Iraq War Resolution

IRAQ WAR RESOLUTION

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this nonbinding resolution. I cannot support it for it neither supports our troops nor offers an alternative plan. It is symbolic, it is partisan, it is cynical, and it is meaningless.

The leadership of this body is taking the easy route: criticize the other guy's plan but don't offer your own. Call up your own nonbinding resolution, but don't allow votes on resolutions that actually have substance. Position yourselves for the next elections but not for the next wave of terrorism attacks. Win the White House, but lose the war on terror.

There is no doubt that the voters spoke in the last election. They are not happy with the war. Few, if any of us, are satisfied with the progress made in Iraq. I know I am not. Neither are my constituents. Their patience and that of all Americans has run thin.

For too long we pursued an open-ended commitment without well-defined goals and clear benchmarks for success. We also pursued a strategy that placed too heavy a burden on our troops and too light an expectation of the Iraqi Government. But I want to remind my colleagues that the voters will speak again if we don't get this right. And I say ``we' because it is all of us. If we don't put aside the partisan positioning and work together for the good of this country, we all will lose more than just our seats in this body.

It is not enough to point the finger and say that the President is wrong, and wait for the returns to come in. It is not enough to disapprove and criticize and say It is not my job. He is the Commander in Chief. And it is not enough to turn around and through this resolution say you support troops that have been or are serving in Iraq, but not those who may go in as replacements, rotations, or as part of the new temporary deployment. This is why we should be using this opportunity, not to take a symbolic vote of no confidence in our Commander in Chief, but to discuss real options for the way forward in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, I have been there several times. I have been to the red zone, visited the convention center where the Iraqi Parliament meets, and was there as Prime Minister Maliki presented his reconciliation plan. I met with our military commanders. I have listened to our soldiers who patrol the streets in Baghdad, and I have talked with democratically elected Iraqi leaders about their hopes for the future. The one thing that was very clear to me is that only the Iraqi Government can take the tough steps that will achieve reconciliation and an end to sectarian violence.

So now Prime Minister Maliki has stepped forward and asked our President for specific assistance in securing Baghdad. In response, President Bush's commanders have drawn up a plan. The President proposed a new commander on the ground, General Petraeus, who was confirmed by the other body in a bipartisan, unanimous vote of 81-0.

We urged the creation of a bipartisan Iraqi Study Group comprised of our country's most distinguished and seasoned experts and asked their advice. Among the key items they supported was a temporary surge in troop strength if called for by the commanders on the ground. ``As Baghdad goes, so goes Iraq,' they pointed out.

These are all steps in the right direction. But what would approving this resolution signal to the world? That we tell the Iraqi people to take the tough steps, but then we deny them the support they need to do so? That we urge the creation of a bipartisan commission to give us guidance and then reject its advice? That we unanimously confirm a new general on the ground and then we deny him his plan? That we support our troops, but not their replacements?

These are not the messages that I want to send. We owe it to our troops and to those who have given their lives to give the Iraqis one last chance to show that they are willing to fight for and take responsibility for the future of their own country. But we have to exercise our constitutional powers and hold them to it, and we have to stop signaling that the best Congress can offer is a big, nonbinding ``no' to someone else's plan.

So today I am cosponsoring legislation, H.R. 1062, that will do just that: hold the administration, and the Iraqi Government, accountable in achieving clear benchmarks. It requires the President to report to Congress every 30 days on the extent to which the government of Iraq is moving forward on more than a dozen fronts, from troop training and security to rebuilding, reconciliation, international cooperation, and enforcing the rule of law. It also requires progress reports on the implementation of strategies that will prevent Iraqi territory from becoming a safe haven for terrorist activities.

Most significantly, H.R. 1062 exercises the full constitutional powers of this body, not through a symbolic expression of discontent, but through vigorous oversight and true accountability.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1062 and reject the resolution before us.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov