Press Conference with House Speaker Pelosi (D-CA); Rep. Skelton (D-MO; Rep. Berman (D-CA); Rep. Emanuel (D-IL)
Press Conference
Press Conference with House Speaker Pelosi (D-CA); Rep. Skelton (D-MO; Rep. Berman (D-CA); Rep. Emanuel (D-IL)
Copyright ©2008 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Carina Nyberg at cnyberg@fednews.com or call 1-202-216-2706.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
REP. EMANUEL: As my colleagues mentioned, there is a series of costs associated with this war. One is the cost to our readiness of our troops that we've heard and a number of you have reported on. That is quite serious, both around the country, but also the new recruits and the strain that it's put on our families and our capability of meeting other security concerns around the country, which is another -- around the world, rather -- which is another cost associated with this war, which these hearings will have to delve into, which is now not only in Afghanistan but in the Korean Peninsula. There is a cost that Iraq is basically draining America's security, its armed forces and also, as the speaker said earlier, our economy.
You know, in every war, the -- presidents in the past have built and strengthened America at home. Before we even talked about the Marshall Plan, Roosevelt launched the GI Bill of Rights here at home to make sure that America was strong. While we were talking about helping Korea, President Eisenhower proposed the interstate highway system to strengthen America here at home. At the height of the Cold War, President Kennedy launched a mission to put a man on the moon.
Yet look at what President Bush has done. This is the president of the United States that, while he has expanded hospitals in Iraq -- 20 hospitals in Iraq, 80 new clinics -- he's vetoed a children's health care bill for 10 million children, and his own budget proposes $178 billion cuts in Medicare and Medicaid. While we are building 6,700 schools in Iraq and training 60,000 teachers in Iraq, the president's budget here at home cuts funding for education and teacher training programs and reading programs, and in fact does not fully fund the Leave No Child Behind program.
This is the first president in history in the middle of a war has asked the United States to sacrifice more for its own economic good and its own strength here at home, and that has not been the tradition or the practice in the past.
And as the speaker noted, Iraq is running a surplus. They have not invested, as they said they would do, in their own reconstruction. We have put $45 billion of taxpayer money into Iraq's reconstruction while our education, our health care, and our physical infrastructure and our environment are all running huge deficits as it relates to the obligations and needs that America has here at home.
So across the waterfront -- whether it is our national security, our Armed Forces or our economy -- there are costs associated with this war that are having a debilitating effect on America to compete, either in the arena of national security or economically. And part of the questions and part of the forum next week will not be just to look at Iraq, but the costs associated with Iraq to all of our other obligations around the country here and then also around the world. Thank you.
SPEAKER PELOSI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Be pleased to take any questions on this subject while our chairmen are here.
Q Senator Ben Nelson has proposed converting this reconstruction grants into loans so that Iraq would have to repay them. Would you and the chairmen be interested in that?
SPEAKER PELOSI: I haven't seen the senator's proposal, but when we do, we'll let you know. Okay? That was a subject at the beginning of the going into the war in Iraq, was turn it into loans right from the start. So it's revisiting a question that we have discussed before.
Yes, ma'am.
Q Can any of you speak to what you'd like to see in the supplemental that is coming up and whether or not withdrawal language will be included in it?
SPEAKER PELOSI: We're not talking about the supplemental now. We -- probably, as Mr. Hoyer, our leader -- floor leader, has said -- the majority leader has said, it will probably come up in May. We'll be working on that in the weeks ahead. Right now, our focus is on this testimony next week and what that tells us about what should be in that supplemental.
REP. EMANUEL: Madame Speaker, can I add just one thing to this first question?
SPEAKER PELOSI: Sure.
REP. EMANUEL: I do want to note -- I mean, Howard said this also -- is -- we both think the same thing. As you said, talking about loans, this was -- I don't think anybody should lose sight this war was supposed to pay for itself and Iraq's oil revenue was going to pay for reconstruction. So before we get to talking about whether it's a grant or a loan, remember the first pledge that they made. It was clear this was not supposed to be an expensive war. It was going to be a short war. And more importantly, Iraq's oil revenue was going to pay for its own reconstruction.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
REP. EMANUEL: Let me just -- I want to finish one comment. I'll be real quick.
Part of the testimony and part of what we were saying here today -- and this goes to the heart of the question -- is that General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker can talk about Iraq, but there's an obligation in that hearing and beyond that hearing. I know Ike is having one at 1 o'clock that same day. What has happened to our troops? What is happening in the Korean Peninsula as it relates to what is becoming increasingly as North Korea's threatening South Korea? Are we ready? Do we have everything we need for that?
