Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I often say that the opportunity to serve on Veterans' Affairs Committee is one of the greatest privileges I have been given in my short time in Congress. The action on the floor of the House today is another reminder of how it is truly an honor to serve on this Committee. Earlier this afternoon the House passed several pieces of legislation to improve outreach and care to our nation's veterans.

Memorial Day is the day for Americans to officially honor the heroes who have fallen in service to our country, and a day to pray for and remember the brave souls who have given the ultimate sacrifice. We are the beneficiaries of those who serve and who have served to preserve the peace and freedom we enjoy.

As a nation, we honor the bravery of those who have fought and died for our country and recognize the tremendous sacrifices they and their families have made. But to truly honor these heroes it is our duty as a grateful nation to not just spend the day remembering their service, but to provide the promised support and benefits to the soldiers and veterans who served with and followed them. These bills help provide that support.

H.R. 67, the Veterans Outreach Improvement Act, creates a grant program to allow the VA to partner with State and county veteran organizations to reach out to veterans and their families to ensure they are aware of their eligibility for benefits.

This bipartisan bill also increases acountability in spending taxpayer dollars by requiring reports on how the grants in this program have been used to improve outreach. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this bill and am pleased it has passed the House.

H.R. 612 is an extremely important piece of legislation. This bill will extend access to VA Healthcare for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans from two years to five years. This is vital to the health of our veterans returning from Iraq because of the nature of Traumatic Brain Injury and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

In some cases, TBI and PTSD symptoms do not emerge until several years after the injury occurred. With the current freeze on Category 8 veteran enrollment in VA healthcare, this means that some OIF/OEF will realize they suffered a brain injury while deployed but be locked out of the system.

They might not have health insurance to cover their treatment, and will not have crucial medical documents that will help them receive disability benefits.

By expanding their eligibility for 3 additional years, Congress is acting to limit the damage done by the President's Category 8 veterans enrollment freeze. I was proud to also cosponsor this legislation.

Another extremely important bill to our Iraq and Afghanistan veterans is H.R. 2199, the Traumatic Brain Injury Health Enhancement and Long Term Support Act.

TBI is the signature injury of the war in Iraq and this bill vastly improves the VA's ability to provide care for brain injury.

This bill requires the VA to establish a program to screen veterans for TBI and establish a program of long term care for acute TBI victims.

Currently, of the nearly 1,300 VA health care facilities in the United States, only 4 have specialized TBI programs. This bill allows the VA to partner with private facilities to provide treatment the VA cannot immediately provide.

It also establishes centers of research and a national database so we can better understand the causes and symptoms of TBI. Hopefully, this will allow us to better treat victims in the future. This bill contains provisions of H.R. 1944, a bill I originally cosponsored.

H.R. 1470 expands chiropractic care to all VA facilities throughout the country by 2011. During a subcommittee hearing on returning Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, several OIF veterans suggested that back injuries will be a long term problem for this generation of veterans. This bill will help the VA better prepare for this new wave of patients.

I am proud that these bills passed the House today and that I could support their passage.

Congress has a responsibility to live up to our promises to our veterans. Today was another down payment on fulfilling these promises.

Through my role on the Veterans Affairs Committee, I pledge to continue to push for legislation that will improve services for our veterans and treat them with the respect they have worked so hard to earn.

Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 407, the Heller of Nevada amendment, had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, today this House is again going to consider legislation that would heed the

will of the American people by changing course in Iraq and paving the way for responsible redeployment of our troops.

Although the President claims that he is interested in cooperation with Congress, his most recent veto threat shows that to him cooperation still means, ``I'm the decider, you will do what I say.'' Well, the American people feel differently. The President is going to have to acknowledge that his course in Iraq is the wrong course, and that it is time to abandon this approach and work with Congress.

The bill we are considering today funds our troops, enhances our ability to go after al Qaeda and ensures benchmarks for the Iraqi Government that will ensure we are not on a road to nowhere in Iraq.

This bill sets the stage for responsible winding down of our military involvement in Iraq, and I urge my colleagues to support it and the President to sign it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my disappointment with President Bush's veto of the Iraq Accountability Act. Sadly, this is just the latest example of the President's unwillingness to change his mistaken policy towards Iraq. After more than 4 years of the President's stay-the-course strategy in Iraq, we must provide a responsible plan to redeploy our troops and require the Iraqi government to meet basic benchmarks for stability. This bill presented that plan and the President should have signed it into law.

