Floor Statements

Madam Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy. I appreciate his leadership and that of the chairwoman, Eddie Bernice Johnson. I salute the committee, which has done more on water resources in the last 12 weeks than we have seen the previous Republican leadership do on water resources in the last 12 years.

One of the reasons that we have had a roadblock dealing with these critical water resources has been the Republicans' pathological aversion to Davis-Bacon protections. Sometimes when I hear some of my conservative friends on the other side of the aisle fulminating about Davis-Bacon, I want them to go back and look at the history.

Davis-Bacon is named for the Republican sponsors of the legislation in the Hoover administration. It is not some sort of Democratic plot. In my State, in Oregon, we have adopted a ``little Davis-Bacon Act'' that was signed into law under a Republican Governor, former Senator Mark Hatfield. When the ideologues put it to the test, tried to repeal the protections, it was overwhelmingly supported by Oregonians almost two to one, and I would note that it passed in every Oregon county, big city or rural areas.

What we have seen is that Davis-Bacon protections level the playing field for bidding, so we are not going to have shoddy public works with inadequately trained and equipped workers. We have watched over time where the

amount of a public contract for construction for labor has actually declined as a percentage. So if they were ever concerned, they should have been concerned long ago when the Republicans introduced it in the Hoover administration.

I would hope, Madam Chairman, that this President does not continue holding water resources hostage by threatening a veto. For heaven's sake, vote Davis-Bacon up or down, but don't penalize American communities by shortchanging water resources.

I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy, and I must say I have enjoyed the opportunity to work with him on this amendment.

Madam Chair, it is a pleasure to see the people; I feel a little angst not being on the Transportation Committee, I must say, and I keep gravitating down to the floor because of the important work that is being done.

I deeply appreciate Congressman Hall's work in the water resource area. I know he comes from an area that is challenged in terms of water resources and environmental threats and has long been a leader before he came to Congress. I deeply appreciate his leadership in this regard, and I was pleased to partner with him on this amendment because it will strengthen the bill to target effectiveness and support where the needs are greatest. As Mr. Hall mentioned, there is a deep concern that we target the resources where they will make the most difference.

There is another adage that I would offer up, and that is, ``Fix it first.'' We are dealing with an aging water infrastructure problem that is hundreds of billions of dollars, national in scope. The work that the Transportation Infrastructure Committee has done already in the last 12 weeks is moving us forward on an aggressive agenda. But by being able to target this money in areas where the need is the greatest, not to add to the inventory that is already overloaded, I think is an important area of priority.

I look forward to the approval of this amendment, working with the gentleman, working with the committee, working with our other colleagues. We have massive problems around the country where we need to be focusing; and I note my friend and colleague from Louisiana there, we have got unfinished business there as well. And the extent to which we are able to work in the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and in this Congress to be able to put the dollars where they will do the most good is important.

Being able to have thoughtful infrastructure investment in ways that reinforce smart growth, where it needs to be, where it will have the most impact, is an important principle. I am pleased that, with the adoption of this amendment, we will be able to enshrine it in this legislation, and I hope that it finds its way in the work that will come forward with this committee throughout the course of this Congress.

Madam Speaker, for thousands of years, Celilo Falls was the most important native fishery and the center of a vast trade network linking the coastal and plateau peoples of the Northwest to the buffalo hunters of the Great Plains and the foragers of California. Thousands of Native people gathered at this meeting place every year during the spring and summer fish runs to harvest salmon and trade, socialize, exchange arts and ideas, and participate in ceremonial rites.

Celilo Falls was known to Native Americans as WyAm, a word which some say means ``echo of falling water.'' Archaeological digs prior to the completion of The Dalles Dam confirmed that Indian people had continuously occupied the Celilo village site for at least 11,000 years, making it the oldest continuously occupied site in Oregon.

By the 20th century, Celilo Falls was a tourist spot famous for the sight of Indian salmon fishers dip-netting from wooden scaffolds above the rapids. But on March 10, 1957, the rising waters of The Dalles Dam inundated Celilo Falls. Celilo Village was relocated and

today sits about 10 miles east of The Dalles, on the Oregon bank of the Columbia River. It is inhabited by fewer than 100 people and comprises a collection of small houses, and abandoned trailers.

