Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, it is like a broken record. The majority is trying to drill our way to energy independence. Last week, they were trying to drill off our coasts, and this week, it is ANWR. Even the big oil companies know that oil in ANWR would only fill America's appetite for oil for maybe 6 months and that it would not be available for 10 years.

To reduce the pain of high-fuel costs for America's families, we need to use existing technology to make our cars, our SUVs and light trucks go farther on a gallon of gas. We need to raise CAFE standards. We need to invest in alternative energies and alternative fuels. We need to become independent of fossil fuels. We need to vote against this bill and head in the right direction and not drilling off our coasts or in

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Bonilla and Ranking Member DeLauro for their hard work on this bill, particularly their work on the school meal and WIC program.

While I appreciate the increase in funding, I sincerely hope that we can do even better in conference on the WIC program and on the school meal program.

I also appreciate that the committee rejected a number of President Bush's requests that would have harmed the women and children who benefit from WIC. The President's proposed cap on nutrition counseling and on education for WIC recipients would limit both essential services for WIC families and for the States' abilities to negotiate cost savings with food producers.

The President also asked to limit WIC eligibility for any Medicaid recipients. These are only some of the examples that the President would have listed in his neverending effort to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, with benefit cuts for the most vulnerable Americans.

As I say, I honor the Chair and the ranking member for not letting that happen. I am proud to have led a bipartisan effort in opposition to those proposals, and I thank the committee again for rejecting them.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I thank the committee for its promise to continue to monitor the WIC caseload to ensure that funding remains sufficient to meet the needs. I ask the committee to also monitor, as I will, USDA's implementation of its cost containment regulations.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order.

Mr. Speaker, the Secretary of State was on the talk show circuit this past weekend and said something extraordinary about the reason we invaded Iraq. These are Secretary Rice's words: ``I understand that Americans see violence on their screens. They continue to see Americans killed. But I would ask that people remember why we are there.''

Secretary Rice continued: ``We are there because having overthrown a brutal dictator who was a destabilizing force in the Middle East, we are trying to help the Iraqis create a stable foundation for democracy and a stable foundation for peace.''

I would have liked to have seen Ms. Rice and the rest of the Bush national security team come before the Congress, the American people, and the world community with this argument in late 2002 and early 2003. My guess is they would have gotten roughly 25 votes in this body to authorize the President to go to war. Actually, they didn't get mine, or two-thirds of the Democrats; but they got enough votes to go to war.

But, of course, the Republicans were too smart for that. To make their case for war, they needed something that would scare the pants off everyone in this Congress and in this country. So we heard a lot of tall tales about aluminum tubes, uranium from Niger, and reconstituted nuclear weapons. Secretary Rice herself engaged in the ultimate fear mongering when she said, ``We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.''

When it came time to close the sale, they sent Ms. Rice's predecessor, Colin Powell, to the U.N., not to talk about how cruel Saddam Hussein had been to his own people, but to specifically outline the case, the phony case as its turned out, that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and posed a direct threat to our national security.

Dictators are undoubtedly bad and democracy is undoubtedly good, but can we afford to spend $300 billion and march 2,500 Americans off to their deaths every time we spot a bad, undemocratic regime? Taken to its logical extreme, this policy would commit us to military occupations in every corner of the globe, something that, to say the least, we don't have the resources or the appetite to do.

Isn't there a better way to spread freedom? Of course there is.

We can and must have a robust democracy-promotion agenda that invests in the hopes of oppressed people, one that lifts their spirits instead of tearing down their countries.

The SMART Security plan that I have proposed includes an ambitious investment in democracy-building, the kind that would establish rule of law, civil society, a free press and independent judiciaries around the world.

Unfortunately, as I have discussed here many times over, the Bush administration is scaling back funding for exactly these kinds of efforts. Step number one is to bring our troops home. Now, for sure, right now. No permanent military bases, no designs on profiting from Iraqi oil.

Let us work with the global community to establish a multilateral security force that can keep Iraq stable in the short term. Let us lead the way in the U.N. toward establishing an international peace commission that can

begin the post-war reconciliation process.

Let us focus on putting Iraq back together again, changing our role from that of military occupier to reconstruction partner.