Last month, 4 years after the President declared ``Mission Accomplished,'' was the deadliest month for American troops in Iraq this year. For too long, the Republican-led Congress failed to exercise its Constitutional responsibility to hold the Bush Administration accountable--with disastrous results for the American people. No longer.

I have opposed the war in Iraq since its start, and today with my vote to override the veto I was proud to vote once again to take our policy in Iraq in a new direction. More than 4 years after the President declared the end of major combat in Iraq, we suffered over 100 U.S. military casualties in April alone. We must provide a responsible plan to redeploy our troops and require the Iraqi government to meet basic benchmarks for stability.

Our country faces serious threats. There are dangerous people in this world that seek nothing more than to kill as many Americans as possible. The number of people who died from my district on September 11th make me acutely aware of this dire threat. I was proud to vote for a bill that allows us to refocus our military on that threat. That would allow us to seek out, capture, or kill those who were responsible for September 11th or who currently plot to kill Americans rather than police a civil war in Iraq.

I'm disappointed that the President chose to ignore the American people and veto the Iraq Accountability Act. He should have signed this bill, in order to get these needed resources to our troops and our veterans, hold the Iraqi government accountable, change course in Iraq and refocus on destroying Al Qaeda.

As we move forward, the President must realize that this Congress is not going to give the President a blank check with which to ignore the will of the American people on Iraq. Four years of a flawed strategy are 4 years too long.

Mr. Chairman, I won't need that much time.

Thank you to my colleague from Rhode Island and from the other side of the floor, who just spoke in favor of this amendment. I would like to take a moment to commend all who support this issue.

There are 27 Head Start facilities in my district, and they provide critical services to families that want their children to have every opportunity to grow and succeed. I'm glad that the bill we are considering today will expand access to Head Start and help make sure that America's less well-off children can have a great chance of long- term success when they arrive in our schools.

The amendment will help to meet these goals by providing more support for inclusive education. This is the practice of teaching children with disabilities in the same classrooms as those without disabilities, and it has largely been shown to have a positive effect on the development of those children with disabilities.

The Head Start Act already requires that 10 percent of enrollment slots go to students with disabilities, and the actual number of enrollees is even higher, at about 13 or 14 percent.

Although these classrooms can provide increased educational benefits, they also present teachers and staff with increased demands. Teachers and staff have often been forced to try to handle greater responsibilities without the necessary resources. This amendment would help to bridge that gap by allowing training and technical assistance funds to be spent to enhance the ability of classroom staff to meet the needs of eligible children in inclusive classrooms.

Providing more resources for teacher training and support, this amendment would make great strides in improving the quality of the educational experience for all children in a class.

Another fundamental goal of the Head Start program is to make sure that all children have the best chance of success in school and in life. The second provision of this amendment will help to further serve those goals by working to make sure that the inclusive classroom environment benefits every student, including typically developing children. It would do so by allowing research and evaluation funding to be used in further studying the impact of inclusive classrooms on the educational experience of children with or without disabilities.

I urge my colleagues to support it.

Madam Speaker, on a different subject, regarding H. Con. Res. 95, I thank my colleague, Ms. Woolsey from California, for introducing this resolution honoring Dr. Frances Allen.

Through her years of groundbreaking work at IBM, Frances Allen has been described as a pioneer, teacher, mentor and friend, and I am proud to say a constituent of mine in New York's 19th District. Now, the A.M. Turing award winner can be added to that last list.

The A.M. Turing award is considered to be the Nobel Prize of computing, and I cannot think of an individual more deserving than Frances Allen. Her work has been groundbreaking; not an exaggeration to say it's been part of one of the great technological revolutions in history.

Over the course of her career, Frances Allen's long journey took her from a teacher of FORTRAN to a nationally recognized leader in computer science.

At IBM's T.J. Watson Research Center in Hawthorne, New York, her research and development of program languages and algorithms helped to create the theory of optimization and laid the foundation for much of today's compilers and high performance computing systems.

Her work has been a bridge from the theoretical to the practical in the computer science.

Just as her work has been pioneering, Frances herself has been a pioneer in advancing the role of women in computer science.

An Advisory Council Member of the Anita Borg Institute for Women in Technology, whose goal it is to increase the participation of women in all aspects of technology, she has worked tirelessly to help more women enter the field, and has served as a role model for women and men hoping to make new breakthroughs in computing.