Over the years, Celilo's deteriorating state was cause for public health and safety concerns to village residents, and needed to be addressed. The Tribes requested the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to rebuild the village, and in 2004, Public Law 108-204 was signed into law, authorizing Celilo Village redevelopment. The law provided for repairs to the Longhouse, reconstruction of the village's main structures and infrastructure systems, and operation and maintenance of the rebuilt village. The Corps expects construction to be completed by 2009.

Today the spectacularly renovated Celilo Longhouse is used for the ceremonial First Salmon feast, an annual rite which honors the return of the life-giving fish and pays homage to allow their life cycle to begin anew. Traditionally, the feast must be completed before fishing, hunting, root-digging and gathering seasons can officially begin.

By commemorating the 50th anniversary of the flooding of Celilo Falls, and the ongoing restoration of the village, we are doing more than keeping the memory of a once vibrant salmon fishery and cultural center for Native Americans alive. We are looking with an eye to the future on keeping our commitment to uphold Tribal Treaty rights, restore salmon runs, and ensure that residents of Celilo Village have the opportunity to thrive, just as their ancestors were able to do for thousands of years.

I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on the bill and commend her leadership.

I had the privilege, for 10 years, of serving on this subcommittee. I miss the work that is being done. But I am pleased that in the first days of this Congress we are moving forward with important bipartisan legislation that can make a huge difference for communities around the country.

The city that I call home, Portland, Oregon, is one of over 1,100 communities around the country with a combined sewer overflow problem. The EPA estimates that there is something like 40,000 discharges of raw sewage that occur each year from sanitary sewer systems with a volume into the billions of gallons each year. In my community, this represents an investment well of over $1 billion to try and deal with the problems of an antiquated system, much of which was built before 1960; and, compared to what is happening in other parts of the country, that is a modern system.

This is a situation where we, as a country, have long overlooked making the type of systematic investments that are important. I appreciated my colleague, Mr. Duncan from Tennessee, who talked about the potential for a $400 billion shortfall. Well, it is really not clear exactly whether it is $400 billion, $500 billion, you pick a number, being able to meet the needs of America's communities that are being stressed, not just by aging systems but by growth and development. Sprawl across the country is putting more and more strain on these inadequate systems at a time when we are finding out more and more of what needs to be done to protect the public health and infrastructure.

Mr. Chairman, around the world, at any given time half the people are sick needlessly from waterborne disease. In this country, we have had a better record. But we have had problems here, and we are on the edge in many places around the country. I can't say enough about my appreciation for moving forward with this in an expeditious manner.

Unfortunately, other areas of the Federal Government haven't quite caught up to the leadership of the subcommittee bringing this forward. I am sad to note that the administration continues its trend of downplaying this problem with its 2008 budget and its stated opposition to this bill. I am confident that there will be such an overwhelming show of support for it that we will be able to convince others that it is a good investment.

Solving America's water quality issues requires a partnership. Already, State and local jurisdictions are being stressed. We are finding the private sector stepping up and making higher and higher investments. The average rate payer is facing exponential increases.

In my community, in the course of 10 years we are going to double the sewer rates. I met with a group of professionals this last week that said that, at the current rate of expenditure, we could actually have the entire country's GDP devoured by local utility cost for sewer and water. That is not going to happen because of the leadership that we see here now.

I look forward to a strong bipartisan vote in support of it, and I hope that my colleagues will take the time to visit with the hundreds of consulting engineers and local government officials who are on the Hill today to tell them that we have taken a step forward, and we look forward to working with them to finish the job.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a bill to amend the National Trails System Act to require the Secretary of the Interior to update the feasibility and suitability studies of four national historic trails, and for other purposes.

This legislation shall authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study certain routes of the Oregon Trail to determine the suitability of becoming part of the Oregon National Historic Trail. Additionally, a 20-mile southern alternative route of the Pony Express trail shall be considered along with portions of Missouri Valley and central and western routes of the California trail to be designated as the Pony Express National Historic Trail and the Californian National Historic Trail respectively. Lastly, the Secretary shall undertake the study of certain routes for the consideration of the Mormon Pioneer National Historic Trail.

