Waiving Requirement of Clause 6(a) of Rule XIII with Respect to Consideration of Certain Resolutions
WAIVING REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS -- (House of Representatives - November 18, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, the troops in this country are going to be surprised to find out that the Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee filed a resolution saying that it is the sense of the House of Representatives, apparently as he sees it, that the deployment of the United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately. Apparently, the Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee thinks that we should not have an orderly withdrawal of the troops, thinks that we should not provide for their safety and protection on the withdrawal, thinks that we should not do the things that Mr. Murtha suggested that we do.
It is either that, sir, or they are going to think that this is some sort of a trick, that you filed this so that we would have been looking at something that Mr. Murtha did not want us to look at. Because if you are concerned about what the message is that the troops are getting in Iraq, you would, in fact, have a full-fledged debate here so that Mr. Murtha and other Members of both parties could express clearly and succinctly what it is they believe ought to happen in terms of policy.
But that is not what we are seeing here. You should have a chance for Mr. Murtha to discuss his idea on protecting the troops when there is a redeployment or redeploying to over the horizon so that there will not be a spread of terrorism, of making sure that any redeployment is made with the protection and the safety of the troops. But I do not think that is what is going on here.
You talk about your respect for Mr. Murtha. You talk about his known knowledge for the military, and yet it is you, sir, who comes down here and says that the Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee proposes that the House of Representatives put their statement and their resolve that we should deploy immediately from Iraq and not protect our troops, apparently, because it does not say that, and not provide for their safety, not provide for redeployment somewhere over the horizon so that we will be sure that terrorism does not spread there and we will be ready for any emergency.
If instead you want the troops to get the message that that is not what we want, then why did you not work with your delegation over there to make sure that Mr. Murtha's resolution could be proposed and debated and explained fully and then this country could have the benefit of a full discussion of where the policy is going, because this administration, apparently, has no clue and has no idea. They politicized the lead-up going into the area, and now you are politicizing how it is we are going to get this country back in order and out of there.
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would also advise Members to address their remarks to the Chair and not to other Members.
Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
And let me make this point: that the resolution is written in precisely the way that I think describes the essence of the publicity that has emanated from Washington, D.C. This is a message that has been sent to our troops; and if you look at the e-mails coming in, I think the question is well described, and I think that it manifests what a lot of people now think, especially uniformed people in the Iraq theater, and it is precisely the question before the House that the gentleman will have an absolute right to vote on; and I would hope that this is not Mr. Murtha's position. He will have a chance to vote ``no'' on it.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney).
Mr. TIERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I do not understand it to ever be the habit of this institution for a Member on one side taking it upon himself to interpret the meaning of a resolution of a Member on the other side without giving that Member the courtesy and the respect of allowing them to put forward what the meaning and intention of their own resolution is. I think, sir, you are playing games.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov