Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I accept and I thank the gentleman from Florida for the amendment.

Let me support this amendment of my friend and colleague, Mr. Welch. The gentleman from Vermont has done a service in bringing this thoughtful amendment forward.

In doing so, it specifies the training and reporting requirements for medical care case managers and servicemember advocates. More importantly, it ensures they have the resources they need to get the job done. I will repeat that. That they have the resources to get the job done. I appreciate his contribution and thank him for his efforts in this regard to make this good bill even better.

Would the gentleman yield?

I must say, it is a thrill to be able to work with my friend, Duncan Hunter, in bringing a piece of legislation like this forward in a bipartisan manner, and thank him for his cooperation as well as all on both sides of the aisle.

Again, I will mention our wonderful staff that works so well in a bipartisan manner. So Mr. Hunter, thank you very much for your solid efforts in this regard.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Texas for giving me this opportunity to speak so I can applaud my friend, John Spratt, the gentleman from South Carolina, for bringing to this House floor a fiscally responsible budget, particularly as it relates to defense. It is an excellent budget.

The fiscal year 2008 budget resolution provides the same level of funding for national defense as was requested by the President. It provides for $507 billion for national defense and another $145 billion for overseas deployments, numbers consistent with the CBO's reestimates of the President's budget.

The budget resolution includes proposals that would reorient the national defense priorities, including more funding for CTR and nonproliferation programs, which I think are very important, and greater assistance for wounded veterans, including fixing the problems at Walter Reed. This is serious.

Earlier today we passed legislation that was the first step in fixing the challenges at Walter Reed Hospital, and this budget resolution gives us greater assistance in doing just that, and we will be able to do that in the Armed Services Committee.

The budget resolution also calls for a significant increase in funding for veterans' health, and I fully support this proposal which falls within the jurisdiction of the Veterans' Affairs Committee. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Budget resolutions are difficult at best. But if you look at it through the eyes of the Committee on Armed Services and if you look at it through the eyes of national security, this is an excellent approach. It gives us the opportunity to work our will within the committee, to make things even better, particularly for the young men and women in uniform. They are our national treasures, and this budget resolution gives us the opportunity to do something positive about that.

Again, I thank my friend from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, first let me compliment my friend from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the chairman of the Appropriations Committee; and the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), for the excellent work that they have done. And we thank our minority for working with us on this bill.

The purpose of the Members of Congress front and center is to provide for the common defense of our country. I must tell you how concerned and worried I am about the readiness and state of readiness of the United States Army based upon testimony and briefings that we have had within the Armed Services Committee.

Readiness is based upon equipment and based upon people able to do their job as defenders in uniform. This is a serious situation in which we find ourselves. This bill is a major step toward helping our readiness.

It is our job not just to appropriate money for today's concerns, whether it be in the Middle East or elsewhere. It is our job to make sure that those in uniform can protect the interests of America in the days and years ahead.

In the last 30 years, we have had 12 military conflicts in which our military associates have been involved. What does the future hold? We don't know. But as sure as God made little green apples, there will be threats that we need to deter or challenges that we need to fight in the days and years ahead. We must have a ready force in all services and my deep concern for the United States Army causes that to come into question in our capability.

In this we provide money for the real war in Afghanistan, the Strategic Reserve Fund, which supports training, not just operations but repair of equipment, purchase of equipment, and expenses to improve the readiness of the nondeployed military forces.

I am deeply concerned about the readiness of our forces in the days and years ahead. This bill will help immeasurably in that first step toward restoring readiness for our United States Army. And this is no small thing. A vote against this is a vote against those uncertainties of the future as well as where we are today involved in conflict.

Military health care is very important, and we look at that in this bill solidly. Veterans' health care, military housing allowances. We do so many good things in this bill for our military.

Let us not let the readiness of our United States Army suffer as a result of not passing this all-important legislation.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1362, the Accountability in Contracting Act. This bill amends title 10 and 41, United States Code, and establishes other new statutory requirements to improve the quality of government contracts, increase government contract oversight, and promote integrity in contracting.

The House Armed Services Committee approved this legislation on a bipartisan vote of 53-0. Our committee has worked for decades to improve the contracting process within the Department of Defense.

Over this time, the committee has passed numerous bills, including both major additions to contract law and focused revisions. We utilized the experience gained in these legislative efforts to formulate our recommendations in this bill. I am confident that this is a good product that will improve contracting and save the taxpayer money.

Right now, American military forces are deployed throughout the world in support of the war on terrorism as well as other military operations, including Iraq. These contingency operations have generated a number of very large contracts, the Department of Defense has expended billions of dollars on support and reconstruction contracts that have been awarded, administered and overseen in the most challenging of conditions.

