Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in recognition of the brave firefighters from across California and around the country who have courageously risked their lives to halt the spread of wildfires that continue to devastate California. The dedication and determination of our Nation's first responders and firefighters have helped dramatically contain the nearly 1,800 wildfires that have burned over 829,000 acres, or 1,300 square miles, across California.

These fires have been the most intense and widespread in California's history, and thousands of brave men and women have honored the call to protect our state from these fires. More than 150 firefighters from Sonoma County, in my Congressional District have responded to the fires, and firefighters from Santa Rosa served more than 22 days each, totaling 4,000 hours of their time in June. More than 80 Marin firefighters and other support personnel have been dispatched to fight fires throughout Northern California. In addition to the unrivaled contributions of the California's firefighters, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger called up 2,400 National Guard troops join the fire crews. Furthermore, firefighters from 41 states, Puerto Rico, Mexico, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand have all offered their support, resources, and manpower during this crisis.

The bravery of these committed first responders and the tremendous sacrifices they made to help fight California's fires have not gone unnoticed. Our firefighters deserve the highest commendation for putting themselves in the line of danger. That's why I am proud to support H. Res. 1322, a resolution honoring the firefighters from California and throughout the United States for their heroism and sacrifices in fighting the California wildfires. These brave men and women deserve no less.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 1090 honoring Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela as he celebrates 90 years of life.

Mr. Mandela was born on July 18, 1918, in Transkei, South Africa, where he was given the name Rolihlahla, meaning ``troublemaker,'' which would later seem so fitting. Throughout his early adulthood, he developed his own ideas about the oppression he had experienced which led him to join the African National Congress. His work with the ANC led him to be tried for treason. He was acquitted of the charges, but his strong opposition to South African apartheid continued.

His fight against racial segregation came to a sudden halt when he was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for allegedly plotting to overthrow the South African government.

However, 27 years in prison could not diminish the spirit of a great leader. Once released from prison, Mr. Mandela wasted no time in becoming involved with the ANC once again. It was no surprise that this revolutionary man would become the next President of the ANC in 1990, continuing to devote himself to a multi-racial democracy for his country.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Mandela embodies the dignity, strength, and leadership that all of us should strive for. Our country was founded on the values of freedom and liberty for all, personified undoubtedly by Mr. Mandela. He grasped these ideals and fought to make them a reality for South Africa through commitment unsurpassed by others. The dedication Mr. Mandela displayed, despite the many challenges he encountered, is deserving of our highest respect.

Mr. Mandela has undisputedly contributed to tremendous change with his efforts to peacefully resolve conflicts throughout the world. It is with great pleasure that I commend Mr. Mandela for his lifetime commitment to promoting the vision of freedom and equality for the people of South Africa.

Mr. Speaker, the Government Accountability Office issued a report on Monday that should worry every single Member of the House. The GAO said that the government isn't moving quickly enough to ensure that radioactive materials don't get into the hands of terrorists.

Last year the GAO ran a sting operation to see how easy it would be for anyone to get a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to buy enough radioactive materials to create a dirty bomb. They set up a bogus company with only a post office box number and got the license within a month.

The government then promised to tighten up on its requirements for the purchase of radioactive materials, but the GAO report found this effort is still years behind schedule. So while the government takes what looks like its sweet time, we live under the threat of a dirty bomb that could kill many Americans and devastate our economy.

But as outrageous as this situation is, it is only a prime example of how our country's real security needs are being ignored.

Another example is the occupation of Iraq because the administration continues to have tunnel vision when it comes to Iraq. While the administration devotes most of our military resources and troops on the occupation of another country, an occupation that actually makes no sense whatsoever, it is blind to the real threats to our security in Afghanistan.

Even Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has admitted that we are focusing on the wrong place. Earlier this month he said, ``I don't have troops that I can send into Afghanistan until I have a reduced requirement in Iraq. We don't have enough troops in Afghanistan to hold, and that is key clearly to the future of being able to succeed in Afghanistan.''

Mr. Speaker, al Qaeda is growing stronger along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Even Ryan Crocker, our ambassador to Iraq, admitted when he testified before Congress in March that stopping al Qaeda in Afghanistan should be our top priority, not the occupation of Iraq.

Yet we have five times more troops in Iraq than Afghanistan. That doesn't make military sense; it doesn't make common sense.

We can have two reactions to this tragic situation. We can scratch our heads and wonder at the folly of it all, or we can take action. Of course I prefer action. That is why I have offered a SMART Security plan which would defeat terrorism through strong international alliances, aggressive diplomacy, improved intelligence, and initiatives to address the root causes of terrorism.

In addition, I and my colleague, Representative Barbara Lee from California, asked Members of Congress to sign a letter to Prime Minister al-Maliki of Iraq last week. Thirty-one Members signed the letter, and I thank them.

The letter states, ``We, the undersigned Members of the United States House of Representatives, support the sovereign right of the government of Iraq to insist that any security agreement between the United States and Iraq include a timetable for the complete redeployment of U.S. Armed Forces and military contractors out of Iraq.''

Prime Minister al-Maliki has called for such a timetable. We should work with him to make it happen. This is a great opportunity to end our disastrous and counterproductive occupation of Iraq.

Yesterday, The Washington Post released a poll that shows that 63 percent

of the American people believe that the war in Iraq was not worth fighting. Let's listen to the American people, Mr. Speaker. Let's bring our troops and military contractors out of Iraq, but let's not repeat the same military folly in other parts of the region.

Madam Speaker, on July 14, 2008, I was unavoidably detained and was not able to record my vote for rollcall No. 486.

Had I been present I would have voted:

Rollcall No. 486--``yes''--Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the crossing of the North Pole by the USS Nautilus (SSN 571).

Mr. Speaker, with nearly 300 fires continuing to burn in California, it is clear we cannot afford to wait to deal with the enduring threat forest fires pose to our communities. That's why I rise in strong support of H.R. 5541, the Federal Land Assistance, Management, and Enhancement (FLAME) Act.

Over the last decade, we've seen a dramatic increase in the number of devastating forest fires. Those fires have long lasting effects on our ecosystem, increasing the deadliness of mudslides, which destroy our homes, displace once vegetated areas with bare terrain, and disburse large quantities of pollutants across broad regions.

Nine million acres burned across the United States last year, and there is no indication that 2008 will be any different. Climate change and drought are creating longer and more intense fire seasons, while a century of fire containment has made the forests denser and more vulnerable to burning.

The increase in forest fires has led to skyrocketing costs for federal fire suppression efforts, which prevents the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Forest Service Agency from adequately funding essential programs that will lessen the intensity of fires, reduce their frequency, and better protect the public. The FLAME Act would prevent future forest fires from devastating communities across the country and crippling federal land management agency budgets by creating an emergency national fund devoted solely to fighting such destructive fires. This fund will be separate from traditional funding for fire mitigation and prevention.

It's our responsibility to empower our nation's firefighters with the tools they need to effectively fight forest fires. I ask my colleagues to join me in passing this important legislation to better ensure that our citizens, environment, and ecosystem are safe from the dangers of forest fires.

Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to serve as Co-Chair of the 74-Member Congressional Progressive Caucus in this Congress. In that capacity, I am saddened by the recent death of one of the great progressive leaders and philanthropists of my generation--Stewart R. Mott. Many of us have attended functions and meals at the renowned Mott House across the street from the U.S. Supreme Court. Hosting so many of us so often for progressive causes was just one of the countless ways in which this remarkable man gave of himself and his personal wealth to defend the Bill of Rights and preserve our liberty.

It is not very often that the editorial writers at the Wall Street Journal pay homage to liberals. But that is just what they did a few weeks ago in the following editorial about Stewart Mott under the heading: A Liberal Freedom Fighter.

