Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction Act, 2004

EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN SECURITY AND RECONSTRUCTION ACT, 2004

AMENDMENT NO. 1830

Mr. BINGAMAN. I thank my colleague from Nevada.

Madam President, so there is no question about the opportunity for others to speak, I was asked if I would describe my amendment first and then at the end of my description I will ask to set aside the pending amendment and send my amendment to the desk. That is how I will proceed.

I intend to offer in a few minutes an amendment on behalf of myself, Senator Lugar, Senator Lieberman, Senator Bayh, Senator Clinton, Senator Durbin, Senator Landrieu, Senator Lincoln, Senator Smith, and Senator Reid. This is an amendment to honor our service men and women in Iraq who are serving far from home, far from family, far from friends.

Let me indicate from the title of the amendment that I intend to send to the desk what it would do: to authorize the award of the Iraqi Liberation Medal as a campaign medal for members of the Armed Forces who serve in Southwest Asia in connection with Operation Iraqi Freedom.

These service men and women, as we all know, have left the security of this country and their home behind to provide freedom and security for those who have not known it for many years. The human cost has been substantial, over 300 American fighting men and women will never come home. There are over 1,200 who will return wounded, far higher than previous conflicts.

I have a chart that demonstrates the grim statistics, showing the casualties our military has incurred in recent conflicts. In Operation Desert Storm, with which we are all familiar, the casualties, total deaths were 382, killed in action, 143, and the wounded were 467. In the Kosovo campaign, there were 16 deaths. In Operation Iraqi Freedom, as of last week, there were 196 killed in action, 309 total deaths, and 1,268 wounds.

So the casualties have been significant. This is not a minor military activity. We have over 130,000 troops in the region.
They remain to ensure that those who died and those who were wounded did not suffer and die in vain. They are also there to build a new Iraqi nation and to provide stability and freedom in that nation.

The liberation of Iraq is turning out to be the most significant military occupation and reconstruction effort, clearly, since the end of the Vietnam war and perhaps even before that. Despite their sacrifice and courage, these brave men and women will not, under current policy, be specifically recognized for their service in Iraq. Instead, the Department of Defense has decided to award them a Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal.

This issue was drawn to my attention by an article that appeared in the Army Times and the Navy Times and the Air Force Times called "One Size Fits All?" "The Pentagon plans to award one medal for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for any future campaigns related to the war on terrorism."

I believe this is a mistake in policy, that our military personnel deserve better. Accordingly, my colleagues and I are offering this amendment to correct the mistake by ensuring there is authorized an Iraqi Liberation Medal in lieu of this Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal.

As all who have paid attention in the Senate know, some of us did not agree with the administration's decision to proceed in Iraq when it did, but clearly we have all been united in our support of the troops. Young men and women, both active-duty personnel and National Guard and Reserve, have come forward and done their duty. That is clearly the essence of patriotism, and we all respect that.

They continue to serve even though they do not know when they will be returning to their families and to their communities. They continue to serve despite the tremendous hardships they face and despite the constant threat to their lives.

The President, of course, has agreed entirely with this view of the exemplary service our men and women have provided.
He has made many statements to that effect, and there is no partisan disagreement on any of that.

Let me put up another chart in the Chamber.

During Operation Desert Storm, service members received three separate military decorations for their service: the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal; the Liberation of Kuwait Medal, given by the Government of Saudi Arabia; and the Liberation of Kuwait Medal, given by the Government of Kuwait. Those are all three depicted on this chart.

In the case of Kosovo, our service men and women received the NATO Service Medal and the Kosovo Campaign Medal.
And those two medals are depicted on this part of the chart.

In the case of this current conflict in Iraq, the proposal by the administration is to give them the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, and that would apply to Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom or any operation in the Philippines or any future global war on terrorism operation.

The policy as it now exists would say that if you are in the military and you are directed to duty in one or more of these operations, you get this generic medal which indicates you are part of the global war on terrorism, which we know is of indefinite duration and which we know is not limited by any geographic limitation.

There is a difference—a substantial difference—between an expeditionary medal on the one hand and a campaign medal. We only need to look at an excerpt from the U.S. Army Qualifications for the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and the Kosovo Campaign Medal. In order to receive the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, you do not need to go to war, you only need to be "placed in such a position that, in the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, hostile action by a foreign armed force was imminent even though it does not materialize." So that is an expeditionary medal.

To earn the Kosovo Campaign Medal, there was a higher standard. A military member had to either "[b]e engaged in actual combat, or duty that is equally hazardous as combat duty, during the Operation with armed opposition, regardless of time [spent] in the Area of Engagement."

Many within the military agree there is a significant difference between an expeditionary medal and a campaign medal.

According to the Army Times:

Campaign medals help establish an immediate rapport with individuals checking into a unit.

An expeditionary medal does not necessarily denote any combat or any real connection to that particular area of potential combat. A campaign medal is designed to recognize military personnel who have risked their lives or are risking their lives in combat.

Obviously, all of us want to see proper recognition given to our young men and women who are in Iraq, including Army SP
Joseph Hudson from my home State of New Mexico, from Alamogordo, NM. He was held as a prisoner of war. The Nation was captivated, and particularly people of my State were captivated, as we watched Specialist Hudson being interrogated by the enemy on videotape. Asked to divulge his military occupation, Specialist Hudson stared defiantly into the camera and said: "I follow orders." Those of us with sons and daughters were united in worry with Specialist Hudson's family. The entire Nation rejoiced when he was liberated. He is just one of many who deserve this special recognition I am arguing for today.

We have also asked much of our Reserve and National Guard personnel. The reconstruction of Iraq clearly would not be possible without the commitment and sacrifice of the 170,000 Guard and reservists who are currently on active duty. As recently as this last week, an additional 10,000 troops from Washington State and North Carolina were activated for service in Iraq.

I think this is a straightforward amendment, one for which I hope we can have very strong support. I am very pleased that it is being proposed as a bipartisan amendment. My colleagues and I are committed to appropriately honoring the 200,000 or so heroes who have served to date or are serving in connection with the effort in Iraq. We believe current administration policy does not properly honor those personnel, and therefore we propose that in lieu of this Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, a new decoration that characterizes the real mission in Iraq—one that is distinctive and honors their sacrifice, something in the nature of an Iraqi Liberation Medal—be provided.

Some will argue that Congress has no business legislating in this area. But I point out there is ample precedent for what we are proposing. Congress has been responsible for recognizing the sacrifice and courage of our military forces throughout history. Congress has had a significant and historically central role in authorizing military decorations. Our Nation's highest decorations were authorized by Congress. Those include the Congressional Medal of Honor, the Air Force Cross, the Navy Cross, the Army's Distinctive Service Cross, the Silver Star, and the Distinguished Flying Cross. All of those were authorized by Congress.

We have also authorized campaign and liberation medals similar to what is being proposed here in many cases. A partial list includes the Spanish War Service Medal, the Army Occupation of Germany Medal, the World War II Victory Medal, the Berlin Airlift Medal, the Korean Service Medal, and the Prisoner of War Medal, in addition to the medals I have referred to already.

The men and women of our military are doing their jobs every day in Iraq. We should do our job by honoring them appropriately with a medal that is specific to their sacrifice and to this campaign in Iraq.

Mr. President, I send the amendment to the desk and ask that it be immediately considered.