and dining room, a fully equipped kitchen, arts and crafts room, library, pool and game room, workshop and hobby room, and office space. A full-time director and activities coordinator was also hired. Today, the Center also offers daily meal service, banking services, classrooms, computer lab, auditorium and a greenhouse. The Westerly Apartments and the Barton Center both publish regular newsletters that highlight current programs and services such as the Driver Evaluation Program, Home Town Band Concerts, the Holiday Fair and community transportation services.

Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of the Fortieth Anniversary of the Westerly Apartments and Barton Senior Center. The founding members, past and present administrators, staff, and residents have transformed a structure of brick and steel into a welcoming and lively social center, and a place that truly is ``home.''

Mr. Speaker, the Bush administration made specific, unequivocal statements about the imminent threat posed by Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, repeatedly claiming they had intelligence showing Iraq had 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulin toxin, 500 tons of sarin mustard and VX nerve agent, and over 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. So where are those vast stockpiles? Where was the imminent threat?

At the State of the Union the President said, Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin mustard and VX nerve agent. Where are those vast stockpiles? Where was the imminent threat?

This administration repeatedly claimed Iraq's weapons of mass destruction represented an imminent threat to this country. They claimed specific evidence of vast stockpiles. Where are those vast stockpiles? Where was the imminent threat?

Did this administration deliberately mislead this Nation into war, telling us there was an imminent threat when there was not?

The resolution of inquiry now signed by 36 Members of the House aims to find out the truth.

Mr. Speaker, the credibility gap is growing. First the administration said the U.S. had to sweep aside the U.N. inspections and the Security Council because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction which were an imminent threat.

No weapons have been found to justify the war. So why did we go to war?

Now Paul Wolfowitz says, ``The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. Government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason.''

Now their story is changing. Iraq had a weapons program, they say. No longer weapons of mass destruction but a program. Is this now the core reason?

Bait and switch will not work here, nor will a pretense for war. If this administration can fabricate reasons for the war after the fact, where will America be headed for war next?

Congress must demand accountability for the wanton exercise of war power, loss of life, destruction of property, waste of tax dollars, and damage to America's reputation.

Thirty-three Members of the House have now signed the resolution of inquiry to demand the White House tell the truth.