In 1989, she was the first woman to be given prestigious title of IBM fellow. It would seem fitting then that she is also the first woman to receive the A.M. Turing award.

Described as a strong mentor, and noted for her willingness to lend her expertise, advice and experience to anyone, from a struggling graduate student to a university president to an industry executive. Through it all, she's been willing to stand up for what she believes in, and has had a remarkable career.

Dr. Allen is a great source of pride for the Hudson Valley, and I congratulate her for receiving the prestigious A.M. Turing award.

Mr. Chairman, tonight the House took a critical step in the effort to ensure that America remains at the leading edge of the global economy by passing H.R. 363, the Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Act. The provisions in the bill, including expanded grants through the National Science Foundation and Department of Energy for early career researchers, support for research in fields of national importance, and government recruitment of young scientists build on the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences and will help to rebuild our knowledge infrastructure. By doing so, the legislation will help America maintain its leadership in scientific research and allow American innovators to strengthen our economy by finding solutions to achieve energy independence, greater environmental protection, the development of new medical treatments, and a host of other goals. It is for these reasons that I voted to support H.R. 363.

However, I am deeply opposed to language, added to the bill through a motion to recommit, that prioritizes support for research into advanced nuclear reprocessing. Although supporters of nuclear power have renewed their efforts to increase America's reliance on nuclear power, the reality is that there are significant safety and environmental concerns associated with nuclear energy. The storage of spent nuclear fuel is a growing problem facing individual power plants and communities throughout the nation. At the Indian Point Energy Center, there is an ongoing leak of radioactive material from spent fuel pools into the Hudson River, and throughout the country communities that host nuclear facilities are being forced to contemplate the cleanup and security costs associated with the storage of nuclear waste.

We must also clearly understand that, at a time when nuclear terrorism is one of the greatest threats facing our nation, the process used to recycle spent fuel would create a significant proliferation risk by resulting in the production of plutonium that can be used in nuclear weapons. The language prioritizing support for a technology that threatens to damage our environment and undermine our national security is misguided, and tarnishes an otherwise laudable piece of legislation. I am hopeful that this language will not be included in the conference report.

Madam Speaker, on Monday, April 16, 2007, the Virginia Polytechnic Institute was struck by one of the most heinous acts of violence our Nation has ever witnessed. This sense of loss has resonated throughout our country and around the world. It has affected the entire Virginia Tech community and led to an outpouring of sympathy and support from all Americans. It has touched families across the Nation, especially those in my home district in the Hudson Valley, where we lost an outstanding young woman, Caitlin Hammaren.

Caitlin was a young person from Westtown, New York, who graduated from Minisink Valley High School in 2005. She was the section leader in the high school chorus, loved to ride horses, and was kind and generous to all who knew her. As a Resident Assistant in her dormitory at Virginia Tech, she looked over and protected her fellow students and guided them through their daily experiences as young people just learning how to become independent adults. Caitlin will be deeply missed by her family, friends, and the campus community that she was such an important and cherished part of. I know all of my colleagues join me on this day of mourning in sending our thoughts and prayers to Caitlin's family and friends.

Madam Speaker, although I am a staunch advocate of increasing the use of hydroelectric power to meet America's energy needs, I voted against the motion to recommit H.R. 1495 because it does not constitute a good-faith effort to meet this important goal.

Under the guise of supporting renewable energy, the amending language contained in the motion to recommit would have directed the Secretary to undertake a boundless survey of America's waterways and wherever possible to augment existing hydroelectric dams

or build new ones. While supporters of the motion may attempt to portray it as advancing ``green'' solutions to our energy challenges, the reality is that the language only required economic considerations to be taken into account and provided no framework or guidance regarding the environmental suitability of potential hydroelectric sites or requirements to account for environmental impact mitigation or wildlife protection.

I am strongly supportive of exploring beneficial ways to increase the role that hydroelectricity plays in our energy mix, and look forward to working with my colleagues on pursuing environmentally responsible hydroelectric options such as installing low-head hydroelectric turbines in existing small dams. It is extremely important that we explore such alternatives, but we must do so in a way that is thoughtful, measured, and responsible. The language in the motion to recommit could have opened the door to reckless, counterproductive hydroelectric projects and so I chose to vote against it.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 226, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Madam Speaker, I rise today as an original co-sponsor of the Technology Innovation and Manufacturing Stimulation Act of 2007. This bill provides a three-year authorization for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). NIST is one of three agencies targeted by the President's American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI). The ACI aims to double the federal investment in physical science research over the next 10 years. This investment will ensure that American remains technologically competitive in the complex global marketplace.