H.R. 1362 would help address these challenges by empowering the heads of the military departments and the defense agencies to ensure the proper use of a variety of contract types, both competitive and noncompetitive, and by empowering Congress to oversee such contracts. It also ensures continued faith in the integrity of the procurement system.

I thank my friend and colleague, Chairman Waxman, for introducing this legislation and bringing it to the floor today. And I especially want to thank my friend and partner on the Armed Services Committee, Mr. Hunter, who is the ranking member and the former chairman, for working so closely with us on this legislation. I thank him for that.

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

Mr. Chairman, I will be glad to yield 1 minute to the gentleman.

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

I first wish to thank the gentleman from California and all the members of the Armed Services Committee that worked on this legislation that recommended its passage by a 53-0 vote, and I was very pleased and proud of that. Of course, it was changed to about 1 percent as opposed to 99 percent that we approved in our committee.

The change merely clarifies the application of post-employment restrictions to senior level officials who are involved with procurement. It is a minor change. The language was shared with the minority well before the bill went to the Rules Committee for its rule on bringing it to the floor today. So I think that the change made post-Rules Committee effectually was minimal, or as they say in the law, de minimus; and I am sorry that there is a question that has arisen to that effect.

This bill does not affect the rapid acquisition authority that the Armed Services Committee did approve. It allows, as the gentleman from California mentioned, 1 year for emergency contracts, and it can go longer if the agency head so determines that it is needed.

I wish that this bill, as it is before us, could receive a unanimous vote on the floor because of what it does. It is clear. It helps the procurement process. It brings it home to every American that we are on top of the matter and that oversight is happening, and it is a clarification of a law that is actually overdue and well deserved.

I applaud all those who worked on it. I am going to thank the gentleman from California for his work on the Committee on Armed Services and all of those, Democrats, Republicans, who did approve it and thank the chairman, Mr. Waxman, for his hard efforts in bringing this to the floor.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining time.

I thank the gentleman from California; and, again, I certainly hope we could get a strong bipartisan vote for this bill. It does good things. It clarifies the law and makes sure that the American taxpayer is more protected regarding contracts. It is fair. It is equitable. It is easy to understand.

All you have to do is read the King's English and follow the law, and it will help clarify so much of the problems that have arisen in recent years regarding contracting.

Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, it has come to my attention that a long and exceptionally distinguished career in public service is about to come to a close. Leona ``Kay'' Hutchison Williams will retire from her position as city clerk of Versailles on March 31, 2007.

Leona ``Kay'' Hutchison Williams was born on July 12, 1943, to Leo and Erma McBroom Hutchison in Latham, MO. She is a graduate of Morgan County R-II High School and went on to take classes at CMC in Warrensburg and SMC in Springfield.

Kay has performed many valuable and notable services for the community of Versailles. She has served as chairman of the Versailles High School Alumni Association in 1965, 2006 and 2007; is a member of the First Baptist Church; was appointed City Clerk in March of 1973; was appointed water clerk, was appointed purchasing agent; was appointed office manager; was elected city collector in April of 1974; is a member of the Central Missouri City Clerks and Finance Officers Association; is a member of the Missouri City

Clerks and Finance Officer Association; International Institute of Municipal Clerk's Board Member of the Missouri Municipal League; and a member of the Morgan County Historical Society.

In addition, Kay is a member of the Women's Civic Club; a member of the Gold Wing Road Riders Association; a charter member of Missouri B-2 Gold Wing Riders Association; was awarded the B-2 Chapter of the Year Couple in 2000 & 2007; a member of West Central Riders; has served on the Chamber of Commerce Board and Old Tyme Apple Festival for 23 years; was chosen Citizen of the Year January, 1991; co-established the Adult Winter Volleyball league; a member of the 1986 Co-Ed Volleyball Team that placed 2nd in the Missouri Show-Me State Games; and Chaired the Committee to enter The Old Tyme Apple Festival into the Library of Congress for its Birthday Celebration.

Leona ``Kay'' Hutchison Williams is a leader in her community. She was one of the first tellers at the Morgan County Bank in 1963 and has served as secretary for the National Farmers Organization. Ms. Williams has also served as city clerk, city collector, and deputy city clerk working with 7 mayors and 35 different aldermen. Outside of public service, her greatest joy is time spent with her husband, Lonnie Joe, their two daughters, and one step grandson.

Madam Speaker, I wish Leona ``Kay'' Hutchison Williams all the best in her retirement and I know the Members of the House will join me in thanking her for her commitment to her community.

Madam Speaker, it is with deep sadness that I inform the House of the death of Mr. and Mrs. Richard Doak of Stover, MO.