A Liberal Freedom Fighter

Some people walk to the beat of their own brass band, and so it was for Stewart Mott, the eccentric liberal philanthropist and General Motors heir who died last week at 70 years old. Beloved by Democrats for his decades of charity to progressive causes, he was also a notable champion of free political speech.

In 1968, he was one of a handful of millionaires who bankrolled the primary campaign of Eugene McCarthy, at the time a little-known Minnesota Senator challenging a sitting President. With the help of Mott's $210,000, that effort became a groundswell that drove Lyndon Johnson out of the race and changed Democratic foreign policy. In our view that change wasn't for the better, but without Mott and other ``fat cat'' donors, Clean Gene might never have had an impact.

Mott went on to finance the candidacy of George McGovern in 1972. Four years later, he went to court to protect his right to make such contributions, joining Republican Senator James Buckley's challenge to a 1974 campaign finance law in Buckley v. Valeo. Mott and the First Amendment lost that fight, but he would live to see his views vindicated by the political shambles that Congress and the High Court have made trying to limit money in campaigns.

Today, the campaign finance laws have strengthened the incumbents whom Mott loved to challenge, while making political donations less transparent than ever. And today, unlike Mott, George Soros and other wealthy liberal patrons support campaign-finance rules that enhance their own power by limiting others. Stewart Mott was admirably truer to his liberal principles.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 1090 honoring Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela as he celebrates 90 years of life.

Mr. Mandela was born on July 18, 1918, in Transkei, South Africa, where he was given the name Rolihlahla, meaning ``troublemaker,'' which would later seem so fitting. Throughout his early adulthood, he developed his own ideas about the oppression he had experienced which led him to join the African National Congress. His work with the ANC led him to be tried for treason. He was acquitted of the charges, but his strong opposition to South African apartheid continued.

His fight against racial segregation came to sudden halt when he was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for allegedly plotting to overthrow the South African government.

However, 27 years in prison could not diminish the spirit of a great leader. Once released from prison, Mr. Mandela wasted no time in becoming involved with the ANC once again. It was no surprise that this revolutionary man would become the next President of the ANC in 1990, continuing to devote himself to a multi-racial democracy for his country.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Mandela embodies the dignity, strength, and leadership that all of us should strive for. Our country was founded on the values of freedom and liberty for all, personified undoubtedly by Mr. Mandela. He grasped these ideals and fought to make them a reality for South Africa through commitment unsurpassed by others. The dedication Mr. Mandela displayed, despite the many challenges he encountered, is deserving of our highest respect.

Mr. Mandela has undisputedly contributed to tremendous change with his efforts to peacefully resolve conflicts throughout the world. It is with great pleasure that I commend Mr. Mandela for his lifetime commitment to promoting the vision of freedom and equality for the people of South Africa.

Mr. Speaker, most of our Nation's students are on summer vacation right now. They are enjoying camp, swimming, playing, or just hanging out and relaxing. Some are even earning a few dollars at a summer job.

For their counterparts in Iraq, the school break is just now beginning. Iraqi students have just wrapped up their final exams. This year we learned was very different from last year's exam period. According to reports from relief organizations and a recent article in the Christian Science Monitor, last year's tests were marred by unprecedented incidents of mass cheating, bribe-taking, and sheer lawlessness. In many places, Mr. Speaker, last year we heard that militiamen and insurgents strolled casually into exam centers and forced officials, often at gun point, to allow cheating.

Parents feared sending their children to exams. The challenges of just getting to school, making it past militia roadblocks and suicide attackers was one thing; making it through a day full of cheating, intimidation and violence was quite another. One test proctor overseeing a geography high school exam at Baghdad University told the Christian Science Monitor, ``Last year the outlaws took advantage of the brittle security situation and caused unprecedented chaos during the final exams. It was truly a mark of utter shame on our education system as a whole.''

Another Iraqi reported that militiamen stormed into an exam hall to force proctors to let students cheat. When one headmaster objected, he was briefly kidnapped and threatened by the militiamen until he relented.

Students were woefully underprepared for their exams, Mr. Speaker. One observer told the media that anguished-looking girls came out of the exam room complaining not only about how difficult the questions were, but also about their preparation. They said it is not fair, we didn't even have a chemistry teacher all year, and we are being tested on chemistry.

This year, thankfully, it appears that the neighborhoods are much more secure. An overwhelming presence of military and law enforcement appears to have kept interfering forces at bay during the testing. The situation is still not ideal, however, because many students have to travel great distances daily. But generally, the situation is somewhat, if not a great deal, better.

Iraq has a rich educational history, Mr. Speaker. Until the years of the first Gulf War, Iraq led the region in academics and produced internationally recognized leaders in the fields of law, medicine and theology. But the challenges are still great.

The Ministry of Human Rights reported at the end of June that 340 academics were killed in and around Iraq from 2005 to 2007. And according to the Ministry of Education, 28 percent of Iraq's 17 year olds in the center and southern part of the country took their final exams in the year 2007, but only 40 percent passed. That was a decrease from 2006 when the figure was 60 percent passing.

We already know that this administration gets a failing grade on its Iraq policy. However, we don't need to condemn a generation of Iraq's future leaders. We should be investing in schools, not in tanks and guns. We must redeploy our troops and military contractors from Iraq, and we must work peacefully to help with their reconciliation. Mr. Speaker, let's send the children to school, not to war.

Mr. Speaker, just 10 days ago we celebrated the 4th of July because on that day in 1776, we first declared our Nation's independence and sovereignty.

The American people have cherished and fought for that sovereignty for 232 years, so it is only right that we respect the sovereignty of other nations.

Last week, Iraq's Prime Minister al-Maliki said that the withdrawal of American troops out of Iraq or a timetable for withdrawal should be part of the current status-of-forces negotiations between his government and the United States. He insisted that the basis for any agreement will be respect for the full sovereignty of Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, this House should affirm Iraq's right to full sovereignty. In fact, my colleague, Representative Lee of California, and I have sent a letter to every Member of the House inviting all Members to cosign a letter to Prime Minister al-Maliki supporting his government's sovereign rights. The letter reads in part as follows: ``We, the undersigned, Members of the United States House of Representatives, write to acknowledge and support the sovereign right of the government of Iraq to insist that any security agreement between the United States and Iraq include a timetable for the complete redeployment of U.S. Armed Forces and military contractors out of Iraq.

The letter goes on to say, Mr. Speaker, ``As elected members of the legislative branch of the world's longest continuing democracy, we recognize that it is the national legislature that is responsible for expressing and exercising the sovereign rights and powers that the people have entrusted in their government.

``It is for the free people of Iraq, acting through their elected representatives in the Iraq parliament, to decide for themselves the terms and conditions under which they will agree to the continuing presence of the U.S. Armed Forces and military contractors in their country. And it is for the Congress of the United States to approve the terms and conditions of any security agreement that commits the United States to the defense of Iraq.''

Mr. Speaker, Prime Minister al-Maliki's statement for support for withdrawal timetable could very well be the light at the end of the tunnel that the American people have long been waiting for. Ending the occupation of Iraq, which was never an imminent security threat to the United States in the first place, would allow us to refocus on Afghanistan where the real threat lies. It would end the U.S. military occupation in the Middle East that has done so much to strengthen Iran's hand in the region. And it would allow us to redirect tens of billions of dollars back home for desperately needed investments in our economy, our health care, energy independence, education, child care and so much more.

The President has often said that as Iraqis stand up, we will stand down. Prime Minister al-Maliki's statement shows that the Iraqis believe they are ready to stand up. Now the ball is in our court. It is time for the President

to prove he meant what he said because if the administration doesn't work with the prime minister in a serious way to withdrawal our troops and military contractors, it will prove what so many of us have feared all along, that the administration has no intention of leaving Iraq ever.