NIST plays a unique role in that its scientists and engineers have a 100-year plus history of working directly with American industries to address their needs for measurement methods, tools, data, and technology. These are the building blocks that allow industry to grow and prosper. To cite just a few examples, NIST's labs develop chemical, biochemical, and chemical engineering measurements, data, models, and reference standards, provide measurement science for the electronics and electrical industries, and research and develop test methods and standards to improve the usability, reliability and security of computers and computer networks for work and home.

The Technology Innovation and Manufacturing Stimulation Act of 2007 supports the President's ACI by authorizing NIST's labs at a rate that would double the budget over the next 10 years. The bill also supports the competitiveness of American's small and medium-sized manufacturers by authorizing the Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program. Finally, the bill ensures that new research findings will find their way quickly to the marketplace by authorizing the Technology Innovation Program to provide grants to accelerate the development of high-risk technologies.

I thank Mr. Ehlers and Mr. Gingrey for their extensive input in developing this bill and my Democratic colleagues for incorporating our priorities into this bipartisan legislation. I look forward to working on this bill with all of my colleagues on the Science and Technology Committee.

Mr. Chairman, today it was with great reluctance that I cast my vote against the Woolsey substitute budget amendment. I say it was with great reluctance because the progressive budget put forth by the amendment contained a great many individual provisions that I strongly support.

I strongly applaud the inclusion of full funding for No Child Left Behind in the amendment, and believe that we as a Congress must continue to work toward that goal. For too long, the Republican majority and President Bush have forced local communities to bear the brunt of No Child Left Behind's mandates without sufficient Federal support. For the sake of our children, our schools, and our communities we need to rectify this.

Likewise, I admire, respect, and support the amendment's commitment to full, guaranteed funding for veterans' healthcare. As the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan create a new generation of veterans with critical new healthcare needs, we must make sure that the VA healthcare system will be able to accommodate them while caring for veterans from previous generations. As a member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, I remain committed to making sure that the VA can honor the sacred pact we make with our soldiers; that if they fight to defend our Nation, our Nation will make sure they have the care they need.

There are other highly commendable provisions in the amendment, including the repeal of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans, tax cuts which I believe have helped to put us on the path to fiscal ruin without providing one bit of support for working families. The proposal also includes much-needed provisions to crack down on corporate welfare and a commitment to expand health coverage to all Americans.

I support these provisions, and it is my deep and abiding hope that they will be brought to the floor of this Chamber individually to be considered and adopted by the House. However, the option to consider them as such was not available today.

The previous majority left this House, and this Nation, with an astounding fiscal train wreck, and in order to restore budgetary balance we must make difficult decisions. I am also concerned that although there are many laudable goals included in the substitute amendment, it failed to reform the Alternative Minimum Tax, which unintentionally and unnecessarily burdens a tremendous number of the residents of the Hudson Valley.

The underlying budget resolution, for which I cast my vote, contains strong funding increases for many of the programs I have discussed, balances the budget, and provides vital AMT relief. In light of the fiscal challenges created by previous Congresses, I believe that the underlying budget represents a strong, responsible step forward and is deserving of support.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from New York for offering this important amendment. I am honored to speak in support of it.

America's railways and power lines are key critical infrastructure. So when proposals would locate them together, it only makes sense for DHS and DOT to give them serious scrutiny.

In the State of New York, the homeland security stakes are particularly high. Yet a private company continues to pursue eminent domain authority to install the massive New York Regional Interconnect along rail routes, through environmentally sensitive areas, and over the objections of local residents.

In their hurry to get NYRI up and running, the company has pushed forward a plan that would put a 1,200 megawatt line on 135-foot towers near numerous rail lines. In western New York, there have been 19 derailments since 2005. The potential recipe for disaster is clear here.

There is also a matter of precedent that this amendment would help to clarify. By passing this amendment, this body can say that in projects in New York and around the country that we will not endorse putting special for-profit eminent domain provisions above the security of our citizens, the sanctity of our environment or the rights of our landowners.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Thank you, Congressman, for yielding to me.