The recognition and maintenance of these trails provide our citizens with an opportunity to retrace the journeys of our ancestors, and engage in living history.

Madam Speaker, historically, the month of March has been a time when we greet representatives of our Nation's veterans who come to Capitol Hill to advocate on behalf of their fellow veterans. This year, however, it is hard not to feel a sense of shame as we see the veterans spreading out over Capitol Hill again carrying their message. Sadly, as has been shown in our hearings and on the front pages of our papers around the country in countless news accounts, Congress has done a poor job of listening to their needs in the past, and we are seeing more than ever the need to address those concerns directly.

I haven't supported the reckless treatment of our veterans. I have supported our Democratic efforts when we were in the minority, fighting for appropriate funding and equipment. But we can only go so far with an administration that has been focused on its own version of reality and its own priorities very much at variance with our veterans, and that have been enabled for the last 6 years by a Republican leadership with their own sense of priorities.

We have seen and heard from our veterans about the long waits, the red tape. It is not, however, the fault of some faceless bureaucracy as implied by Vice President Cheney yesterday, because there are countless dedicated men and women who still provide good care for most of our veterans and who want to do better. It is an administration and its policies and the people that they have put in charge that must change. And, of course, it is the war in Iraq, itself.

It is not just a question of money. We have given plenty of money to this administration, more in fact than they have asked for. We are spending more on our military and veterans than the entire rest of the world combined. But because of the mismanagement, we have been giving too much to the wrong people to do the wrong things, dealing with the wrong priorities.

I just left a budget hearing. We are still looking at an administration that wants to lavish billions on missile defense and Cold War era weapons, while having proposals that would cut programs for traumatic brain injury and, according to the Congressional Budget Office, underfund our veterans' needs by some $3.4 billion over the next 5 years.

We are dealing with an administration that has put political operatives in sensitive positions. The head of the Veterans Administration, for example, is a former head of the Republican Party who was surprised about the budget problems, whose administration forgot about the thousands of returning veterans that were going to need more services, who was baffled by the security lapses in the veterans' files on VA computers.

This last week, I hope the tide is turning. I hope that finally the spotlight that has been focused on amplifying the concerns that a number of us have heard and have talked about in the past, will make a case that will not be possible for this administration to ignore any longer.

Mr. Vice President, it's not just the Federal bureaucracy. It's your bureaucracy after 6 years. It's your budgets, your priorities, your leaders who are failing.

I am confident that this Congress will be able to turn the tide so next year, when our veterans' representatives are here on Capitol Hill, we are not going to feel guilty; that we will be able to look our young men and women who are in the service today and the people who are recovering from their service overseas in the eye, knowing that we, this Congress, the administration and the American people have done all we could for them.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this rule.

I am pleased that after 12 years of not just ignoring the needs of working men and women and their needed labor protections, but actually what we have seen is a concerted, specific program that has undermined those rights, I am pleased to see this legislation come forth today.

I am pleased that the gentleman from California will have the opportunity to put his substitute before us and be able to debate back and forth.

As the gentleman from New Jersey pointed out, there are clear differences of opinion, but the facts are that we are simply strengthening opportunities for working men and women to overcome the serious abuse of the organizing process in this country.

Time after time, we have had examples of where there have been clear cases of unfair labor practices that have undercut the opportunity for men and women to represent themselves. Often they win a sort of hollow victory because long after the fact, there is a slap on the hand for the company that doesn't play by the rules long after the damage has been done.

What we need to do is have an appropriate process that guarantees the rights of working men and women in this country to organize. This legislation provides additional, valuable tools.

I am under no illusion, given the attitude of this administration, and perhaps what will happen in the other body, that this bill which I hope passes today in the House, is going to become law anytime soon. It is however a long overdue signal that people in this House are going to stand up for the rights of working men and women, give them an opportunity to organize, and that we are going to reestablish a level playing field. We will be able to help organized labor, the people who brought us the 8-hour day, the people who brought us the weekend. It is time to allow them the opportunity to extend the rights of organized labor to other folks in the workforce.

One of the first things I did as an elected official was be involved with collective bargaining rights for public employees in Oregon. There were all sorts of dire predictions about what was going to happen, but in fact, what has occurred is that we were able to provide a framework for solving issues that affected people in the workforce.

As luck would have it, later in my career, I was on the other side of the bargaining table, working to represent management, but I never regretted having an aggressive, effective program for organized labor to be able to collectively bargain.

This is the most civilized, effective and appropriate way to resolve workforce issues, and this legislation today is an important step in that direction.

I urge support of the rule. I urge support of the bill.

Madam Chairman, the history of organized labor in the United States goes beyond the colorful to include stories of drama, heated conflict, and even violence.

Any objective view of history shows that legitimate efforts of workers to organize and represent themselves have been subjected to an amazing array of extraordinarily aggressive behaviors on the part of employers and at times even of the government itself. Indeed it was regarded by many business and government leaders as a subversive activity. There has been violence and intimidation on both sides but systematic repression against workers is certainly one of the darker chapters in our history.

Over the last century, organized labor has brought about the five-day workweek, overtime pay, and workplace protection; ultimately, unions helped create America's middle class. These are benefits that we now take for granted, but which were fought by many business interests who had taken advantage of unorganized workers. These issues arose out of intense conflict and were faced with great difficulty. There are numerous examples in today's workplace that attest to the continuing need for workplace protection.

Recently we have found that the Federal Government has no longer been serving as a neutral protector of collective bargaining within the organizing process. I'm convinced that legitimate rights have been systematically undercut and the Federal Government has been indifferent, at best, to providing a level playing field to workers and redress against abuse.

Today's Employee Free Choice Act is a small step in correcting that imbalance by restoring choice in a system that is currently driven by aggressive employers and coercion, as well as anti-union consultants. Instituting a level playing field for workers who want to unionize will ultimately improve wages, working conditions and job security for workers.

While it is highly unlikely, given this administration's antagonism toward organized labor, that this legislation would ever find its way into law, passage of this bill today in the House is a vital and important step in giving workers a toehold again.

This legislation will help end the official hostility and indifference by initiating a process that spotlights workers' opportunities and employers' responsibilities. I am confident that

the passage of the Employee Free Choice Act will ultimately give unionizing rights to all workers.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a resolution supporting the goals and ideals of World Water Day, along with Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, the Chair of the Transportation & Infrastructure Subcommittee Water Resources and the Environment.

Every 15 seconds, a child dies from lack of access to safe drinking water and sanitation. This resolution is intended to help us raise awareness of this leading cause of preventable death.

For the last 15 years, March 22nd has been designated as World Water Day in order to draw attention to the global water crisis and inspire action to alleviate this unnecessary tragedy. While over the past 20 years, two billion people have gained access to safe drinking water, approximately one in six people in the world are still without this most basic building block of life.

Last Congress, the House and Senate both passed the ``Senator Paul Simon Water for the Poor Act,'' which made safe drinking water and sanitation key priorities in U.S. foreign assistance. However, much more needs to be done both at home and abroad to ensure safe, affordable, and sustainable access to water for people everywhere.

I invite my colleagues to cosponsor this important resolution.

Madam Speaker, President Kennedy, speaking 46 years ago at the establishment of the Peace Corps, remarked that, ``The initial reactions to the Peace Corps proposal are convincing proof that we have, in this country, an immense reservoir of such men and women-- anxious to sacrifice their energies and time and toil to the cause of world peace and human progress.'' What was true in 1961 is true today; Peace Corps Volunteers are an outstanding group of men and women serving the cause of humanity across the globe.

During this National Peace Corps Week, I want to honor the service and commitment of the Peace Corps Volunteers from Oregon's 3rd Congressional district and express my pride in my fellow Oregonians who have chosen to devote years of their lives in service to others.

In particular, I want to recognize those Peace Corps Volunteers who have begun their service in the past year: Annie Crater (Honduras), Michelle Gerdes (Tanzania), Benjamin Grace (Niger), Eli Mechanic (Morocco), James Murphy (Mali), Nicole Probst (Malawi), Radhika Reddy (Burkina Faso), Michael Thoeresz (Belize), and Lauren Towery (Romania).