Representative Lee and I urge all Members of the House to sign this important letter to Prime Minister al-Maliki. This is a critical moment and a crucial opportunity to end the long, bloody, disastrous occupation of Iraq. We must seize it.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday Warren Christopher and James Baker released a groundbreaking report on the powers of the Congress and the White House about declaring war.

The Constitution is clear that only Congress has the right to declare war. Not only that, but Congress is granted the power of the purse. We in the Congress decide when it's appropriate to enter into armed conflict and then fulfill our commitment by fully funding and protecting our troops.

The publication may sound like dry stuff, another commission with another report. But that's not the case.

The fact that this report even needed to be written is noteworthy, however. It's noteworthy on its very own. Who would have thought that Members of Congress would need to be reminded of our constitutional duties? But the Baker-Christopher report is absolutely necessary, particularly now, as the administration's drumbeat for war with Iran builds.

We have seen over the past years how some have exploited the so- called war on terror to mean war with anyone who does not agree with America. We have heard it before: ``If you're not with us, you're against us.'' Some even question the patriotism of those of us who have spoken up in opposition to some of the misguided policies of the White House, policies over the Iraq occupation, the loss of civil rights and liberties in the name of security, just as an example.

Recently, the New Yorker Magazine revealed that the administration sought up to $400 million to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, described in a presidential finding--my colleague was just talking about those--signed by President Bush and designed to destabilize the country's religious leadership.

Mr. Speaker, you don't need a secret decoder ring to know what that means. How often does a country spend hundreds of millions of dollars to declare peace with another nation?

Congress must assert itself. We can't just be waiting around to be ``consulted.'' Consulting, not an open hearing or floor debate, is exactly what got us where we are today. I just don't think that we can sit back and wait for the executive branch to come down here to us and ask our permission.

This Congress, and the American people, will not stand for another war. We must strengthen our diplomatic efforts and work at it 24 hours a day. This is not something we can wait until the next administration takes over or until the current one forces our hand.

Negotiating with Iran's leaders may not be the ideal situation for some, but for others and most of us know it is the best opportunity that we have. Wouldn't it be nice if we could only talk to our friends? Well, that's not the way it is. We don't need to talk to our friends. We have to talk to those with whom we have differences. We have to talk to our enemies. That's the only way we are going to bring about any kind of disarmament and any kind of nonproliferation because talking to friends won't bring about human rights. It certainly won't bring about regional stability. We must have dialogue with Iran and we must do it now.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6331, the Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act will delay cuts in physician payments under Medicare until next year. I hope that this is the last temporary delay and next year we will implement a permanent fix to this problem. It's important to Medicare patients and physicians that there is a continuity of payments so physicians can continue to treat Medicare patients and Medicare patients do not lose access to the physician most familiar with their medical needs.

When we implement a permanent fix to the Medicare physician payment cuts, I hope to address the issue of the Medicare physician geographic payment discrepancy that is faced by many areas in California and across the country. One of these areas is Sonoma County, in my District. This inconsistency has led to doctor's reimbursements being based upon geographic location and not the true cost of providing services. Because of this discrepancy, doctors in Sonoma County receive a lower payment for the same services than doctors in next door Marin County and this discrepancy is causing doctors to leave Sonoma County. Congress must act to fix this discrepancy and ensure that physicians with Medicare patients can continue to afford to see Medicare patients regardless of where a practice is located.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6331, Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act and look forward to working together to provide a permanent solution to the Medicare physician payment issues so that our Nation's seniors receive the best possible care from the physician who knows the patient the best.

Madam Speaker, Section 60 at Arlington National Cemetery is a very special place. It holds the graves of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Section 60 also is the place where a group of remarkable women come together on a regular basis. They are the Section 60 mothers, the mothers of the soldiers buried in that hallowed ground.