Mr. Speaker, I introduced H.R. 1284 earlier this month with the Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Congressman Filner.

Chairman Filner has been instrumental in moving this bill forward. I thank him for that. I also want to thank the ranking member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Steve Buyer, and our ranking member of the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, Doug Lamborn, who were both helpful in getting this bill moved expeditiously. The fact that we got this bill to the floor within the month shows the House leadership's commitment to our Nation's veterans.

As chairman of the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, I believe that America must uphold its promise to care for our veterans and their families, and I strongly support efforts to alleviate unjust financial burdens imposed upon our Nation's veterans and their survivors. This is why I am so pleased that H.R. 1284 is on the floor today.

H.R. 1284 would provide a cost-of-living adjustment to the rates of disability compensation provided to our Nation's disabled veterans and to the compensation provided to the survivors of veterans and servicemembers who died or who will die as a result of military service.

Every year since 1976, Congress has enacted an annual COLA adjustment for veterans with disabilities and their survivors. The regularity of Congress' action on COLA legislation underscores its importance. Without it, inflation would diminish and erode the purchasing power of millions of beneficiaries. According to VA, as set forth in its fiscal year 2008 budget, the Department estimates that it will provide disability compensation to 3,220,031 veterans with service-related disabilities in fiscal year 2008.

In summary, this legislation is critical to the lives of over 3 million beneficiaries who have served our country well and faithfully. I ask for your continued support for our Nation's veterans, and I ask for your support of the bipartisan Veterans' Compensation Cost-of- Living-Adjustment Act of 2007.

I would just like to say a few words also about another bill that is on the floor today and falls under the jurisdiction of my subcommittee, H.R. 797, the Dr. James Allen Veteran Vision Equity Act. As with H.R. 1284, I am proud of the speed and fashion in which this bill has come to the floor.

H.R. 797, which has the backing of the Blind Veterans Association, would put the Veterans Administration on a par with the Social Security Administration, the World Health Organization, and all 50 States in defining a visual impairment.

Furthermore, this bill allows certain veterans to receive a ``V'' on their gravestone and reauthorizes the VA's popular work/study program.

Mr. Speaker, this Congress faces a substantial task in dealing with the difficulties our veterans face. Currently there are more than 570,000 veterans claims pending before the VA, literally hundreds of thousands of veterans waiting on decisions that can substantially affect their financial situation.

On top of this, we have a new generation of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. The subcommittee I chair, the Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs Subcommittee, recently held a hearing where we heard from experts and Iraq war veterans. They all agree that the VA is critically unprepared to deal with these new commitments and will be overwhelmed.

One witness privately compared the VA's current position to that of a person standing on a beach while a tsunami comes rushing towards the shore. These men and women deserve our support, and it is incumbent upon this Congress to act.

In the coming month, I plan to hold hearings on several pieces of legislation that will address this backlog. I have introduced one bill which would provide interim benefits to veterans who have waited over 6 months for a decision on their appeal.

While this will not fix the entire problem, it will help veterans pay their bills and buy their medicine while they wait for a decision from the VA. I look forward to working with colleagues on both sides of the aisle on these important issues, and I trust they share my sense of urgency on these matters.

It is my hope that H.R. 797 and H.R. 1284 are the first of many steps this Congress takes to ensure that those who have sacrificed so much for this country receive the benefits they have earned.

Mr. Speaker, I thank very much Congressman Hinchey and thank Congresswoman Kaptur for her remarks.

Today marks the start of the 5th year of the war in Iraq; and as I begin my statement, I want to recognize the honorable service of the men and women who have served our country in Iraq. I want to honor the memories of the 3,188 servicemembers who have given their lives in Iraq, including five men from my district and over 50 officers of the United States Army who graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point, which I am proud is in my district. While I believe the war in Iraq has been a mistake, I deeply respect the honor and integrity of those who have given their lives following the orders of their Commander in Chief.

In light of the sacrifices of so many of our men and women in uniform, it saddens me that I have to come to the floor of the House of Representatives and say I believe this war has been a strategic blunder in our efforts to fight terrorism.

On September 11, our Nation was attacked and many people from my district, including police and firefighters, died at the World Trade Center. The United States correctly responded by pursuing those responsible for 9/11 in Afghanistan. Unfortunately, this administration decided to change its focus and start a war of choice with Iraq, a country which had not attacked us and was not an imminent threat to the United States.