Their work to empower people and communities in developing countries is an invaluable contribution to creating a safe and prosperous world, building bridges between America and the world, and establishing a better future for people everywhere.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing the Ethics Reform Act of 2007 with Congressman Greg Walden. This legislation would abolish the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and establish an Independent Ethics Commission.

Recent legislation and current proposals attempt to reform the ethics process; however, they do not address the core issue at hand, Congress's ability to govern its own ethical behavior. Members of Congress and their personal relationships can skew the evaluation process and create the potential for decisions being made upon a personal or political basis. This legislation would rectify these issues by replacing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct with a panel made up of former

Members of Congress who can bring a higher level of objectivity to the table.

Our ethics reform bill would deal comprehensively with accountability and oversight of Congress in a way that cannot be accomplished under the current system.

Madam Speaker, after Congress has successfully completed action on the first 100 hours, we now begin a critical 100 days for the future of our engagement in Iraq, United States policy in the Middle East and our struggle against violent fundamentalism. Between now and the Memorial Day recess, 100 days for Congress to reassert itself as a coequal branch of government, as envisioned by the framers of the Constitution, to change the course in Iraq.

This is a decisive moment. It is time for every one of us who would be a leader to lay our cards on the table. Each must be true to our own conscience and to the responsibility of office by letting the American people know honestly and directly what we stand for and what we would do in Iraq.

This resolution gives clear and concise voice to the desires of the American people. It expresses support for our troops and demands that we not place more of them at risk without a reason or a plan. And I strongly support it.

Along with this resolution, the Congress under Speaker Pelosi's Democratic leadership has already done more to provide oversight and accountability than Republicans over the last 5 years. We have held 50 hearings on the conduct of the war, fraud and failure in reconstruction efforts, and the outrage of our troops being sent into harm's way without the equipment they need. I applaud the efforts of our leadership

on the Appropriations Committee to end the practice of giving too much to the wrong people to do the wrong thing.

However, these are only the first steps. We should not only oppose escalation of the war, but we should pass legislation to bring the war to an end responsibly. Investigations must be followed by specific and personal accountability for crimes that have been permitted in the conduct of this war.

We should use the power of the purse to ensure that funds go specifically to keep our soldiers safe, rebuild badly damaged military readiness, undertake new diplomatic efforts and support the Iraqi people, not an open-ended occupation.

For the last 2 years, I have been working with concerned citizens in Oregon to develop a responsible plan to end the war and provide the best hope for a better future in Iraq. Last month, I introduced comprehensive legislation, the New Direction For Iraq, H.R. 663, as a model for the kind of legislation that Congress should enact, and I am confident will enact.

This legislation would bring the troops home, require a comprehensive diplomatic effort, redirect reconstruction assistance, promote international efforts to disarm militias, investigate and punish war profiteering and deal with the 2 million Iraqi refugees who have been forced to flee their country, people the administration has only recently been able to recognize.

A word about Iran. It is a complex puzzle, more difficult than any of us imagine and one that poses real challenges. But as the President marches us closer and closer to a major provocation, maybe a new war, whether intentionally or not, Congress should not let itself be steamrolled or lied to, as it was with Iraq; Congress must assert itself with real diplomacy and a real strategy.

It is also time that America lived up to our ideals. No more torture, kidnapping and unauthorized wiretaps; no more lying and unnecessary secrecy; not treating the Constitution as a suggestion or using false claims about national security to score political points against those of us who have been right about this war from the beginning.

We must start treating the public like a partner and recognize that they are far ahead of the President and the Republican leadership. I am just frustrated to hear false analogies to the dark days of World War II or to the Civil War. We are bogged down in somebody else's civil war, and we have been doing it longer than World War II or the Civil War, with no end in sight, until now.

They should join us in taking this conversation to coffee shops, churches, campuses and conference rooms, working with the American people.