Richard L. Doak was born on December 24, 1922, and was the second of seven children to the late Grace and Edgar Doak. Upon completion of high school, Richard became a student at the University of Missouri- Columbia. His college education was interrupted to volunteer for service in the United States Army in World War II. On August 19, 1944, he married Virginia Ray McClesky and soon after completed his undergraduate education, receiving a B.S. in Agriculture. He again served his country as an infantry platoon leader, 7th Division, 31st (Polar Bear) Regiment, Charlie Company, during the Korean War. In honor of his commitment to the U.S. Army, he was awarded both the Silver Star for gallantry in combat and the Bronze Star for meritorious service. After his service, the Doaks returned to Missouri where they would raise their four children on the family farm. Mr. Doak later earned a master's degree in Education from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and served as a teacher at Payne School and as an elementary school principal at Hallsville, Jefferson City, and Versailles, MO. In 1985, Richard retired from teaching and returned to work on his farm raising and showing Southdown sheep.

Virginia Ray (McClesky) Doak was born on December 8, 1922, in King, Texas, to Estelle and Henry McClesky. Virginia graduated from high school in Gatesville and attended the University of Mary Hardin-Baylor. After receiving her degree, Virginia taught school at Purmela and Plainview in Texas and Payne School in Missouri. On August 19, 1944, she married Richard Doak, a Missourian she had met while he was stationed at Fort Hood. While raising a family in Missouri, Virginia remained close to her family in Texas and looked forward to visiting them at Christmas and during the summer.

Madam Speaker, Richard and Virginia Doak were great friends of mine and were valuable members of the Stover community. I know the Members of the House will join me in extending heartfelt condolences to their family.

Madam Speaker, it is with deep sadness that I inform the House of the death of Adjutant GEN Charles Kiefner.

General Kiefner was born on June 28, 1930, in Cape Girardeau, MO. Upon completion of high school, he attended Westminster College. Kiefner began his military career by enlisting in the Missouri National Guard as a private in Company F, 140th Infantry Regiment. On September 11, 1950, he entered active duty with Missouri's 175th Military Police Battalion.

General Kiefner was commissioned a second lieutenant, Infantry, on December 21, 1951. He served as a platoon leader, company commander, battalion motor officer, battalion S-2, brigade adjutant and S-3, executive officer and logistics officer on the staff of the adjutant general.

General Kiefner was appointed adjutant general by Governor Christopher ``Kit'' Bond on May 8, 1973, and would serve in this capacity until March 1977. As a member of the U.S. Army Reserve he served as a liaison officer to the U.S. Military Academy, West Point, from 1978 to 1980. He was re-appointed to lead the Missouri National Guard by Governor Bond in 1981 and Governor Ashcroft re-appointed him in 1989. While serving in this position, General Kiefner served as president of the National Guard Association of the United States.

General Kiefner retired from the National Guard in 1993 and was promoted to the grade of lieutenant general, Missouri National Guard Retired Listm, by Governor Mel Carnahan. His decorations and awards include: the Distinguished Service Medal, Legion of Merit with Oak Leaf Cluster, Meritorious Service Medal, Army Commendation Medal, Air Force Commendation Medal, Good Conduct Medal, Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal, Humanitarian Service Medal, Armed Forces Reserve Medal, Department of Defense Identification Badge, Ranger Tab, the NGB and

NGAUS Distinguished Service Medal, Missouri Meritorious Service Medal, Missouri Conspicuous Service Medal, Distinguished Service Medal: Indiana, Minnesota, and Tennessee; Minnesota Medal for Merit, 1992 Distinguished Alumni-Award-Westminster College, Field Artillery Association Order of St. Barbara, Army Engineers Association Silver Order of the de Fleury Medal, and the Sons of the American Revolution Silver Good Citizenship Award.

Madam Speaker, General Kiefner was a valuable leader who was respected by everyone who knew him. I know the Members of the House will join me in extending heartfelt condolences to his wife Marilyn and his sons, John and Keith.

Madam Speaker, as a lifelong resident of Lafayette County, MO, it gives me great pleasure to introduce H. Res. 171, a resolution honoring the life of the Marquis de Lafayette on the occasion of the 250th anniversary of his birth.

Lafayette occupies a considerable place in the history of the United States. More than any one person, he symbolizes the assistance American colonists received from Europe in the struggle for independence from Great Britain.

Lafayette was a man of considerable military skill who sympathized with American revolutionary fighters. After withdrawing from the French army and traveling across the ocean at his own expense, the Congress voted Lafayette the rank and commission of major general in the Continental Army. His military service during the Revolutionary War was invaluable to GEN George Washington, earning him the title of ``the soldier's friend.'' Lafayette's strategic thinking and dedication as a general officer serve as a model for present day military personnel.