Now our military is trapped in the middle of a civil war instead of pursuing Osama bin Laden, Mullah Mohammed Omar, and other al Qaeda affiliates throughout the world responsible for 9/11 and other similar attacks and groups planning to attack the United States again.

Because we are focused in Iraq, the progress made in Afghanistan is slipping. The Karzai government does not control the territory outside its own capital. We see an increase in the drug trade that funds regional warlords. The Taliban emerges at night to terrorize the local population, and our military expects increasing attacks throughout this spring. However, because of our continuing overcommitment in Iraq, the United States has little ability to increase its troop numbers in Afghanistan and respond to that deteriorating situation.

While the administration and its allies say we are battling the terrorists in Iraq, the United States intelligence agencies say otherwise. The National Intelligence Estimate released in April 2006 stated: ``The Iraq conflict has become a `cause celebre' for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement.'' Iraq is not the central front in the war on terror as the President likes to say. Instead, it is a rallying point, a recruiting poster that Osama bin Laden uses to recruit more terrorists.

The war in Iraq has seriously weakened our military. A recent report found that 90 percent of our National Guard youths are rated ``not ready'' to respond to a national disaster or terrorist attack in the United States. Further, in order to meet their recruitment goals, the military has lowered the minimum standards for being accepted into the service, and our military faces a crippling loss of mid-level officers as larger and larger numbers decide not to reenlist and face multiple deployments.

It is time for a new direction. Our intelligence agencies know it, our military commanders know it, and the American people demanded it last November. General Petraeus, commanding general in Iraq, stated on March 8: ``There is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq, to the insurgency of Iraq.'' And just last week, Pentagon analysts admitted that the war in Iraq is a civil war.

Unfortunately, our President refuses to face reality and the will of the American people. He wants to put more troops in the middle of a civil war. He wants an open-ended commitment to keep combat troops in Iraq indefinitely. He wants to leave the problem of Iraq to the next President. And, once again, he has returned to Congress and asked for another blank check to continue this misguided war. Unlike the President, this Congress will face reality and realize that we must change direction in Iraq.

Some of our colleagues speaking earlier from the other side of the floor criticized us for trying to, as they say, micromanage the war. There cannot be 435 or 535 Commanders in Chief. We would not need to take this kind of action to manage or, if you will, micromanage the war if the President and Commander in Chief were doing his job, if the leadership were coming from the top, as our structure of government ordinarily calls for it to come.

But because there is a vacuum in the top, because the President has continued to disregard or turn a blind eye to the reality of what is happening, not only around the world, as our Congresswoman just mentioned, in terms of the reputation of the United States, which ultimately in the long term is what will determine our security, our reputation, the approval of the United States and its policies by other peoples and other countries around the world will ultimately determine in the long run how secure we are, we do not have enough money to spend our way into security if we continue to make more enemies and lose our friends.

General Petraeus is correct. We need a political solution to the war in Iraq instead of a military escalation. It is time for a diplomatic surge. The United States must push the Iraqi Government to meet its commitments that it made to its partners in Iraq. It is time the United States reached out to our allies in the region and throughout the world.

By requiring the Iraqi Government to achieve a list of objectives and establishing a timetable for U.S. involvement in Iraq, we can end the culture of dependency developing in Iraq. We can make the Iraqi Government stand up and take control of its own fate. If they do that, we will stick by them. We will help them train police and military forces and rebuild their country. If they are unwilling or unable to take that responsibility, we will know that the United States does not have a serious partner in Iraq.

If we are to defeat the people who did attack our country on September 11, those who continue to seek to destroy us, we must pivot away from Iraq and back to Afghanistan and al Qaeda, the people who actually attacked us. We must draw down in Iraq and let our military redeploy, rebuild, and refocus.

The United States faces a gravely serious threat, and we must be prepared to defeat it. Our 4-year involvement in Iraq has seriously endangered our ability to do that. At home, our National Guard has been undermined. It is unprepared to respond to a terrorist attack or a natural disaster. Abroad, our military forces are stretched thin and unable to shift quickly.

If we really want to defeat Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and the other terrorist groups that seek to kill us, we must return our attention to that war and leave the civil war we currently face in Iraq to the Iraqis. If we rebuild our forces and refocus on the threats in Afghanistan, Pakistan and throughout southeast Asia, we will be able to truly defeat our enemies and truly protect the United States of America.