Over the next 100 days, I will continue to fight for a comprehensive plan that I am confident will come forward. It is in the honor of Travis Bradach Nall, a constituent of mine who was killed in Iraq the very day the President taunted the insurgents to ``bring it on.''

For Travis and over 3,000 of his brave comrades who have given their lives, I urge support of this resolution as a critical first step to bringing this tragic war to a close.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is interesting listening to the Republican fog machine starting to churn out its smoke surrounding the resolution that we are going to be discussing this week. I listened to my friends from Texas and from Georgia talking about the innocent people that are going to suffer under the approaches that we are talking about. Well, it is interesting that polls show that the people in Iraq, the majority of them, think it's all right for the insurgents to shoot and kill our soldiers. They are not just fighting us. They are also fighting each other. The discussion this week is going to be the first honest and direct opportunity to start redirecting the course here.

Stay the course? My Lord, that is not remotely what we are talking about here. Anybody who has watched what the Democrats have done for the first month that they have been in power realize that we are setting in motion a foundation to do what should have been done from the outset: to regain the power of the purse, to be able to deal with oversight which has been completely abandoned by my Republican friends over the last 5 years, and start developing the policy framework that is going to be necessary to deal with the disaster that has been created in Iraq. The increase in troops, the over 20,000 that we will be talking about this week, was not the first choice of the military and indeed the masterminds that President Bush turned to for this surge theory did not talk about 20,000 or 25,000. They wanted far more troops. They have stripped this down.

I heard my friend from Texas disparage the retired generals and admirals who have come forward to deal with their deep concern about the flawed strategy and implementation of the Iraq campaign. These are men and women who have proven their dedication to this country, who in many cases have been in far more battles than all the people in Congress combined, who don't have anything to win or lose by not speaking their mind. If you go back and check the record with what they have said, with what has happened in Iraq, I'll take those retired commanders every time. The fact is they've been right, and if the President and Congress had listened to them, we wouldn't be in the middle of the mess that we're in now.

I served in this body when President Clinton took steps to stop the genocide in the Balkans, and I watched the Republicans on the other side of the aisle be unable to figure out whether they supported the President, they were opposed to the President, or they wanted to change the policy. Go back and look at the former majority leader, Tom DeLay, who just couldn't figure out what to do in the Balkans but he sure knew that he wasn't going to support the Commander in Chief.

What the Democrats are doing now is laying a foundation that should have been done from the outset. We have had over 50 oversight hearings now, in the first month, more meaningful oversight than in the last 5 years of the Republicans who just couldn't bring people in to find out what happened to the billions of dollars in cash that is now unaccounted for. In committee after committee, the American people are finally getting to what should have happened years ago in terms of meaningful oversight. This is what the Truman Commission did during World War II. The Republicans would have no part of it, and now the American people are seeing for themselves. We will soon see in the appropriations process that Congress is regaining the power of the purse to make sure that the money will be spent properly.

There is no reason to not have troops that are deployed with a guarantee that they will have the equipment that they need. It was a travesty what men and women from my State were subjected to, being sent over to Iraq in a war of choice without being properly equipped. Under the Democratic watch, we are going to make sure that that is not going to happen.

Last but not least, by having a simple debate on whether or not this Congress approves of this escalation, we

are going to establish a baseline. I suggest that this baseline is not only going to have overwhelming Democratic support, but we are going to find dozens of Republicans on the other side of the aisle who, when finally given a choice, are going to make a clear stand with us. It's just the beginning, it's long overdue, and it's exactly what the American people, what our troops and the Iraqi people deserve.

Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor with some observations about Iraq, but I must comment on the presentation I just heard from my friend from Georgia.

You know, Mr. Speaker, independent observers agree that Democrats have moved quickly and aggressively to implement what we said we were going to do in the first 100 hours. I find it disingenuous that our friend was talking about somehow the Democrats not dealing with its commitment on earmarks, and mentioning the rain forest in Iowa. Mr. Speaker, again, independent observers agree that Mr. Obey and Mr. Byrd did bring forward a clean continuing resolution that didn't have any new earmarks. It killed the earmarks that had been set aside in the failed budget of the Republicans in the last session of Congress.