First and foremost, we must end the war. Our brave soldiers have served bravely and sacrificed plenty. It is time to return them home to their families, and it is time for the United States to truly devote itself to the spread of democracy worldwide through peaceful partnerships and not military conquest.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Robin Lowitz on the occasion of her receipt of the prestigious Tikkun Olam Award from the Jewish Community Center of Sonoma County (formerly the Jewish Community Agency). The ``Healing the World'' Award is bestowed upon an individual who demonstrates this Jewish Value and Obligation of dedication, perseverance, creativity plus giving time, energy, talents and resources to make an important social justice impact on the quality of life in a community.

Robin Lowitz saw a great need in Sonoma County and preceded to fill it by envisioning and implementing The Jewish Community Free Clinic, a medical clinic specifically for the uninsured,--``the working poor, barely able to make ends meet who fall through the cracks.''

A Berkeley, California, native, Dr. Lowitz had volunteered for several faith-based free medical clinics in the Bay Area in the 1990's. Upon arriving in Sonoma County and witnessing the need first-hand, she garnered volunteers and financial support from the Jewish Community, synagogues, and other groups and individuals. In October, 2001, she opened the Jewish Community Free Clinic in a space donated by the Lions Club of Petaluma.

That first night there were 6 patients and 15 volunteers. The Clinic now provides 2,500 free medical care visits to over 1,000 uninsured patients annually, offering free medical care for anyone in need, without regard to ethnicity, race or religion. The vast majority of patients are uninsured Latino immigrant men, women, and children (many of whom need immunizations and physicals in order to attend school). They also serve uninsured single parents, students, the elderly, homeless, and temporary/unskilled workers.

The medical equipment at the Clinic is donated, and its 100+ volunteers come from all sectors of the community--including the communities it serves. Fifteen volunteer physicians, with as many nurses, nurse practitioners and physician assistants rotate each week, supplemented by a large referral network of volunteer physician specialists. Volunteers also offer social work, growth and development monitoring, safety awareness in Spanish and English, Spanish language interpreting and community resource referrals.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to offer my congratulations to Dr. Robin Lowitz. She had the commitment, passion, and energy to make the Jewish Community Free Clinic a reality for the people of Sonoma County and truly exemplifies the spirit of Tikkun Olam, Healing the World.

Mr. Chairman, the majority party believes that if we just keep drilling for more gas and oil then our energy crisis will be over. Unfortunately, they are not looking for a solution to our energy crisis and a solution to our rising gas prices. They are just looking short term for false security solutions that ultimately line the pockets of big oil companies.

Mr. Chairman, that is why we are here today discussing offshore oil drilling instead of promoting efficient and renewable energy policies. The people that I am fortunate to represent in Marin and Sonoma Counties north of San Francisco, across the Golden Gate Bridge, do understand. They get it. The coast of my district is one of the most biologically productive regions in the entire world, and it would be threatened, threatened by oil and gas exploration if this bill passes as is.

For this reason, I have introduced a bill to extend the Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries along the entire coast of Sonoma to protect it from offshore drilling threats.

The coastal communities in my district rely on tourism and fishing, industries that would be severely hurt if offshore drilling was permitted. If you were to visit this beautiful stretch of coast you would understand why, and you would know that we must protect it.

Mr. Chairman, the people who live in my district strongly oppose offshore drilling. They understand that we need an energy policy that focuses on investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy sources, not on oil rigs and the endless depletion of our natural resources.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Capps-Davis amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Marin Youth Symphony Orchestra (MYSO) on the occasion of its 50th anniversary. Over the past half century, the orchestra has provided the opportunity for over 3,000 talented young musicians to learn and perform classic symphonic orchestral music.

This was made possible by brilliant conductors such as founder Maestro Hugo Rinaldi who led the MSYO from its inception in the fall of 1954 until 1989 while the group enjoyed residence at Dominican College. Under his leadership the MSYO grew to become an integral part of the arts community in Marin County collaborating with the Marin Ballet, Marin Girl's Chorus, Marin Opera, Marin Theater Company, Marin Youth- In-Arts and numerous other organizations. He also toured the MSYO to Italy, Austria, and Australia, a unique experience for the young musicians.

Upon Hugo Rinaldi's retirement, Leslie Stewart led the group for seven seasons, adding scholarships and a chamber program. Dr. Anthony Adessa developed the orchestra further until 2001, when current conductor George Thomson took over the baton. Thompson moved MSYO to its current home with the College of Marin.

Under Maestro Thomson's leadership the orchestra has developed an extraordinary opportunity for soloists, and ensemble players to experiment with innovative repertoire. He continues to provide gifted young people with an opportunity to benefit from his professional coaching and intimate knowledge of classical literature, allowing for participation in performing rich and rewarding orchestral music.

The MYSO has provided valuable training for a number of students who have continued their musical careers into the uppermost heights of musical accomplishment. Alumni include Joe Alessi, Principal Trombone of the New York Philharmonic; Mark Isham,

Grammy, ASCAP, and Tony award winning film score composer; Tara Flandreau, Chair of the College of Marin Music Department; Dan Smiley, Second Violin; San Francisco Symphony; and numerous performers of the Marin Symphony Orchestra as well as music teachers who have continued to instruct successive generations.

In the words of participant Lucy Williams (First Violin Section, 2004), ``When I went to hear Jeremy Constant (Marin Symphony concertmaster) perform on his Stradivarius at Davies Symphony Hall I asked him what inspired him. He said that as a youth symphony musician he got to play Scheherazade, by Rimsky-Korsakov, and I realized that he was my age when he was playing it and we had just finished performing that same piece! I felt a rush of excitement, like I was walking a path of history and it might lead me onto that stage some day. I thought about George telling us about the ``giant nerf rocks'' in the shipwreck passage and it made me feel like the luckiest person there.''

Mr. Speaker, the Marin Youth Symphony Orchestra will continue to develop musical talent and provide inspiration for young talented people in Marin County by making it possible for them to learn and share musical experiences of the highest possible level. The benefits of this cultural asset extend to the entire community, enriching our national musical heritage. I congratulate them on this 50th anniversary celebration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor my friend Marinell Eva, upon the occasion of her retirement as Executive Director of the Community Child Care Council of Sonoma County (4Cs). Thanks to Marinell, 4Cs is not only a successful agency but also one with a lot of heart. Her writings in the newsletter, reflective of her childhood and her children's, show her deep connection and empathy with families and children.

During Marinell's 17 years with the agency, she was a leader in developing a variety of child care services, collaborations with other organizations, and advocacy for children and families. Also, 4Cs researched and published the study, The Economic Impact of Child Care in Sonoma County, under her direction and in partnership with the Child Care Planning Council. 4Cs continues to inform businesses and government of the link between child care and our local economy.

Marinell moved to Sonoma County in 1978, and soon became the Program Director at the YWCA's A Special Place child care program where she served for many years. She volunteered with the Sonoma County Child Abuse Council and was a member of the Board of Directors of the Extended Child Care Coalition. She currently serves on the SRJC Child Development Advisory Committee, First Five Professional Community Advisory Committee, and is an advisory member of the Sonoma County Child Care Planning Council of Sonoma County. She has a B.A. in English Literature and Psychology, and an M.A. in Clinical Psychology.

Her commitment and passion have been an invaluable asset to Sonoma County. Carl Wong, Superintendent of Schools, says, ``The teachers and principals of the Sonoma County K-12 public school system have benefited from the leadership and advocacy of Marinell Eva for over 16 years. Her professional dedication in support of children and families helps to promote a level playing field for the 5000+ Kindergarten students who begin their school experience each year.''

These thoughts are echoed by Joel Gordon, the Director of Early Childhood Education at Santa Rosa Junior College: ``Through the years Marinell has been one of my favorite people to work with. In a time when the word is overused, she has become a great leader in Sonoma. The combination of her vision, talent, commitment, compassion and sense of humor have changed for the better our community and ultimately the lives of many of its youngest citizens. She is one of a kind and will be greatly missed.''

Marinell and her husband, David Pittman, live on property in Sebastopol, where two their children and all four grandchildren live. She plans to continue as a member of the Board of Trustees at the Sonoma Academy, and in between gardening and reading she will spend time studying Spanish, literature, and music as well as keeping up with the grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, I, too, have been inspired by working with Marinell Eva. She says it best in her own words: ``Working with people in the child care field has been my deep privilege. I have had the good fortune to work for what I believe in--meeting the needs of children. What better way to change the world?''

Mr. Speaker, this Congress had a great opportunity today to pass a defense authorization bill that is good for the American people, a bill that reflects the very best of American values. Foremost among those values is our desire for peace, our capacity for global leadership, and our compassion for the people of the world. We could have reflected those values by utilizing the defense bill as a means of voicing our opposition to prolong the war in Iraq. The Rules Committee, however, prevented me from offering just such an amendment to the defense authorization bill.

My amendment expressed the sense of the Congress regarding the war in Iraq in two parts. First, it instructs the President, the Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces, to develop a plan to bring the members of the U.S. Armed Forces home from Iraq and to bring the plan to the congressional defense committees.