After achieving military victory, Lafayette returned to France, helping the U.S. to secure trade agreements and critical loans with European nations. He also became a prominent figure in the French Revolution, speaking out in support of universal freedom and human rights.

Because of Lafayette's commitment to America, Congress honored him with awards of money and land. Congress was also presented a life-size portrait of Lafayette that hangs in the Chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives. The portrait is one of only two in the House Chamber. The other is of President George Washington, Lafayette's closest friend and role model.

At the invitation of President James Monroe, Lafayette returned to the United States in 1824 and 1825. He embarked upon a triumphant tour, during which he visited 25 States, including Missouri, and he became the first foreign dignitary to address a joint session of Congress. During this visit and thereafter, various American leaders honored Lafayette by naming many cities, towns, and counties for him. Lafayette County, MO, which is my home, is named for Lafayette.

As we take a moment this year to honor the Marquis de Lafayette on the occasion of his 250th birthday, let us remember how he helped secure American independence and helped establish the United States as an international presence. The values of democracy espoused by our Founding Fathers and by Lafayette have been the bedrock of U.S. domestic and international policymaking for generations.

I urge all Americans and especially those in the military to study Lafayette as America pays tribute to him.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 47) supporting the goals and ideals of a National Medal of Honor Day to celebrate and honor the recipients of the Medal of Honor.

Mr. 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 now under consideration.

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

Today I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 47, which I introduced to recognize the extraordinary heroism and sacrifice of the Nation's

Medal of Honor recipients and to increase America's awareness of the significance and meaning of the Medal of Honor among our American citizens.

I want to thank my colleague on the House Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) for being here in support of this issue this afternoon.

The Congressional Medal of Honor is our Nation's highest military award for valor in action against an enemy that can be bestowed on any member of the Armed Forces.

Since the medal was created in 1861, more than 3,400 individuals who have served our Nation in uniform have been awarded the Medal of Honor.

The first medal was established by the United States Navy to recognize sailors and marines who distinguish themselves in war. President Abraham Lincoln signed Public Resolution 82 into law, and thus the first medal of valor was created. The Army shortly followed in 1862 by establishing a Medal of Honor to recognize commissioned officers and privates who distinguished themselves by their gallantry in action. The Medal of Honor became a permanent decoration in 1863. The first award was given to Army Assistant Surgeon Bernard J.D. Irwin for his bravery in rescuing 60 soldiers at Apache Pass, Arizona, in 1861.

It is very interesting, Mr. Speaker, that a Medal of Honor was awarded a Union soldier years after the 1861 Battle of Lexington, Missouri, my hometown, for his gallantry in helping to retake the Anderson House, which was the hospital at the time of that battle, September 18, 19 and 20, 1861. His name was Palmer.

The current conflict in Iraq sadly has posthumously added two heroic and courageous individuals to the rolls, Sergeant First Class Paul Smith of the United States Army, and Corporal Jason Dunham of the United States Marines. These two individuals continue to epitomize the recipients of the Medal of Honor, whose uncommon valor and extraordinary bravery are standard characteristics.

It is interesting to note also, Mr. Speaker, that in the history of the medal, 19 men received a second award. 14 of them received two separate medals for separate actions, and one was awarded to a woman. Of the more than 3,400 medals awarded, 266 of those were awarded for action during World War II, and 154 were awarded for action during the Vietnam conflict. Today there are only 111 living recipients of the Medal of Honor. America is rapidly losing its greatest and true heroes.

It is also important to note that when Missouri's President, Harry Truman, awarded the Medal of Honor to a soldier at the end of the Second World War, he said he would rather have this medal than being president.

The resolution before the House seeks to recognize the heroism and sacrifice of the Nation's Medal of Honor recipients, and to urge the establishment of a National Medal of Honor Day to ensure that all Americans continue to celebrate and to honor the contributions and ideals that the Medal of Honor recipients exemplify.

Mr. Speaker, I urge the support of this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we are able to bring this resolution to the floor. It is highly important that we recognize those very special individuals who received the Medal of Honor and will bear the recognition throughout their lives, as well as their family receiving recognition should they be awarded posthumously.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 5 minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota, the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, my friend, Mr. Peterson.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts, the chairman of the Financial Services Committee, Mr. Frank.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Massachusetts 30 seconds.

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

The question is, where are we today? We are looking at this conflict today and the consequences that it has upon tomorrow and tomorrow's military readiness.

I spoke about the lack of readiness last summer. Others did as well. We had a hearing on it a good number of months ago, our committee responded, and we thank the gentleman from California for helping in that massive effort to re-equip our Army as was necessary, and hopefully we will be able to do more in the future.

But where are we today? Yesterday regarding the issue of readiness of our Army, the Army Chief of Staff, General Schoomaker, said that the increase of 17,500 Army combat troops in Iraq represents only the tip of the iceberg and will potentially require thousands of additional support troops and trainers as well as equipment, further eroding the Army's readiness to respond to other world contingencies.

In the last 30 years, there have been 12 military engagements, some large, some small, that our country has engaged in. The Pentagon says they would only need some 2,500 support troops for the 20,000-plus combat troops. The Congressional Budget Office says there is going to be a necessary 13,000 in additional support troops. But the issue of readiness is real, it is there today because of additional combat troops, and that is what we are debating today. That is exactly the issue today. The readiness of tomorrow is contingent upon what happens today.

I yield, Mr. Speaker, 5 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to my friend the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), the chairman of the Budget Committee and also a member of the Armed Services Committee.

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

The gentleman my friend, Mr. McKeon, raised a very interesting issue about who is really involved in this war in this country. My opinion is those in uniform and their families.

All one has to do is to go to Walter Reed and the Bethesda hospitals, go to visitation or a funeral, and those are the ones, and the saying good-bye to the National Guard and Reserve units, the active duty units, the farewells and the welcome homes, those and their families are those that are involved.

And I am afraid the gentleman is correct, that they are the only ones that are actually involved with this war.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman. He reiterates what I have been saying, that it seems like the members in uniform and their families are the ones truly involved in this war.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to section 2 of House Resolution 157, and as the designee of the majority leader, I request that the time for debate be enlarged by 1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the leaders or their designees.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my friend, the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my friend, the gentlewoman from New York, the chairwoman of the Small Business Committee, Ms. Velazquez.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 5 minutes to my friend from California, the gentleman who is also the chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, Mr. Miller.

(Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, it is a privilege to share this body and this floor with the remarkable gentleman from Texas. I applaud him for his patriotism, his courage, and commitment to America.

Madam Speaker, we have had a long debate on this resolution. I have listened to critics, and I find it quite interesting that the criticism is focused almost exclusively on what this resolution doesn't say, rather than what it does.

Let me review, if I may. The resolution says two simple things: We support the troops completely, wholeheartedly, now and in the future; and we disapprove of the White House's plan to deploy more than 20,000 additional combat troops to Iraq.

That is what we are voting on today, and nothing said on this floor or in this Chamber will change the fact that that is what is before us.

I oppose the President's plan because it will embroil our troops even more deeply in a sectarian conflict. Some call this conflict a civil war, some call this more complicated than a civil war, and, either way, it is a conflict we cannot resolve and which ultimately cannot be resolved militarily.

The President's plan to deploy more troops is simply not the answer. It cannot fix the three irretrievable mistakes made in 2003 when the administration insisted on de-Baathification, dissolving the Iraqi army, and shutting down the state-run industries, throwing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis out of work and creating untold numbers of insurgents.

The President's plan hastily put together is insufficient in a number of ways:

It is insufficient in the requirements for progress it places on the Iraqi political system, the true center of gravity in this whole conflict.

It is insufficient in the support it provides to our combat forces both in terms of equipment as well as support forces.

And it is insufficient in the amount of training time it allows for deploying units.

As a result, under the President's plan, U.S. military forces will be less ready to go into during and after this troop increase; and, sadly, they could be stretched to the point of breaking. To the point of breaking.

Now, finally, I oppose the White House's plan because it will heighten the already unacceptable level of strategic risk currently facing our Nation,

strategic risk that exists because our military is overcommited in Iraq and is ill-equipped and ill-positioned to respond to emerging crises elsewhere in the world. And this worries me, it worries me deeply.

I have been privileged to serve here in Congress slightly over 30 years, and over that time 12 significant military contingencies have occurred in which our military have been involved. Each of them occurred in an unexpected place and at an unexpected time. It will happen again. Right now, we are not prepared as we should be for an unforeseen military threat. That worries me.

Unfortunately, it is the magnificent, wonderful, courageous men and women of our military who will pay the price for that failure.

Madam Speaker, we must send the White House a message that cannot be ignored; and that is why we are here today. I urge that we pass the Skelton-Lantos-Jones resolution.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my friend, my colleague and chairman of the Appropriations Committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my friend and colleague, the chairman of the Readiness Subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my friend the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan), who is also the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larsen) who is also a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the majority leader.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my colleague, a fellow member of the Armed Services Committee, the gentlelady from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez).