What my friend is talking about, the rain forest in Iowa, was an earmark from several years ago, a Republican earmark, I might say, from several years ago. And now he is suggesting that as we have moved forward to clean up the budget mess left by the Republicans, failing to meet their commitments to produce budgets in a timely fashion, that we didn't go back and surgically remove earmarks that they had scattered throughout the budget for years. Well, I'm sorry. With all due respect to George Orwell and my friend from Georgia, I think that is doublespeak. We did what we said we were going to do. The CR has come forward without earmarks, and we have put in place a much more transparent process so people will know who is doing what on whose behalf.

But, Mr. Speaker, I came to the floor today to make a few comments about the situation in Iraq. There is much ado in the other body to work to catch up with the reality on the ground in Iraq and where the American public is. This is not the time just to oppose escalation of more troops in Iraq. We find that the 21,000 that the President referred to is actually going to mean 50 additional thousand when you put all the support in. It is time for Congress to deal in a comprehensive fashion with what we need to do to make the best of this tragically mismanaged situation, a war of choice that we didn't have to do, sadly mismanaged by the administration. It is time for Congress to rediscover our war powers with Iraq, and even more important, the saber rattling that is directed now towards Iran. It is time for us to rediscover the power of the purse, not provide an open-ended bank account, but tighten down the resources that are provided by Congress to the administration, and to rediscover oversight where there are daily reminders in every major newspaper of where Congress in the last few years has frankly been missing in action.

To be able to advance those goals in a comprehensive fashion, I have introduced new directions for Iraq. It sets forth goals for United States policy, supporting the Iraqi people, preventing greater violence, reestablish our international credibility and military readiness, and focusing on real national security threats. It calls not for escalation, but prohibiting the escalation without specific congressional approval, and for the redeployment of troops from Iraq to be completed in approximately 1 year.

It calls for the United States to forswear the establishment of permanent bases in Iraq, as well as U.S. control over Iraq's oil infrastructure and economic policies. It redirects United States reconstruction funding from large foreign contractors to Iraqi-owned businesses to help create jobs in Iraq. It instructs the President to nullify contracts where any company has not fulfilled an Iraq reconstruction contract, and to recover lost funds.

We ought not to just stop the fraud in terms of the contracting, but we ought to aggressively punish war profiteering, encouraging Congress to investigate and the Attorney General to aggressively prosecute profiteering and fraud.

It requires a regional diplomatic initiative because ultimately it is going to require diplomacy on the part of the United States and all of the surrounding countries to be able to turn this around.

I strongly urge my colleagues to look at the New Direction For Iraq Act of 2007 as a comprehensive way to change the situation in Iraq.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a resolution which recognizes the contributions of the architectural profession during National Architecture Week. The architectural profession has made unique contributions to the history, texture, and quality of life in the United States. Through advances in building technology and design innovation, architects are vital to the creation of communities which are safe, livable and sustainable.

This year is the 150th Anniversary of the founding of the American Institute of Architects, which signifies the founding of the organized architectural profession. This bill will honor and celebrate the work of the approximately 281,000 individuals in the United States who create the structures we cherish and towns we treasure. The bill additionally requests that the President issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to recognize and celebrate National Architecture Week beginning April 8th.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this.

I understand my colleague from Oregon being frustrated. This is an issue we have discussed over the last year, and I imagine his frustration has doubled because the committee that he was a member of in the last Congress, the bill did not find its way into law because of what happened in the prior Congress. I understand his going with my colleague, Mr. DeFazio, to the Rules Committee and flagging the issue because while it is not quite as critical in my direct district, it affects them and it affects my State. And not just Oregon, but there are people in rural America across the United States for whom this is serious.

I am sorry that the last Congress failed in its responsibility. I worked with him then. I will work with him now.

I respectfully disagree slightly in terms of the tactic, in terms of venting frustration at the Rules Committee or the Appropriations Committee. I take the Chair of the Appropriations Committee at his word that he is concerned. He will work with us. The Chair of the Rules Committee, Ms. Slaughter, is a cosponsor with us. And I look forward, as we move forward with this year's budget, to doing the best we can.

I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Washington.