It is clear that we need to begin the process of bringing our troops home because, among many other reasons, the presence of nearly 150,000 American troops in Iraq is an obvious rallying point for dissatisfied people in the Arab world, making the situation in Iraq worse and not making the U.S. any more secure.

The second part of my amendment describes how the United States should support Iraq once our troops have come home. The amendment directs the United States to engage the international community, including the U.N. and NATO, to establish a multinational interim security force for Iraq. The U.N.'s Department of Peacekeeping Operations actually is particularly well suited to this task.

Next we would have shifted our role from that of Iraq's military occupier to its reconstruction partner. By working with the Iraqi people to rebuild their economic and physical infrastructure, we can give Iraq back to the Iraqis and help to create Iraqi jobs and Iraqi security.

Finally, my amendment urged the President to involve the United Nations in establishing an international peace commission comprised of members of the global community who have experience in international conflict resolution so that they would oversee Iraq's post-war reconciliation process, beginning Iraq's long road to recovery after years of sanctions and war.

The House should have been able to debate the importance of ending the war while we helped to stabilize this war-torn nation. Unfortunately, this Congress had other priorities, priorities like authorizing another $50 billion to continue a devastating war in Iraq that has already taken the lives of more than 2,400 American soldiers, countless tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians, and forever shattered the lives of another 16,000 injured and wounded American troops.

Priorities like authorizing another $10 billion, that is billion with a ``B,'' on a still unproven missile defense system that can't stop the greatest threat we face, nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists, and has never even been able to stop the missiles it is designed to destroy.

It is beyond dispute that this administration, in tandem with the Republican Congress, has been, to put it mildly, less than fiscally responsible.

Earlier this month I introduced new legislation called the Commonsense Budget Act of 2006 that finally put some sanity back into the Nation's fiscal policy. This bill already has the support of almost 40 cosponsors.

The Commonsense Budget Act would trim $60 billion in waste from the Pentagon budget and put it to work on behalf of the people and programs that truly strengthen America.

These programs include $10 billion for the modernization of every public school, $12 billion for health insurance for every child in America, $10 billion to invest in renewable energy and energy efficiency programs, $13 billion to feed the hungry, $5 billion to improve homeland security, and $5 billion to start the reduction of our deficit.

We need to change the way we think about national security, Mr. Speaker. The return on the investments I have proposed as part of the Commonsense Budget Act will benefit the entire society, and they won't cost us a dime more than we currently spend on our bloated national defense.

Any change in budget priorities, though, has to go hand in hand with change in policy on the ground. The very first of those needs to be an end to the war in Iraq. For the sake of our soldiers, their families and our national security, it is time to bring our troops home.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Petaluma Chamber of Commerce on the occasion of its 100th anniversary celebration. The chamber has been serving my hometown of Petaluma, CA, since it was first launched on February 6, 1906, with 79 members.

Many of these early members bore names still remembered in Petaluma today, including J.E. Olmstead, publisher of the newspaper, and Rodney Putnam who was related to future mayor and first female Sonoma County Supervisor Helen Putnam.

One of the key characters in the chamber's early years was Bert Kerrigan who was hired in 1918 to promote the city. It is thanks to Kerrigan that I was able to participate in Petaluma's 25th Annual Butter and Eggs Day Parade this year.

After evaluating the local business situation, Kerrigan decided the town needed to push its poultry industry; he traveled to Washington, DC, to establish National Egg Day and coined the slogan ``The World's Egg Basket.'' He then performed various publicity stunts--flying an airplane over San Francisco to drop flyers, parking a huge egg basket in front of the St. Francis Hotel with attractive women, the ``Slick Chicks,'' to be photographed, and forming the precursor to today's parade, ``Egg Day,'' which was held at night.

Under the current leadership of CEO Onita Pellegrini, the chamber has been thriving and currently has over 900 members. In fact, I, too, was a member when I ran my business in Petaluma from 1980 to 1991. The chamber recently relocated to the historic Great Petaluma Mill Building in the heart of downtown. The group still actively promotes the city's businesses and advocates with city government for smart growth principles that maintain the community feeling that has been Petaluma's hallmark.

Mr. Speaker, the Petaluma Chamber of Commerce continues to represent the diversity of the city from its agricultural roots to its small businesses to its new high tech companies. I cut my political teeth as a member of the Petaluma City Council, and I know the good work that they do. Congratulations to everyone in the chamber on this centennial milestone.

Mr. Speaker, the so-called war on terrorism has been going on for more than 4\1/2\ years, and it looks like terrorism is winning.

The U.S. Government released its annual survey of global terrorism two Fridays ago. Of course, they always save the bad news for Friday, when they hope everyone will have checked out for the weekend. The results? The number of terrorists attacks worldwide quadrupled from 2004 to 2005, climbing over 11,000. That is 30 strikes by terrorists every day, an average of more than one an hour.

Of the 11,000, nearly one-third took place in Iraq, and those Iraqi attacks led to 8,300 deaths. Keep in mind, these are just civilian casualties. These numbers don't even include the number of American troops who have been killed at the hands of the insurgency.

Thank goodness there have been no more attacks on American soil and nothing on the order of 9/11. Then again, if violent extremists want to kill Americans, they don't have to infiltrate our borders. They can make a much easier trip to Iraq, where 130,000 of our bravest men and women are deployed.

The dirty little secret that you won't find in the report is that the Iraq war is responsible for the proliferation of terrorism in recent years. Our preemptive invasion strike on Iraq inspired vicious animosity towards the United States, the likes of which we have never seen and the likes of which we will be dealing with for years and years to come.

The continued occupation is a rallying point for bin Laden and everyone who already dislikes America. The war has given jihadists the best possible propaganda tool, turning Iraq into a hotbed of terrorism. And the way we have conducted the war has only exacerbated the problem. The abuses at Abu Ghraib, the detention camps at Guantanamo, the secret gulags around the world, all of these have eroded U.S. moral authority and further radicalized the Muslim world.

The President has sold the Iraq campaign as some kind of antidote to terrorism. The truth is just the opposite. Our presence in Iraq is pouring gasoline on the fire instead of putting it out.

Peter Bergen, a terrorism expert at the New America Foundation, put it this way: he said, ``The President is right that Iraq is the main front in the war on terrorism, but this is a front we created.''

There was one part of the terrorism report that I just could not believe. The Washington Post cites the survey as indicating that bin Laden and al-Zawahiri are frustrated by their lack of direct control over terrorist operations. Here is a man who is American public enemy number one, a sadistic killer who President Bush promised to hunt down and capture, dead or alive, and the best we can say 4\1/2\ years later is that we have got him frustrated?

There is only one answer, Mr. Speaker: we must bring our troops home, and we must do it at once. Every day that we persist with this occupation is another day that the insurgency gathers strength and further justifies itself. Every day that we stay in Iraq is a day that we lose ground in the war on terror.

It is time for a new counterterrorism strategy like the one I have outlined in my SMART Security proposal; one that is based on strong intelligence and cooperation with our allies and multilateral organizations; one that invests in homeland security and enhances efforts to cut off financing for terrorist organizations.

Defeating terrorism will require more brains and less brawn. It demands, first and foremost, that we bring our troops home.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of turn.

Mr. Speaker, exactly 3 years ago yesterday, President Bush gave his speech about the military operations in Iraq and said they had become ``Mission Accomplished.''

Why was this speech important? Because in a single stroke, it revealed more about the President and his administration than all of his other speeches combined. Paying attention to the news, you will recall how on that day President Bush, adorned in a fighter pilot suit, rode shotgun in a military jet that landed on the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier, and a massive banner declaring ``Mission Accomplished'' was brashly displayed in the background during his subsequent speech.

It seemed like a bold act put on by a President who wanted to be perceived as taking bold steps against our Nation's enemies. But nothing had actually been accomplished to that point. The problem is that the ``mission'' in Iraq was not accomplished 3 years ago, and it certainly hasn't been accomplished today, which makes the military jet landing and ensuing speech 3 years ago far short of bold. It was a grandly staged political stunt, pure and simple.

Let us talk about ``Mission Accomplished.'' For whom exactly is this mission accomplished? Is the mission accomplished for our troops, many of whom have returned home from Iraq forever changed as a result of the physical and mental trauma they endured during years of repeated deployment to Iraq?

One such soldier is retired Naval Hospital Corpsman Charlie Anderson who last Thursday spoke at an Iraq forum that I organized. Charlie suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder and now is a regional coordinator for Iraq Veterans Against the War.

I quote him in saying, ``I was completely untrained and unprepared for what I experienced in Iraq.'' He also told us, ``In the 7 years preceding my deployment to the Middle East, I had not set foot in the desert or had any training on how to fight or survive there. I had fired my 9 millimeter service pistol exactly once.''

Is the mission accomplished for Faiza al-Araji, an Iraqi civil engineer who recently fled Baghdad, the only home she has ever known? Faiza and her family left Iraq after her son, a student, was detained for days by the Ministry of the Interior without charges being filed. After nearly a week of panicking, Faiza and her husband paid a ransom to have their son released. They were told he had been detained because he had a beard, and was therefore probably a terrorist.

The fact is, 3 years after President Bush's ``mission accomplished'' pronouncement, Iraq is still mired in chaos. Our troops are still sitting ducks. They are halfway across the world, and the United States is still tangled up in a quagmire of epic proportions.

Of the over 2,400 American soldiers who have been killed in Iraq, all but 139 were killed after the President's USS Abraham Lincoln speech. Attacks against Iraqis, U.S. and coalition troops, and critical infrastructure have increased by nearly 25 percent since then.

According to the Brookings Institute, the Iraqi insurgency has tripled in strength since 2003. It is pretty clear by now that the ``Mission Accomplished'' speech was just another example in a long pattern of the Bush administration playing up the political theater while ignoring the facts on the ground.

Whether they are talking about tax cuts for the richest 1 percent of Americans, prescription drug coverage that does not work for seniors, or the cost of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, this administration's MO is to avoid revealing bad news at all cost, even if it means toying with the truth. It is like all of the bad stories are cut out of the newspaper before they are brought into the White House.

Mr. Speaker, let us accomplish something that will help secure America and Iraq for the future and save thousands of innocent lives in the process. Let us accomplish an end to the pain and suffering felt by the hundreds of thousands, and let's end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home now.

Mr. Speaker, just a few hours ago, I heard moving testimonials about the impact of the Iraq war on real people, real families and real communities, both American and Iraqi. I organized a forum precisely to get beyond the statistics, the strategy, and the abstractions, to understand the devastating human cost of this war.

We heard from Charlie Anderson, a former marine who suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder and now is a regional coordinator for Iraq Veterans Against the War. He spoke of the Government of the United States having failed the men and women it sent to war.

He said, ``I was completely untrained and unprepared for what I experienced in Iraq.''

He told us, ``In the 7 years preceding my deployment to the Middle East . . . I had not set foot in the desert or had any training on how to fight or survive there. I had fired my 9-millimeter service pistol exactly once.''

And this is the part that blew my mind, Mr. Speaker: Mr. Anderson added that after firing his weapon during one ambush, he said, ``I was told I would not be issued replacement ammunition because there was none to be had. My platoon sergeant told me `do not shoot unless your death is imminent . . .' ''

Can you imagine that? The mighty United States military, the greatest fighting force in the world, essentially rationing bullets?

Dahlia Wasfi, a doctor who is half Jewish and half Iraqi, offered a powerful historical analogy. She spoke of her mother's relatives being driven from their native Austria to avoid Nazi concentration camps. ``Never again'' is the refrain we use when talking about the Holocaust. She then spoke of her father's relatives who are ``not living, but dying, under the occupation of this administration's deadly foray in Iraq.''

She went on: ``From the lack of security to the lack of basic supplies to the lack of electricity to the lack of potable water to the lack of jobs to the lack of reconstruction to the lack of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, they are worse off now than before we invaded. `Never again' should apply to them, too.''

An Iraqi civil engineer named Faiza also spoke to us. She fled occupied Iraq last summer after her son, a student, was detained for several days by the Ministry of the Interior without any charges being filed.

``He has a beard; so he was a suspect terrorist,'' she said.

Although they said he had committed no crimes, his family had to pay thousands of dollars to secure his release. How is that for the transformation of power to freedom?

Now she and her family are living as exiles in Jordan, driven away from everything that was once familiar to them. But the only other choice was to live in a country whose infrastructure has been completely torn down and never rebuilt.

Mr. Speaker, in the name of these three brave souls, for the sake of human decency if nothing else, it is time to end this war, bring our troops home, and give Iraq back to the Iraqi people.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order.

Madam Speaker, the carnage and the bloodshed continue in Iraq. Things are getting worse, not better. April is indeed the cruelest month for 63 American soldiers who won't be making it home. In fact, it is the deadliest month so far in the year 2006.

We are coming up on the 3-year anniversary of the President's infamous aircraft carrier flight suit stunt, and I am still looking for someone who can answer this question: How is it possible that we have lost more than 2,000 of our troops after this mission was supposedly accomplished?

Today's big headline? The President has a new spokesman. As if the same talking points, the same platitudes, the same wretched ideas coming out of a different mouth is going to make a lick of difference. The White House doesn't have a PR problem, it has a policy problem. Do they actually think two out of every three Americans are unhappy with the President's performance because of his Press Secretary? Are they that dismissive of the intelligence of the people they are sworn to serve?

It is as if the administration were our landlord in a house that was being condemned, with a foundation crumbling and every corner infested with vermin, and when we register our complaints, they go ahead and change the drapes. There will be a new talking head at the briefing room podium, but the administration's approach remains stubbornly resistant to change.

The other big news of the day is that Secretaries Rice and Rumsfeld dropped in on Iraq, and from this visit we learn that there may be a troop reduction by the end of the year. But that strikes me as a cosmetic, contrived move that is driven by the political calendar. It is clearly not enough.

Remember, this President, who says he doesn't believe in timetables, made it perfectly clear that he intends to keep our troops in Iraq for at least as long as he is in office. And there is every reason to believe that the construction of permanent military bases has begun. This is exactly the open-ended, long-term occupation that fuels the rage of the insurgency.

I, for one, am not willing to stay silent on the sidelines. I will do everything in my power to make the case that the troops should come home now. I will continue to explore alternatives to our current Iraq policy, and I will continue to shine a spotlight on conditions on the ground in Iraq.

To that end I invite my colleagues to join me tomorrow morning as I convene a forum that will help put a human face on the Iraq conflict. We will hear from an impressive panel of witnesses, including:

A Georgetown professor, who spent the bulk of his career with the CIA, where he was considered one of the Agency's preeminent counterterrorism experts.

We will hear from a Shia Iraqi woman, a civil engineer married to a Sunni, who has lived through the invasion and the occupation and then fled to Jordan after her son was briefly detained as a political prisoner.

A marine who served in the Iraq war and was discharged last year due to his post-traumatic stress disorder.

A young American doctor, half Iraqi, half Jewish, who recently returned to Iraq, where she lived as a young child. She has put her medical practice on hold to raise awareness about the devastating impact the war is having on the people in Iraq.

I will also be joined by several of my colleagues, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey), the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the gentleman from North

Carolina (Mr. Jones), and the gentlewomen from California, Ms. Lee and Ms. Waters, among other Members of the House of Representatives. We will engage in a dialogue with these panelists, and we will offer our own thoughts on Iraq.

I had a similar forum last fall, which was focused more on shifting policy direction and brainstorming about how we might carry out a military exit strategy. That will be a component of tomorrow's discussion, but my intent tomorrow is to present firsthand accounts from people who have lived through this war and can speak authoritatively about its human cost.

We hear virtually every day from the White House, the civilian leadership at the Pentagon, and the military commanders. I think it is important that we give a platform to those who have stared this war directly in the eye, outside of the Green Zone, without a security detail or an armored limousine. I hope you can join me tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, the notion that the Iraq war is all about building freedom and democracy across the broader Middle East has been a staple of White House talking points for nearly as long as we have had our troops in harm's way.

But a few weeks ago, courtesy of a front-page story in The Washington Post, we learned something interesting about the President's actual nuts and bolts commitment to democracy. He doesn't have one. That April 5 story by Peter Baker reveals that when it comes to promoting democracy, the bottom line reality doesn't match all the fancy rhetoric.

The administration, in fact, is dramatically reducing funding for programs and organizations that do the nitty-gritty work of helping nations train their people to build and sustain a democratic infrastructure, political parties, unions, a free press and other institutions.

The National Democratic Institute of International Affairs and the International Republican Institute will, according to The Post, be running out of USAID grant dollars in a matter of days. Only a special earmark is keeping them open for business.

The U.S. Institute of Peace has seen funding for its democracy programs in Iraq slashed by nearly two-thirds. The National Endowment for Democracy recently received its last $3 million to spend in Iraq. As one vice-president at the U.S. Institute of Peace pointed out to The Post, the combined cost of all the programs dedicated to encouraging Iraqi democracy amounts to less than what we spend on the military occupation in Iraq in a single day.

Of course, in addition to being expensive in treasure, this military campaign has carried a devastating human cost, namely, 2,390 American men and women killed, all in the name of democracy that is in danger of never taking hold. It is not surprising, I guess, that this administration would shortchange democracy promotion. After all, these are the folks who thought there was no hard work involved in creating a free society. They thought all you had to do was drop a few bombs, kick out a brutal dictator, and democracy would miraculously and spontaneously spring from the oil wells or something. That is one of the reasons their post-war planning was so tragically inadequate.