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire about the time that has been consumed and the time remaining, please?

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

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to note that this debate is about so many things other than the resolution that is before us. Simple, straightforward, in plain English language, two points. The first is, we in this Congress fully support those wonderful young men and women in uniform.

Secondly, we do not agree with the addition of 21,500 troops into Iraq. That is what we ought to be debating.

I listened to my good friend from Virginia speak of Normandy, I was there with him. I saw my friend, Dr. Tommy MacDonnell, with a worn Purple Heart and a Cluster and his Silver Star in his uniform that day. Great memories, great American victory. But what in the world is the debate involving other battles, other days, other conditions, when we ought to be talking about this? This is a simple, straightforward debate.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Georgia, a member of the Armed Services Committee (Mr. Marshall).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my colleague, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand), a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson), a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia. I yield 5 minutes to my colleague on the Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, a member of the Armed Services Committee (Mr. Sestak).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my friend for years and my colleague, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), who is the vice chairman of the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to the gentleman from North Carolina, but first I would like to recognize the gentleman from New York (Mr. McNulty) for purposes of a unanimous-consent request.

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

Yes.

I have one remaining speaker, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), who is the Chair of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security on the Appropriations Committee.

(Mr. PRICE of North Carolina asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5\1/2\ minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I speak today with a heavy heart. I am deeply saddened as I take the floor this afternoon; saddened because we find ourselves embroiled in a conflict in Iraq, a conflict that is involved with insurgents that we failed to acknowledge or recognize, a conflict that is overlaid by sectarian violence between the Shiite Muslims on the one hand and Sunni Muslims on the other.

Mr. Speaker, this is a great American tragedy. The mission of this Congress is to urge the change of course.

We are here today because of a series of irretrievable strategic mistakes. Let's understand the goal of this resolution: number one, to fully extend our support to those in the uniform of the United States. I have been on the Armed Services Committee now throughout the years, and more recently as its chairman, and I cannot tell you how proud I am of those who are in uniform, whether they be deployed in the Middle East or somewhere else in the globe or here in our country. We must let them know, and this resolution does let them know, that we fully support them, as well as their wonderful families.

The second part of this resolution deals with the Presidential decision to increase our troops by 21,500. However, it is not clear what support troops are needed. The Pentagon says 2,500 support troops. The Congressional Budget Office says 13,000 minimum. But whatever it is, we find ourselves not seeing a change in strategy, as was promised by the administration and the White House, but just another tactic that had been used before, an increase in troops. No more, no less. We are here to say that is not a good idea.

The series of irretrievable mistakes is a serious list: the skewed intelligence we received from the Defense Department Office of Special Plans; the postwar phase of conflict that did not have sufficient planning; not enough troops, as pointed out by General Eric Shinseki, the former Army Chief of Staff; allowing the uncontrolled looting and the breakdown of law early on after the occupation began; the dismissal of the Iraqi Army, rather than giving them a paycheck and a shovel or having them do security work that is important to the stability of that country; the deBathification, that put so many thousands of Iraqis out of business, out of work, including thousands of school teachers. The administration has consistently refused to adjust its overall strategy.

I take no pleasure in this, but it is a moment of ``I told you so.'' On September 4, 2002, and again on March 18, 2003, I sent letters to the White House

predicting some of the deadly outcomes we are experiencing today, and I warned against a jagged ending to the conflict. While there is a peacefully elected Iraqi Government, it is a government so divided along sectarian lines it has not been able to accomplish even the most basic steps needed for national reconciliation. And now we have the President's plan for a troop increase, which is a tactic that we do not approve.

The President's plan will embroil our troops even more deeply into the sectarian conflict. Put together hastily, it is insufficient as a requirement for success. Forty percent of all of the Army equipment of our country is either in Afghanistan or Iraq. The readiness of our troops is in peril. We are stretching the Army and the Marine Corps to the breaking point. That is where we are, and basically it is because of the conflict in Iraq.

Today is an opportunity for us to express our support for the troops and to say it is not a good idea to increase the troop level in Iraq because it has been tried unsuccessfully before.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee (Mr. Lantos).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan, a veteran of the Second World War, Mr. Dingell.

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

I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from New York, a Korean War veteran, recipient of the Purple Heart, recipient of the Bronze Star, Mr. Rangel.

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I find it rather interesting, Mr. Speaker, that those who oppose this simple, straightforward resolution tend to confuse a permissive war with a necessary war. The goals of the insurgents in Iraq are far different from the terrorists that had their genesis in Afghanistan. Let us not be confused between the two conflicts or their origins or those against whom we fight.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to a veteran of the Korean War, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers).

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

Mr. Speaker, once again my friends on the other side of the aisle are attempting to confuse the conflict in Iraq with the war against terrorists and has their genesis in Afghanistan, trying to put it all in one basket. That is not the case. Anybody can have their own opinion, but, Mr. Speaker, they may not have their own facts.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 5 minutes to my colleague from California (Mr. Thompson), a gentleman who is a Vietnam combat veteran of the 173rd Airborne Brigade.

Mr. Speaker, during his 20 years of service to this country, the gentleman to whom I am about to yield earned two Distinguished Flying Crosses, two Bronze Stars, the Soldiers Medal and other awards. A Vietnam combat veteran serving two tours as an assault helicopter pilot, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell).

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

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire about the time that has been consumed and the time remaining on each side, please.

Then subject to the Chair, I wish to recognize more than one speaker in a row on our side.

I yield, Mr. Speaker, 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Boyd), a gentleman who is a Vietnam combat veteran, rifle platoon leader of the 101st Airborne Division.

That would be fine.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Patrick J. Murphy) first and only Iraq war veteran to serve in this body, a Member of the 82nd Airborne Division, who received the Bronze Star and his unit received the Presidential Unit Citation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina, United States Army veteran, Mr. Etheridge.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Baca), former paratrooper with both the 101st and 82nd Airborne Divisions.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Con. Res. 63.

I yield the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker, to my friend, my colleague, the gentleman from California, the chairman on the Committee on Foreign Affairs (Mr. Lantos). I ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control the time.

May I make an inquiry, Madam Speaker, of how much time has been consumed and how much time remains on each side, please.

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

The great Chinese strategist and thinker once wrote that war should not be begun unless the end is in sight. Sadly, that admonition of Sun Tzu was not adhered to in this war in Iraq.

Let me bring us back to what we are all about today. We have been hearing discussions ranging from both ends of the football field. This is a very simple, straightforward resolution.

The first part of it is: We fully support the American troops. And I am going to say, Madam Speaker, we are so proud of them. They are volunteers, they are professionals, they understand the word duty.

And, secondly: We do not agree with the troop increase of 21,500, for the simple reason it has not worked in the past, for the simple reason it is going to cause somewhere between 2,500 and 13,000 support troops to support that effort. And, consequently, it is not a well-thought-out tactic. And despite the fact that some wish to call it a strategy, it is a tactic, and there is a large difference between the two.

Madam Speaker, at this time I yield 5 minutes to a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee as well as the Budget Committee, the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Northern Virginia, a member of the Appropriations Committee, Congressman Jim Moran

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

My friend from New York, a fellow member of the Armed Services Committee, Mr. McHugh, a good friend, I must agree with him on one comment that he made when he said, I am troubled by the course that lies ahead.

Madam Speaker, I am very troubled about the course that lies ahead. That is what we are about this evening. We have seen an irretrievable strategic mistake made in Iraq that put us where we are. And consequently it brings us to this point where we express our concern and disagreement with the increase in troops in this crucial time in Iraq and allows us the opportunity to say thank you. We are proud of you, each of you who wears the American uniform.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

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

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from the Appropriations Committee, Mr. Hinchey, the gentleman from New York.

Madam Speaker, at this time I yield the balance of my time to the gentlelady from California, who is a member of the Armed Services Committee and chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, Mrs. Tauscher. I ask unanimous consent that she be allowed to control the time from this moment.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Ms. Brenda Wright, a long-time House Armed Services Committee Employee, on her retirement after 30 years of exemplary and professional service.

Throughout her tenure on the committee, Ms. Wright has been a selfless and dedicated employee and public servant. After serving for six years at the Interstate Commerce Commission, Brenda joined the House Armed Services Committee on February 14, 1977. Initially,

she provided administrative support for the Sea Power subcommittee chaired by Charles E. Bennett and was promoted to her current position as Professional Staff Member on the full committee in 1988.

During the past 30 years, Ms. Wright has served seven committee chairmen, including myself, and has witnessed many pivotal moments in U.S. Congressional and military history. The House Armed Services Committee has been fortunate to benefit from the contributions of those who, like Brenda, not only have a great deal of experience, but who also appreciate and understand the history and the workings of this committee. Brenda joined the Congressional community at a time when our military faced the challenges of the aftermath of the Vietnam War, and since then, her efforts on behalf of our men and women in uniform have been consistent and unwavering. Recently, she recalled that one of the highlights of her tenure was the opportunity to personally witness the commissioning of the USS Cincinnati Los Angeles-class submarine and to stand among the service members who serve our nation so capably.

