Bill Delahunt

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. I voted, and, again, with one exception out of 435 Members, there was a unanimous vote here in this Chamber, bipartisan, Republicans and Democrats and Independent, to go to Afghanistan and destroy al Qaeda and find Osama bin Laden and apprehend him.

Mr. DELAHUNT. I have this vivid memory of the day after 9/11, a headline that appeared in the paper of record in France that said: ``We Are All Americans Today.'' We had support in every corner of the world for what we were doing. We would have succeeded in the war on terror by now. But, no. But, no. We invaded Iraq, and clearly that has created implications for our national security. If I may just for one moment, and I am not alone when I say this, it is interesting, today in the Wall Street Journal a former Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich of Georgia, who succeeded in securing a majority for the Republican Party in this House in 1994, was quoted. Remember, this is a Republican, a leader. The speculation is that he is considering running for the Presidency in 2008. This is what Newt Gingrich had to say. Just consider the following: ``Osama bin Laden is still at large.'' I agree. ``Afghanistan is still insecure.'' I would suggest that it is unraveling. ``Iraq is still violent.'' 3,000 deaths a month. ``North Korea and Iran are still building nuclear weapons and missiles. Terrorist recruiting is still occurring in the United States, Canada, Great Britain and across the planet.'' Those are Newt Gingrich's words, today, in the Wall Street Journal.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Well, if one reviews the memoir of Paul O'Neill, former Republican Secretary of the Treasury, who served in this Bush administration for 2 years, and in that capacity was a member of the National Security Council, you will discover that he was as surprised as anyone when 10 days after this President was inaugurated at a National Security Council meeting, there was a discussion about Iraq and the need to remove Saddam Hussein who, about 6 weeks later on February 22 of 2001, months before 9/11, there was a meeting when Secretary Rumsfeld had a map of the oil fields in Iraq spread out on a table. The discussion, it was prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency, and there was a discussion about how those oil fields would be divvied up between nations and various big oil companies.

Mr. DELAHUNT. If I can just go back to a point made by Tom Allen. The lack of accountability, the abrogation, if you will, of this body's constitutional responsibility to conduct oversight. We serve on different committees. I happen to be the senior Democrat, the ranking member, on a subcommittee of International Relations that is entitled Oversight and Investigations. We have not held one serious hearing relative to Iraq in the past 2 years. And I know that, prior to that, for the past 5 years, Iraq has been off the chart in terms of the committee's considerations. You don't talk about it unless there is good news. What I wanted to do was to bring before the committee, not Secretary Rumsfeld because we have heard enough from him. He is an F. He flunked. But I wanted to bring before the committee the men that lead our military and have served in the course of their service to this country in roles implicating Iraq, in some cases very directly in Iraq. Not one of these men have ever been invited to any committee in the Congress so that we would have an opportunity to hear what they had to say. So one by one, they felt compelled to speak out themselves and educate us and the American people as to the truth and the reality of Iraq and the incompetence of this administration and most specifically Donald Rumsfeld. Let me just review a few. Lieutenant General Greg Newbold, he is the top operations officer for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He was involved in the planning. He is Commanding General, First Marine Division, with Legion of Merit, Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medals. He is a highly decorated, well- respected general. He did not seek a promotion because he felt compelled to leave. Here is what he had to say. ``What we are living with now are the consequences of successive policy failures.'' He said that this year. Major General Paul Eaton, who was given the responsibility but not the resources to train Iraqi security forces, and we know what a joke that has been, here is what he had to say, ``Two and a half more years of that leadership,'' he was referring to Donald Rumsfeld and the civilian leadership, ``two and a half more years of that leadership was too long for my Nation, for my Army, and for my family.'' What an indictment. What an indictment. Lieutenant General John Riggs, ``They only need the military advice when it satisfies their agenda.'' When it satisfies their agenda, that is when they would call in a general and say, This is our agenda, what do you think, General? And then General Wesley Clark, ``They pressed for open warfare before the diplomacy was finished. It was a tragic mistake. It was a strategic blunder.''