The Section 60 mothers come to mourn their heroic children, and to honor their sacrifice. They also come to give each other support in their time of grief. They look to each other for comfort because the only person who can really understand a mother who has lost a child in war is another mother who has suffered the same loss.

Recently, National Public Radio broadcast two stories about the Section 60 mothers. In those stories, the Section 60 mothers talked about their children. They also described how they found each other and created a circle of support to help each other, to help each other make it through another day.

Their words are heartbreaking, yet also inspiring, because these mothers are American heroes, just like their children. I'd like to share some of their words with you today.

One mother placed flowers, balloons, and cards on her son's tombstone because it was his birthday. She said, ``These are our babies. When they have a birthday, this is what you do for them, and this is what we still do for them.''

Another Section 60 mother, whose son died 2 years ago, said, ``This is my son, and I just cannot believe that he's gone. I don't want him to ever be forgotten. It's just in the last couple of months in fact that I have been able to say, `My son's death,' and even that sends a chill through me.''

Another mother described the impact of her son's death on her family. She said, ``I look at my surviving children, and it's such heartache for me because they're in so much pain, and I can't do anything about it except just love them. I can't take their pain away. It's excruciating.'' This mother's son was killed on May 8, 2005. It was Mother's Day.

Another grieving mother said, ``Our job is to protect our kids, and we would do anything to do that. I feel like I should have just jumped across the ocean and known that he was in trouble. It's irrational, but it's a mom.''

A mother whose marine son was killed in Iraq in 2005 talked about how the mothers are supporting each other. She said, ``We talk and we cry about the heartache. Our friendship has just been so incredible and different than any other friendship that I have ever known because our sons are side by side in that same soil.''

Another mother whose son was killed in Iraq in 2005 said, ``When we go to Arlington, sometimes we are holding the crying mother. And sometimes we are the crying mother. You never cry alone at Arlington. It's a refuge for me. You cannot be strong all the time.''

Another mother described the first time she saw another mother in Section 60. She said, ``She was just crying and saying, `Our beautiful boys.' We just started walking toward each other and we were crying so hard.''

A cousin of one of the soldiers told this story about her fallen hero. ``He

always wore a St. Christopher's medal around his neck. When he died, they couldn't find it. But on the day of the funeral, the colonel came up to my aunt and said that they had found the St. Christopher's medal. When his body was thrown back by the blast, the St. Christopher's and his dog tags were in the hole that the bomb was in.''

Finally, one of the new mothers asked another mother if the pain of losing a child in war ever goes away. This mother had to say, ``No.''

Madam Speaker, we owe the Section 60 mothers our deepest respect and gratitude. They remind us that the war isn't something that takes place thousands of miles away. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are happening to our mothers and families right here in our own communities in America every single day.

So let us resolve to go to war only as a very last resort. Every possible alternative to war should always be completely exhausted before we send our great men and women into battle. That is the least we can do for them and the mothers they leave behind.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 365, a resolution celebrating the accomplished life and enduring legacy of Robert Mondavi, whose vision helped propel California winemakers as leaders in the international wine market.

Robert Mondavi was born to a family of Italian immigrants on June 18, 1913. In 1923, his father moved the family to Lodi, California, to pursue an interest in the grape business. Following in his father's footsteps, a young Robert Mondavi began working at Sunny St. Helena Winery in the 1930s, and then later at Charles Krug Winery after his father had purchased the business.

Less than three decades later, Mr. Mondavi had founded the Robert Mondavi Winery to fulfill his vision of developing world-class Napa Valley wines. He later went on to establish the first French-American wine venture, one of many international collaborations. These efforts helped to drive the Mondavi name to be synonymous with premier California wines.