It is Natural Resources, isn't it?

I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.

Thank you.

Right.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I want to divide the issues here. I appreciate my friend and colleague clarifying that it was both committees, neither of which I am a member of, but I am working with him, Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Dicks and others in the Northwest to try to resolve this. We are frustrated that the process broke down, but I want us to get started on the right foot.

Yes.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I appreciate Mr. Dicks' willingness to come forward, his interaction with my colleague even now, Mr. Walden.

This is important business. It failed last Congress. It is not going to be achieved this Congress unless we are able to do it in a bipartisan fashion, unless we are able to look seriously at dealing with the funding. Wedging it in here, with all due respect, is ill- advised. Having an across-the-board cut for everybody on something where I know Mr. Obey has been working very hard to clear the decks so we can get busy on this year's budget and that we can start looking at the overall fiscal situation.

I will continue my efforts to work with the gentleman, but I don't think we ought to confuse it today with the matter before us. I think it is appropriate to use as a vehicle to raise the issue. I think it was a point well made before the Rules Committee. I appreciate his coming to the floor here today to talk about unmet needs. There may be others that could talk about unmet needs. The issue before us is moving forward.

For me, I hope this is the last time this CR action happens. I appreciate the Appropriations Committee being willing to make some very tough decisions. This is not something that would have been ideal. I am sure Mr. Dicks, as a senior member of that committee, there are things that he would have done differently. I am sure Mr. Obey didn't want to be in this situation. But the fact is we are picking up from the abject failure of the Republican leadership last Congress, a breakdown in the process, a failure to pass the legislation, and now we must move forward.

I support this rule. I don't think we have to go back 20 years to find one exception. The fact is we have a plan to move forward. I appreciate the work that has been done. We don't have to bring up extraneous issues. I, too, like Mr. Obey, choked hearing about the reference to the rain forest, which wasn't something that is dealt with in this bill. You could go back over time and start undoing the work that Mr. Dreier or others disagree with when they were in the majority. I hope they come to the Appropriations Committee with proposals to rescind things that they did, but do it in the course of regular order in terms of the authorizing committee or coming forward with their own amendments in the course of what is going to happen this year.

To somehow pick on this rule, pick on this CR, trying to deal with the mess that the Appropriations Committee inherited, I think is out of line, uncalled for, and, frankly, hypocritical.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing, along with Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin and Congressman Sam Farr, the New Direction for Iraq Act, the first legislation introduced in Congress to deal comprehensively with the military, diplomatic, political, economic and humanitarian strategies needed to move forward in Iraq.

On November 7th, the American people sent a strong and clear message that it's time to change the course in Iraq. Unfortunately, President Bush is proposing more of the same. Instead of listening to the majority of Americans, Iraqis, and military experts, the President's stubborn adherence to a clearly failed strategy is undermining our security and putting more of our troops and Iraqis at risk. Our troops have performed valiantly, but

progress in Iraq now depends on a political solution.

It's time for a new direction in Iraq and a comprehensive shift in our Iraq policy. My legislation will: Bring our troops home within approximately one year; Refocus our assistance on creating jobs for Iraqis, supporting grassroots multi-ethnic civil society, and disarming militias; Authorize more aggressive efforts to punish war profiteering and reconstruction fraud; Require a new comprehensive diplomatic effort--internal, regional, and international--to provide support in stabilizing Iraq and promoting ethnic reconciliation; Strengthen efforts to address the Iraqi refugee crisis.

This is now about making the best of a bad situation; our military is breaking and our presence in Iraq is doing nothing to ease sectarian tensions or promote a democratic future. We must leave Iraq and we are going to do so before it's fixed. It will be painful for everybody: the innocent Iraqi victims who will get caught up in the maelstrom, as well as Americans who will be less safe for years, if not generations, to come.

The final costs of this war are not yet fixed, but we have a chance to influence just how high and how horrible through our actions. At this point, we can only try to make this terrible situation no worse and hope that, at some point, it might become marginally better for both Americans and Iraqis. I urge my colleagues to support this bill and look forward to working with them to advance a comprehensive plan to change the course in Iraq.