Madam Speaker, public perception of Congress frequently seems to be based on the personalities and characters of a few powerful figures. However, as one who shares Brenda's long tenure on the Hill, I know that Congress relies on the dedicated staff who steadfastly complete their work in the shadow of the dome and in the shadow of the limelight. Brenda Wright has gained a well-earned reputation as a dependable, loyal, and capable staff member whose absence will be felt by all who have had the privilege of working with her.

On behalf of all of the members of the House Armed Services Committee and her colleagues on the HASC staff, I congratulate Brenda on her upcoming retirement and thank her for her exemplary public service. With deep appreciation, we extend sincere best wishes to Brenda, her sons Robert and Lavan and their families for continued health and happiness.

Mr. Speaker, at the conclusion of the 109th Congress, Republicans adjourned for the year without completing work on 9 of the 11 budget bills that fund the operations of the federal government. Completion of the federal government's annual budget is one of Congress' most critical tasks, but even though several months have gone by since the beginning of the fiscal year, only 2 of the 11 bills for fiscal year 2007--Defense and Homeland Security Appropriations--have been signed into law.

This failure to complete Congress' most basic task--to pay the country's bills--has left newly elected leaders of the House and the Senate with no choice but to make tough choices with regard to the fiscal year 2007 budget.

Since October 2006, the federal government has been operating on the basis of a temporary measure known as a continuing resolution. This resolution is set to expire on February 15, 2007, and unless Congress approves funding for federal programs covering Agriculture; Commerce, Justice, and Science; Energy and Water; Foreign Operations; Interior and the Environment; Labor, Health & Human Services, and Education; Legislative Branch; Military Construction and Veterans Affairs; and Transportation, Treasury, and Housing, federal government operations in these areas will cease.

Over the past weeks, House leaders have been writing legislation that would ensure the federal government remains operational through fiscal year 2007. Today, the House is considering H.J. Res. 20, a joint resolution that will keep the federal government open and require most federal programs to operate under tight budget constraints. While modest increases were allotted to some of America's high priority items, such as veterans' and military health care, law enforcement, and education, the bill cuts over 60 federal programs and rescinds unobligated balances on many other programs to pay for them. Further, the bill explicitly eliminates special funding provisions, commonly referred to as ``earmarks.''

H.J. Res. 20 is not a perfect bill, and I am concerned about how it might impact some federal programs that are important to Missouri residents. Despite my concerns, I have concluded that it is in our nation's best interest to quickly approve this appropriations package and focus our attention toward the President's fiscal year 2008 budget and the President's anticipated supplemental appropriations request for military efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. I commend Congressman Obey for drafting such complex legislation that makes the best of a bad situation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Frank Barnes, a long-time House Armed Services Committee employee, on his retirement from the U.S. House of Representatives after 36 years of exemplary and professional service.

Frank began his congressional career by joining the Office of the Speaker and Parliamentarian in 1972. Already then, Madam Speaker, were Frank's trademark traits--professionalism, dedication, loyalty, and kindness of spirit--in evidence. In fact, in a letter commending him for his service, Speaker Carl Albert wrote to Frank the following:

``Your ability to deal directly with the Members of the

House and their staffs when the occasion arose was

outstanding. This sets your job above most of those in other

offices around the Capitol, and your performance in this

regard has brought credit to yourself and to the Office of

the Speaker and Parliamentarian. But beyond your ability to

do a great job, I want to thank you for the manner in which

you did it. You were always courteous, thoughtful and

helpful. No task ever proved too difficult, and you

consistently seemed to do more than what was asked.

Since March 5, 1979, the House Armed Services Committee has been fortunate to benefit from his abilities and skills. Serving six

committee chairmen, Frank's contributions ensured the smooth operation of committee business, under frequently demanding hearing and mark-up schedules, and helped facilitate the annual defense authorization process. His dedication was such that even after suffering a stroke last year before markup, Frank chided his doctor for not allowing him to leave the hospital and go to work.

Madam Speaker, too often public perception of Congress is colored by the actions of a few powerful or well-known figures. However, as one who shares Frank's long tenure on Capitol Hill, I know that Congress relies on the dedicated staff who steadfastly complete their work in the shadow of the dome and in the shadow of the limelight. Frank has tenaciously labored on behalf of our men and women in uniform as well as each of us in this Chamber and his absence will be felt by all who have had the privilege of working with him.

Simply stated, Frank leaves a legacy that is both remarkable and unsurpassable.

On behalf of all of the members of the House Armed Services Committee and his colleagues on the HASC staff, I congratulate Frank on his retirement and thank him for his exemplary public service. With deep appreciation, we extend to Frank, his wife Ann, his sons Frank Jr. and Glenn and their families every best wish for health and happiness in the years to come.