However, Mr. Mondavi's accomplishments were not limited to the wine industry. His philanthropic and charitable contributions to the community, including founding the Robert Mondavi Institute for Wine and Food Science at the University of California at Davis, the Robert and Magrit Mondavi Center for Performing Arts at UC Davis, the Napa Valley Wine Auction, which has raised millions of dollars for local charities, and his tireless efforts for the conservation of American farmlands all have left an indelible impact on our country.

Mr. Mondavi's bold innovations laid the foundations for many of the wine growers in my Congressional District. His efforts contributed to the success of these wineries now enjoy as one of the world's pre- eminent wine making regions. Mr. Speaker, Robert Mondavi's life and leadership should be applauded, and I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring Robert Mondavi by passing this important resolution.

I want to thank Mr. Oberstar and Mr. Mica for this piece of legislation because, Madam Chairman, it's going to take a big change in how we do business if our country is going to meet our energy demands for the future.

While the Republicans in Congress and President Bush chant ``drill, drill, drill'' to appease, it appears, their big oil buddies, the truth is we can't drill our way out of this problem. What we need is a commonsense solution, solutions like the bill before us today. H.R. 6052 won't solve all of our problems, but it does start the process of getting people to change their habits and get out of their cars by providing them options of transportation that allow them to get to where they're going without driving solo in their cars.

It's steps like this that can make a big difference because public transportation is going to play a huge role in solving our energy problems. It will also make a difference in what is going on in our environment. It will help communities not have to build more and more roads, and it will get people where they're going in a very efficient way.

Madam Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, to support the expansion of public transportation.

Madam Speaker, there is an old saying: Everybody complains about the weather, but no one ever does anything about it. That is pretty much what we are doing in Iraq.

In testimony before Congress and from press conference to press conference, administration officials have said that the most important item on our agenda for Iraq, right after security, is reconciliation. In fact, U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker said before the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Armed Services Committee that reconciliation is perhaps the most critical challenge that Iraq faces right now. Even the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel of recognized leaders in foreign policy and governing, wrote that: National reconciliation is essential to reduce further violence and maintain the unity of Iraq. And its report recommended that diplomats work to energize countries to support national political reconciliation in Iraq.

But this is not just the goal of the United States, Madam Speaker. The Iraqis themselves are calling for reconciliation. Before a meeting of the United Nations, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said, and I quote him, he said, ``Reconciliation lays the foundation for political, social, economic progress, and the security that we strive for.''

This is not a Democratic or a Republican issue, Madam Speaker. It isn't a Sunni or a Shia or Kurd issue. It isn't an American or Iraqi issue. Reconciliation is an issue that has something to do with all of us. It is the pathway for stability and peace in Iraq, and it is the pathway throughout the region.

One news agency has dedicated itself to providing real resources, training, and assistance for reconciliation in Iraq. Since the year 2004, the United States Institute of Peace, the USIP, has been working in Iraq at the national and local level building peace

community by community and neighborhood by neighborhood. USIP has focused on preventing sectarian violence at the local level, developing leaders in schools, universities, government, and civil society, promoting the rule of law, engaging women in public life, and increasing regional stability. All this with a tiny staff, only three USIP staff members and eight Iraqi staffers.

Despite the scarcity of resources, 120 Iraqis have been trained to be reconciliation facilitators. They will go into communities to help to work towards real solutions, making neighborhoods safer, promoting transparency and accountability, and so much more. The work they do is amazing and it is awe inspiring.

Sadly, the resources available are meager in comparison to what we are spending to wage war. That is why it is time to bring our troops and private contractors home, to give Iraq back to the Iraqi people. And that is why I, along with my colleague from Connecticut, Christopher Shays, introduced H.R. 5925, International Partnership for Reconciliation in Iraq Act of 2008. This legislation will ensure that USIP will have the funding and support it needs to continue and to expand.

I urge all of my colleagues to do something: Cosponsor the bill, H.R. 5925, so that we can work with the Iraqi people, so we can work within the international community, and we can reconcile that area. I urge you to cosponsor H.R. 5925. Enough talking about the problem. It is time to do something.