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, a community is gathering to remember a young man who died far away from his home of Eastham on Cape Cod, in a place made infamous through the fury of war. Today, he returns to the place of his youth, to be mourned and to rest forever where peace holds its gentle sway. Army Sergeant Mark Vecchione was the typical, all-American kid who had a fear of spiders, but confessed his greatest weakness was seeing a little kid upset. He went to Iraq, not as part of a conquering Army, but to help establish that fundamental human value that all people everywhere--especially children--should never have to live in fear. As the Bible tells us, ``Blessed is the peacemaker; for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are those who mourn; for they shall be comforted.'' SGT Vecchione was a soldier determined to bring peace to a war-torn land. Now he is in a place to join with Him to bring some comfort to those who gather to mourn his passing. I ask that all of my colleagues in the House take a moment to read the following commentary that recently appeared in the Cape Cod Times about this young man. [From the Cape Cod Times] First Cape Soldier Killed in Iraq (By Robin Lord and Jason Kolnos) Cynthia DesLauriers and her daughter, Lori Vecchione, were sitting on their deck in the evening breeze Tuesday when a government car pulled up to the house. At first, DesLauriers, who is a front desk clerk at the Eastham Post Office, thought it was someone from the U.S. Postal Service. But, when men in military uniforms stepped out, DesLauriers knew her worst fears had been realized. ``They didn't even have to say anything. I just said, `No, no, no, it's not happening,' '' she said yesterday, a little more than 12 hours after she learned her only son and youngest child, Mark Vecchione, 25, had been killed in Iraq. The Army sergeant, who had written on his personal myspace.com Web page that ``getting home alive'' was his No. 1 goal this year, died Tuesday somewhere in Iraq. He was killed when the tank he was riding in ran over an ``improvised explosive device'' or IED. As the head gunner in the tank, he may have been riding halfway out of the vehicle when it was hit, according to what an Army official told his mother, The Army official did not reveal the exact location of his death or his body to DesLauriers, or any other details surrounding his death, pending an investigation and report, she said. Vecchione died exactly two weeks after he had returned to Iraq from a short leave with his family in Eastham. He was on his second tour of duty in Iraq, which was due to end in six months. Although Vecchione moved to Tucson, Ariz., when he was a junior in high school to live with his now deceased father, Guy Vecchione, he is the first person who was born and raised on Cape Cod to die in the war that began more than three years ago. ``If you were going to go to war, you'd want to go with him,'' said Al Cestaro, a retired sergeant in the Army's 501st Airborne Division, who has known Vecchione since kindergarten in Eastham. Cestaro called his friend ``selfless and kind.'' As an Army sergeant, he said Vecchione had ``an undying dedication to his soldiers.'' Vecchione was honored to be serving his country, Cestaro said. ``We all knew as soldiers the price of freedom is you have to see your friends die, or you die. But he didn't want to die any other way than knowing he was protecting his family.'' When Vecchione re-enlisted after his first tour of duty, Cestaro said he asked him why he wanted to go back to the dangers and the horrors of war. He said Vecchione told him he didn't want to let his comrades down. There are about 132,000 U.S. troops serving in Iraq. As of 10 a.m. yesterday, 2,554 soldiers have been killed and about 19,000 injured. Another friend from childhood, Vicki Fulcher of South Yarmouth, called the Army Vecchione's ``passion.'' Both Cestaro and Fulcher partied with Vecchione when he was home earlier this month, stopping at one of his favorite places, the Land Ho in Orleans, and enjoying cookouts. To his sister, Lori, Vecchione was her best friend. He was ``very brave, smart, with a heart of gold and nerves of steel,'' she said. And he was also a hero to her five-year- old son, Sebastian. To his mother, he was ``just my little boy who was always watching out for us.'' With tears welling in her eyes frequently and her face etched with the numbness and weariness that only sudden grief can bring, DesLauriers said her son was ``very proud'' to be serving in Iraq, but ``was afraid at times'' of the dangers. A glance at Vecchione's myspace.com Web page reveals a man with a deep love for his family, especially his nephew Sebastian. He called his late father, who died last year, his hero. He listed spiders as his greatest fear, but posted several pictures of himself holding a 5-foot machine gun in lraq. And he joked that the club he belonged to while attending Sahuaro High School in Tucson was the ``Reserved Seat In the Principal's Office Club.'' He regrets most not doing a better job while in school. A Catholic man who wanted to be a pilot when he grew up, he said his greatest weakness was ``seeing little kids upset.'' When Vecchione left the Cape to live with his father in Tuscon, he befriended Travis Wilson and his sister Bambi Anaya. ``He was the kind of person you could talk to about anything,'' said Anaya, 27, reached at her Arizona home yesterday. ``He was that spot of sunshine in all of our lives.'' Wilson, 26, an Army sergeant currently stationed in Fort Knox, Ky., called Vecchione ``the greatest human being I have ever met and I'm honored to have had my life touched by him.'' It was in July of 2001 when Vecchione, Wilson and another friend all decided to join the Army. Wilson said in addition to seeing it as a way to help his country, Vecchione saw the military as an avenue for personal growth before someday going to college. At the Eastham Post Office on Route 6 yesterday morning, patrons were halted in their tracks at the door, where acting Postmaster Donald Rogers had posted a notice of Vecchione's death. ``It's a small community where everybody knows everybody,'' he said. Recent photos of Vecchione in his uniform and with Sebastian are tacked up on the wall at the desk, as well as on the computer his mother uses. Customers often asked DesLauriers how he was doing, said postal clerk Mark Godfrey. ``I got the impression she got a lot of comfort from that,'' he said. In addition to his mother, sister and nephew, Vecchione is survived by an uncle, Donald Vecchione of East Orleans; an aunt and uncle, Brenda and Jeff Vecchione of Eastham; and a cousin. Tye Vecchione of Chatham, Services will be held at a later date.

