Bill Delahunt

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. Did you hear about limited government? Did you hear about fiscal responsibility? You know what is interesting? I served with a gentleman who is a genuine conservative and he was part of the leadership on the Republican side. He chose not to run again. And I guess that must be a very liberating experience, because he recently spoke out and this is what he said: Our President is publicly oblivious to criticism, although off-the- record reports indicate his patience is running thin inside the White House. He argues the right wing is now spending like profligates with no tomorrow, and is displaying a very real arrogance. What they say about absolute power is coming to reality. Those words were written by, as I said, a former member of the Republican leadership, Representative J.C. Watts of Oklahoma, a conservative, a man of principle. As I said earlier, we have heard about reform. We hear about we have got to limit government. Well, what have they been doing for 12 years?

Mr. DELAHUNT. Maybe it is just that they do not get it. They have not been here long enough to understand that they have been in power for 12 years. I mean, we have a single-party government in this country today, the Senate, the House, and the White House. And yet conservatives like the President of the American Conservative Union, David Keen, he noted in a letter to members that Federal spending has increased by $300 billion since George Bush took office, including $96 billion for domestic social welfare programs. By comparison, Keen said, spending increased by only $51 billion during President Clinton's 8 years. So I guess what we are talking about is the capacity of an administration to spend money wisely and effectively. We heard about welfare reform, Mr. Speaker, and yet we have created a welfare state for major corporations. We have created in Iraq a welfare state for Iraqis. And as we have said here before, it was the Republican majority that insisted that the money that goes to Iraq, to rebuild Iraq, never be paid back to the American taxpayers. That just does not make any sense. That makes absolutely no sense. And we stood here on this floor and said, Make it a loan so that we get the money back, so that we can use it to control the deficit, this deficit that is the product of this administration and this Congress. When Bill Clinton left office, there was a surplus of $5.6 trillion. And I kept hearing something about facts over here. Well, that is a fact that they should recognize, the Republican majority. Bill Clinton left a surplus for the American people. And what do we have now? We have trillions, trillions of a deficit that will explode in future years harming the interests of generations of Americans to come.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Right. Ask General Shinseki, who was dismissed when he disagreed, when he gave just a different opinion as to the number of troops that were going to be required in Iraq. He said 300,000. The then-Under Secretary of Defense, Mr. Wolfowitz, said, Hey, that is vastly overrated. Subsequently, we have discovered that the good general was correct. What about Larry Lindsey, who was an economic adviser to the President and who came out with an estimate that the range of dollars that would be necessary in Iraq would go from $100 billion to $200 billion. We are way past $200 billion now. But the administration, the White House, kept saying it will not exceed $60 billion. The American people should remember that. And what happened to Larry Lindsey? He got bumped too.

Mr. DELAHUNT. That is from the VFW.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Well, I think what is going on is that there is a misunderstanding on the part of the Republican leadership when they speak of patriotism. Patriotism is not about a parade. It is not simply respect for the flag. It is about treating the men and women who go to war for us, who serve the country with respect. That is what patriotism is about. We hear a lot about patriotism on the floor of this House, and I am sure that those words are uttered with great conviction and sincerity. But I guess what we are trying to convey is that patriotism is not just rhetoric. Remember what Franklin Delano Roosevelt used to say during World War II? Shared sacrifice. Who is sacrificing for our veterans? Those that receive this egregious tax benefit who are among the most affluent in America. I daresay if those people were inquired of, one by one, they would say, Take that tax break; I want the veterans to be respected.

Mr. DELAHUNT. That is the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Mr. DELAHUNT. I say to the gentleman from Ohio, how about some welfare reform? Welfare reform for the oil industry and welfare reform for the pharmaceutical companies. You know, when they speak to the issue of welfare reform, they are not talking about the oil industry or the drug manufacturers. No, they are not talking about those folk. They are not talking about corporate welfare. And as you just indicated, $16 billion to go to Big Oil for what? For an industry that just had record profits. As you indicated earlier, they were up here today, brought up here by Republicans because it is so embarrassing to have passed an appropriation and provided subsidies for Big Oil, and then they report these incredible profits. I mean, it was embarrassing.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Who do not give money to politicians. But because he sided with them in terms of their priorities, their expression of what was needed to properly respect the needs of American servicepeople who have done so much for this country, you know what happened to him? Now, they probably do not know this. He got fired, for all intents and purposes. He was removed as chairman of that veterans services committee. And that is Chris Smith, a man of courage and moral principle.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Did you hear about reform?

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, it was interesting to listen to our Republican colleagues and friends in the previous hour. I heard the word ``reform'' over and over again. I heard the term ``fiscal responsibility.'' I heard the concept or the phrase ``spending cuts reining in'' and ``making government smaller.'' And they kept referring to Democrats and the minority side with certain gestures. I guess my response is, who has been running this place for 12 years? Who has been in charge, Mr. Speaker, for 12 years? It was in 1994 that the Republicans came to power and took control of this body. Twelve years ago. Is it just dawning on you now that fiscal responsibility is essential to our economy, essential to the future of our children? And reform, you have had 12 years to do reform. They speak of the veterans and health care and they recite statistics and they were mostly newer Members of the Republican Party that spoke here tonight, so maybe they are unaware of what the Republican leadership in the House did about a year or two ago. The chairman of the veterans services committee, the then chairman was the gentleman from New Jersey, someone whom I disagree with on occasion, but for whom I have great respect because he tells it like it is and he stands tall, and if he believes in something his commitment is unwavering. He made a big mistake. He sided with the VFW. He sided with the American Legion and the DAV, Disabled American Veterans organization. These are the people who understand best. They are not governmental organizations. They are nonprofit voluntary associations of veterans.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Is this a semester-long course?