But this war was never really about building democracy in any real sense. If that had been the justification presented to the American people in 2002, this body and our colleagues on the other side of the Capitol would never have authorized the President to use military force.

No, it was only after the whole weapons of mass destruction thing turned out to be a fraud that the administration started casting about for another rationale. And they came up with this fanciful notion that the war would give rise to democracy, not just in Iraq, but among its neighbors and across the region.

Mr. Speaker, we can encourage democratic elements in Iraq without a military campaign that is killing Americans, killing Iraqis, and fomenting a civil war. It is time to bring our troops home and start investing in true democracy building efforts.

I have offered a new approach to national security called SMART. This stands for Sensible Multilateral American Response to Terrorism. And its core is the notion of investing in nations' democratic potential without resorting to military force.

There are many elements to SMART. It calls for fighting terrorism and stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction through stronger multilateral relationships and improved intelligence. It demands that the United States live up to its nuclear nonproliferation commitments. It would redirect money we are spending on obsolete Cold War weapons toward homeland security and energy independence. But perhaps most important of all, it is a humanitarian program designed to improve living conditions in troubled regions of the world, to address the oppression and the deprivation that often give rise to terrorism in the very first place. That means supporting programs that promote sustainable development; human rights education; peaceful conflict resolution, educational opportunities, particularly for women and girls; and democracy building.

It is time for the United States to actually put its money where its mouth is on promoting democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Jeffrey Kahane, a man who has filled the world with beautiful music and a beautiful philosophy, bringing them to young and old through both performance and education. His inspiration and motivation came as a result of one of history's most sombre times.

At age 17, Jeffrey Kahane's mother and her brother were sent by their parents from Germany to the United States to escape the growing Holocaust. Her ship docked in New Orleans, but on the same day a second ship, the Saint Louis, was turned away from Miami. That was the cursed ``Ship of Fools,'' and all of its passengers were forced to return to Germany and were annihilated. As a new American, and as Lore Kahane grew older, she remained always sensitive to her good fortune, and she determined to raise her children to enrich America, its people and its culture.

For son Jeffrey, music is the means by which he fulfills his mother's mission. Soon after graduation from the San Francisco Conservatory of Music, he made his debut as a classical concert pianist at Carnegie Hall in 1983. He has become one of the best in the nation, appearing as soloist with great American, English, Austrian, and Spanish orchestras. Yo Yo Ma, Hilary Hahn and many famed performers have recorded with Jeffrey, as have many orchestras.

He made his conducting debut in 1988, and that has become a major joy to him and to his legions of admirers. A born educator, he brings to an audience not only magnificent music, but also fascinating and significant stories about the music and its composers. A particular goal for him is to educate and inspire youths who then become the audiences and the performers of tomorrow.

He has been creative director of the Los Angeles Chamber Music Orchestra for many years. For the past 10 years, he also has conducted the Santa Rosa Symphony Orchestra. During that time, he has built the orchestra into one of the outstanding regional symphonies in the nation. He also is Artistic Director of the Green Farm Music Festival in Sonoma County.

His outreach to this community has been unique. For example, he took his vision to the Fine Arts department of Santa Rosa High School and explained the meaning behind two great works--Benjamin Britten's War Requiem and Michael Tippett's Child of Our Time. Over many months, he worked with and inspired students and their teachers to create ballets, plays, art work, etc. that expressed the deep philosophies of these musical works. Then, on the nights when the two works were performed on stage, the students performed their creations and displayed their art work in the concert hall lobby.

This is just one example of his using music for messages that address great wrongs to humanity: war, poverty and, yes, the Holocaust. It has been actions such as these that have led to Maestro Kahane's being so well-loved and well-respected by his community.

Now he is leaving Santa Rosa to become Musical Director of the Colorado Symphony in Denver. He has promised to return frequently and play for Santa Rosans, many of whom he has educated to understand and love classical music. In the months and years to come, Denver will come to enjoy and respect this amazing performer and admirable human being.

We salute Jeffrey Kahane for his continuing contribution not only to entertainment but to knowledge and caring for the wonders of music as an expression of the best of humanity by young and older Americans and citizens of many countries.

And we bestow high gratitude to Lore Kahane, his mother, who brought light out of the darkness of the Holocaust by encouraging a son to make this world a better place with music.