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And as I listened to my friend from Oregon, I was thinking that we are helping the wealthiest of Americans by borrowing from China, by borrowing from China to subsidize that tax cut and further adding to the deficit. But, Mr. Speaker, by the time I am finished speaking, Exxon will have made $158,160 in profits, as opposed to 17 cents earned for the 2 minutes worked by the gas station attendant. In the hour allotted to the debate, Exxon will have made over $4,744,800. And if you are currently paid the minimum wage, you will have made $5.15. In a 40-hour week, Exxon will make a staggering $189,792,000 compared to the $206 earned by someone on minimum wage. Of course that is before taxes. Welcome to Wonderland, Alice. It has been 10 years since the Federal minimum wage was last adjusted, the longest period of time in which Congress has refused an increase. During that time, the price for gas has skyrocketed a whopping 136 percent, health care costs for working families have jumped 97 percent, college tuition has ballooned 77 percent, and the price of bread and milk has risen 25 percent. Far too many families are struggling to make ends meet, living paycheck to paycheck and going deeper and deeper into debt. It is not about paying at the pump any more, now working families are feeling it in the aisles of the local supermarket or when they visit the drugstore. We will not have a straight up-or-down vote on a clean minimum wage bill to help our working families, many of whom face a bleak future thanks to the Draconian budget cuts proposed by the administration and passed by this Congress. Instead, if we want to see the minimum wage addressed in this session of Congress, we are being forced to approve tax cuts that benefit the wealthiest among us and the Nation's corporations. That is just wrong.