Ike opens up, I think, almost at every caucus he speaks that -- I might get this wrong -- that of the last 14 engagements, I think it was what, 12 we didn't know or prepare for. So the question is, he -- the general and ambassador will talk about Iraq. You have to raise your sights up, take the blinders off and then say, what is the whole waterfront of issues associated with the cost associated with Iraq, both to the military, our national security and our ability to meet other threatening hot spots?
And I do think one of the other hot spots is also what is happening here at home economically. There are costs associated with this war that won't just be answered by one chart on this -- what happened to the level of violence in Iraq. They go way beyond that. And I hope that -- and you guys have done this in the past, as we get to this hearing, we will not narrow and just drill down to the violence level and the chart, what that shows, but what else is not being met, and are we ready to meet what we see on the horizon as it relates to our national security?
REP. SKELTON: Let me add to that -- our job under the Constitution is to raise and maintain the military of the United States. The national security is in our hands.
SPEAKER PELOSI: Congress.
REP. SKELTON: And it is -- in the hands of Congress. And it's a broad area, and not limited, of course, to Iraq. I have pointed out, in the last 31 years, there have been 12 military engagements in which our forces have been part of -- four of which have been major in size, Panama, Desert Storm and the two of which we are involved in right now -- none of which were predictable ahead. And consequently, you don't know what's around the corner.
That's the problem of readiness. That's what concerns me.
REP. BERMAN: Could I just, since everybody -- (laughter).
SPEAKER PELOSI: (Laughs.) Certainly, Mr. Chairman.
REP. BERMAN: The one thing I know is the speaker, all of us, we want what is going on there to work. We want the violence to be reduced. We want the political reconciliation to take place. We want a stability. We want the defeat of extremist forces on all sides. Those are things we hope for. But we have to also deal with what the reality is and ask the tough questions.
Two and a half years ago, one of the Iraqi leaders came to my office and said, "This is what it's all going to be based on, and I believe it's going to happen soon. People of goodwill in the middle, moderate Shi'ites, moderate Sunnis, are going to come together in the middle to form an alliance on behalf of a united Iraq against the extremist forces, whether they're al Qaeda insurgents, former Ba'athist insurgents or Shi'ite militias."
That was two and a half years ago. I'd like Ambassador Crocker to tell me there's some evidence that I just have missed that that is what is going on now.
Q Chairman Skelton, just a moment ago you referenced the fact that most of us could probably predict what General Petraeus will say or much of what he will say, paramount of which is the idea of freezing the drawdown of U.S. forces. What are your thoughts about that?
REP. SKELTON: Well, needless to say, that concerns me a great deal. It impacts upon exactly what I was talking about, the readiness of our troops. You're wearing them out. The strain is heavy. It's not heavy just on those in uniform, but as well as their families. Good people. And we see young captains leaving at a disproportionate rate, people who, hopefully, in the days and years ahead would be colonels and maybe even generals; that we're losing that talent because of the strain on them as well as on their families.
You're going to have to have a reduction. And of course, what we've been talking about, more attention to Afghanistan, that's going to have to come to pass that that's going to be a solid outcome. It just has to.
Q To follow up on that, Chairman Skelton, what is the likelihood do you think that troop deployments can shrink from 15 months to 12 months if there is that --
REP. SKELTON: It's going to have to -- it's going to have happen. You're wearing them out. It's just going to have to happen.
Q Do you think it can happen if there is the pause in troop withdrawals? Or do you think that would keep those --
REP. SKELTON: Well, it would be part of it, I would hope. I would hope it would all work together. But you're wearing them out.
Q So if he says the troop surge is working and we need to stay as long as it takes, is that going to push all of your buttons? (Laughter.) As it were.
REP. SKELTON: Well, we really have to look at the overall national security situation. I can't stress again the tough situation we are in readiness wise across the board. And I'm not just talking about Afghanistan; I'm talking about wherever our interests may be. We have troops all over the world, and they're good. They're professional. I'm proud of them. But you can only stretch a military so far. And I'm fearful that the Iraqi conflict is draining them far beyond where they should be.
REP. EMANUEL: Can I jump in? One thing -- every event in Iraq cannot be a justification for the policy of more troops, more time and more money. Violence goes down; we need more troops, more time, more money. Violence goes up; we need more troops, more time, more money. Not every event in Iraq can be a -- can get us into a position which we find ourselves in, which is a policy cul de sac, and we just keep going around and around.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source