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the resolution. While I have disagreements with some of the provisions in the preamble, and with the accusatory tone of some of the ``resolves'' clauses, what concerns me most is the timing of its consideration. Because a draft agreement between the Drug Enforcement Agency of the United States, and the Venezuelan antidrug office hangs in the balance. Now, there has been considerable time and effort invested by both sides in this initiative, which I believe and I know others do, would be mutually beneficial to both Venezuela and the United States. But the passage of this resolution puts that at risk. Because we all know that what we do here tonight will be interpreted in Caracas as a political statement to embarrass and intimidate the Chavez Government. That is simply the reality. And to think otherwise would be naive in the extreme. Let us be candid. And my friend and colleague from Florida touched on many aspects of the relationship. But every one on the planet knows that the relationship between the Presidents of the United States, and Venezuela is poor. Prior to the coup in 2002, it was practically nonexistent. But when it appeared to the Venezuelans that the Bush administration appeared to applaud the coup, that relationship proceeded to deteriorate to the point where it can only be described as bitter and hostile. The rhetoric has become incendiary and insulting. And every action on either side is perceived to be motivated by hostility and political calculation. The unfortunate result is that what has evolved is a relationship that is hardened into profound mutual animosity that is having long-lasting and real world implications, whether it implicates terrorism, or drugs or anything. We all know that while this resolution will be hardly noticed in this country, its language condemning the Chavez Government will provoke headlines in Venezuela, that will be used by Chavez's opponents in the forthcoming presidential campaign, and undoubtedly there will be a reaction from the Chavez Government. Without a working, transparent and viable relationship between the Drug Enforcement Agency and Venezuela, there will be serious consequences to both countries. As I just said, I have no doubt that what we do here today will be interpreted in Caracas as yet another insult, which will provoke more inflammatory rhetoric, and make any potential constructive relationship on this particular issue much more difficult to achieve. Now, let me be very clear. I know that that is not the intention of the chairman who has offered this resolution. But I am also confident, and I hope I am wrong, that this draft agreement will be the victim of this poisonous relationship and atmosphere that exists. Let me emphasize, I am not giving up on the agreement. Earlier today I had a conversation with my friend and colleague from New York, Representative Meeks. We agreed that this is simply too important. This agreement is simply too important not to make a final effort. And we will go down, and we will encourage the government of Venezuela to finally sign the agreement, which hopefully will restore a working relationship between the DEA and the anti-drug office in Venezuela. But I am not hopeful. Because I believe that the language in this resolution, whether it is intended or not, will exacerbate the tension that clearly exists. And the tragedy is that the people in both countries will pay a price, and that is sad. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to my friend and colleague who serves on the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee and has spent considerable time in Venezuela and is familiar with the nuances of that relationship, my friend, Mr. Meeks.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I intend to yield to the gentleman from Ohio, but I am very glad that my friends raise the issue of Iran and Tehran, because the gentleman that spoke here today, that spoke in this, to this House, in this institution, has yet to denounce the military cooperation agreement between Iran and Iraq that exists as we speak. Let me remind my friends, too, that the foreign minister of Iraq by the name of Zebari made this statement to the international community: We should not press Tehran about their nuclear program because they tell us that it is for peaceful purposes. We do not need a guarantee, let us just simply accept, accept what they say. I am really glad you brought up Tehran because what I am beginning to see is an emerging relationship, if not an alliance, between Iraq and Iran. It is clear that there is a huge Iranian influence in Iraq today, a place where we have lost over 2,500 men and women, where we have expended hundreds of billions of dollars. And yet what do we hear? Nothing about Iran. We hear no condemnation of Hezbollah, none whatsoever. I am glad you brought up Iran. Go back and check about that bilateral military cooperation agreement. I know one does not currently exist between Iran and Venezuela, but it does between our friends in Iraq and Iran. We have really created a hegemony in the Middle East, Iran. But also, I think it is important that because the chairman spoke about the DEA, and I am sure they have gone through and I understand they have verified or they have had serious consultations. As a matter of record, if the chairman tells me, I will accept it, does the Drug Enforcement Administration believe that the passage of this resolution will accelerate the signing of this agreement?

Mr. DELAHUNT. Reclaiming my time, there was, and I would remind my friend that there was a very tense issue between Venezuela and the United States regarding air traffic between our countries. Quiet diplomacy, patience, restraint resulted in the resolution of that problem. So that today between Venezuela and the United States, there is air travel, it is working. So accord can happen. I share the frustration of my friend from Indiana. I know that he is someone who is a very can-do kind of guy, and at times, one might describe his temperament as somewhat impetuous. Unfortunately, diplomacy does not necessarily work that way. Now, I understand, too, that the State Department INL had this to say. I am quoting from our own State Department. This is after all of the problems that you described between the DEA and the anti-drug officer of Venezuela. This is a quote. ``In spite of the political tensions, DEA continued working with its law enforcement contacts, developing information and leads that have contributed,'' listen carefully, ``have contributed to record seizures by Venezuelan law enforcement.'' The DEA is acknowledging that there have been record seizures, according to their own official report, the INL. ``After decertification, political sniping faded and government officials expressed renewed willingness to cooperate. Government of Venezuela officials have linked cooperation to the signing of a new bilateral counternarcotics working arrangement.'' That is what we all want, and if we can achieve that, we have done something positive. We know the rhetoric is going to fly back and forth. We know there is going to be finger-pointing and all kinds of nasty words spoken on either side, but what is most important, what is most important is that we protect our own children. I think the decertification process, I wonder if we have any standards for ourselves. In the last 6 years, have we taken steps to adequately decline, to adequately reduce the demand that fuels the narcotics coming in to this country? Mr. Speaker, with that, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich), my friend.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DELAHUNT. First of all, my friend made a misstatement about Chavez going to North Korea, but that is irrelevant to the revolution.

Mr. DELAHUNT. He is not going to North Korea, but let me focus on something.

Mr. DELAHUNT. He has been to Tehran, like Mr. Maliki has been to Tehran, and Mr. Zebari and Mr. Chalabi, all of the friends of the neoconservative movement, they have lived in Tehran for a considerable period of time. But let us talk about this today. The rhetoric that we have heard about is about terrorists, it is about, this is not within the purview of this thing. But I have to tell you something, when this plays down in Caracas, like I said in my opening remarks, it is just going to make it impossible.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Today is the 26th of July, Mr. Speaker. The 26th of July. You know that I, and hopefully accompanied by others, was going to go to Caracas this August, have a conversation, and come back with a signed agreement. That is the hope. But with this language in this particular resolution, I will tell you what we have done. We have buried that agreement. And that is a tragedy because drugs will come into this country. That is the sadness.

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act is scheduled to lapse within days, and the legislation before the House will extend it until September 29. This reauthorization for a brief duration is necessitated by the fact that the House and Senate are still negotiating language on a new legislative construction of the Iran Libya Sanctions Act. We hope to complete this process soon with the passage of new legislation that will strengthen sanctions against Iran and remove from law the outdated references to sanctions on Libya, sanctions which anyway no longer apply because Libya has fulfilled the required conditions. I urge passage of this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. Madam Speaker, well, I am glad to see that you have recovered and that Mr. Meek has made it. I knew that both of you were tired. You worked hard yesterday, but I hope that in the future you can just reach down, grab a little extra, and you know, be here when it counts. I have been very impressed with your perseverance, your performance over the course of the past year and a half; but remember, it has to be consistent. It has to be consistent. It cannot be just about talk. It has to be actions.

Mr. DELAHUNT. I look forward to seeing you graduate to a different level, and I am sure that you will be able to be here for the last hour once you hit that magic mark in September. Like I was saying, we hear a lot of rhetoric on the floor here, and we just heard an hour's worth of good talk, good talk, and you know, I welcome the fact that it would appear, if you listen carefully, that the Republican majority is going to get serious about fiscal responsibility. I would only note that they are coming very late to the issue, because, I know neither of you were here in 1994, but in 1994, this branch, Madam Speaker, was taken over. The Republicans assumed majority. So let us see, from 1994 to 2006, that is 12 years, that is 12 years and now we are faced with runaway deficits, external debt. We just recently received a report from the Comptroller General of the United States that informed the American people that despite the fact that they have already spent 30 billion of their dollars in Iraq, that the bill is coming for another $50 billion to reconstruct Iraq.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Well, I think a lot of it is going to line the pockets of corrupt officials because that is what Mr. Walker, who is the Comptroller General of the United States, found. He expressed concern about the black market in the sale of oil. We all remember the words of Paul Wolfowitz who was the Under Secretary of Defense that the revenues from the oil reserves of Iraq would pay for its reconstruction. False.

Mr. DELAHUNT. But, Madam Speaker, the Republican majority in this House is spending the American people's money not in America, but in Iraq.

Mr. DELAHUNT. And where are they getting the money?

Mr. DELAHUNT. Or if it is at 11:30.

Mr. DELAHUNT. And you are by yourself.