Mr. DELAHUNT. Is that mandatory?

Mr. DELAHUNT. And the American people. Because the American people want to take care of the veteran. Before we leave the veteran issue, if anyone who should be watching our conversation this evening has any doubts, do not call us. Do not call our offices. Do not call the offices of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Do not call the Republican Members. Do not call the Republican leadership. Call the Veterans of Foreign Wars where you live. Call the American Legion where you live. MS. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. We have a very important holiday coming up the day after tomorrow, and each of us is hoping that we have an opportunity to go home and look our veterans in the eye and tell them how much we appreciate and honor them. And I know that I will be able to do that in good conscience. I know that I will stand proud with my veterans and tell them that I did everything I could and will continue to do everything I can and House Democrats will continue to do everything we can to ensure that we honor their service. I certainly would not want to be any Member of Congress with an R next to their name that votes for this bill tomorrow if it comes up on the floor because, growing up, my mom always told me that the guide that I should use when making a decision was whether I was going to be able to sleep well and then wake up in the morning and look at myself in the mirror and be comfortable with the decision that I made and know that I did the right thing. Well, I wonder just how well our Republican friends on the other side of the aisle are going to be sleeping tonight. They have a lot for their stomach to be churning about; and for those that are going to wake up in the morning and decide that they are going to vote ``aye'' and support this legislation, I do not know how the very next morning they are going to be able to stand on the podium with their veterans and look them in the eye and say that they continue to honor them. And, you know, we sometimes stand here and people listening to us or, Mr. Speaker, sometimes people might think that, you know, this is just our opinion, that we are obviously committed Democrats and committed to our beliefs and our agenda. But we are here every night not representing just our own opinion, although we certainly do vociferously express our opinion. We like to make sure that we bring third-party validators to back up the opinion that we are espousing on this floor. I just want to read an excerpt from a letter that was sent to each Member of Congress, all 535 Members of us, of these two Chambers, on Monday, November 7, 2005 by Robert E. Wallace who is the executive director of the Veterans of Foreign Wars Washington office. And I am hopeful that I am not being repetitive. I am not sure if you have already read his words. But, you know, for those that may question whether or not we know what we are talking about or that we are exaggerating or engaging in hyperbole when it comes to what is in this bill and the priorities of the Republican leadership versus our priorities when it comes to commitment to veterans, he says: ``Dear Senator or Representative. To all Members of Congress, we have at the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, VFW, observed for the past several months astonishing efforts to cast veterans who have been found to be severely disabled by the Department of Veterans Affairs' own determinations as undeserving of the veterans benefits their grateful Nation has provided for them in the law. This assault on the most vulnerable members of the veteran community, disabled in service to this country and suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, is broad in its scope and execution. At a time when the VA should be preparing to serve combat veterans returning from the war on terrorism being fought in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, they are expending their limited resources planning a systematic effort to reduce or remove benefits earned by the parents and older siblings of the troops fighting in the field today.'' Well, that is not Tim Ryan saying it. That is not Debbie Wasserman Schultz or Bill Delahunt or Kendrick Meek saying it. That is the executive director of the VFW's Washington office.

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, again, I am pleased to join the younger Members, both in age, I want to be very clear about that, as well as time and service, if you will, in this House. I was back in my office, and I apologize for being somewhat late, but I had business to attend to. I heard my colleagues talking and having this conversation relative to Medicaid. But being, if you will, the senior Member, and I would acknowledge honorary member of the 30-something Group, I really felt compelled to leave my office and come here and address the issue of Medicare, since shortly I will be receiving my Medicare card. It is a year or so away, but I am really getting close. I think it is important to remind senior citizens that they are at risk in this budget process. Now, we do not know what is going to happen, but we know that there have been a variety of proposals out there. Now, it is my understanding that the other branch of Congress has concluded the budget process and has made cuts in regards to Medicare. Can any of my colleagues help me in terms of what the order of magnitude of those cuts are to Medicare and what does it portend, what does it mean in terms of services and health care for senior citizens in this country, if the Senate cuts should prevail?

Mr. DELAHUNT. Are you a patriot? Are you hearing that?

Mr. DELAHUNT. What the gentleman is saying in effect is that we are borrowing money from China so that we can create a welfare state in Iraq. We have become a conduit. That in very simple terms is what is happening because we are borrowing our way into bankruptcy to cut taxes and to support programs, not for American citizens, but for Iraqis who deserve this help but at least should be required to pay it back. That is what it comes down to. Meanwhile, our own citizens in the States, particularly the gulf States, they have to ask the Federal Government for help; and what they hear is, we will give you help, but it will come in the form of a loan. You have got to do matching funds. I think we have got to be friends to our Republican colleagues too, because there are many Republicans that have spoken out about the incompetence of what has transpired in Iraq, have spoken out about the folly of the approach to the war. Senator Pat Roberts from a neighboring State to Missouri and Kansas, back in May of 2004, that is a year and a half ago, he made this observation, now he is a Republican, a respected Republican: ``We need to restrain our growing U.S. messianic instincts, a sort of global engineering where the United States feels it is both entitled and obligated to promote democracy by force if necessary.'' That comes from a highly respected Republican, and yet what do we hear from the White House? We have to stay the course, but please, please temper can the White House not just stand up and say that we were wrong? We have heard other individuals say that. They would gain respect. Senator Lugar, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, a highly well-respected Midwestern Republican senator, this is what he had to say back in September of last year: ``Our committee heard blindly optimistic people from the administration prior to the war and people outside the administration, what I call'' and these are his words, ``the `dancing in the street crowd' that we just simply will be treated with open arms. The nonsense of all that is apparent. The lack of planning is apparent.'' You know what? Now, we face another scandal. We have heard about scandals in the past 6 months to a year. We talk about special interests on this hill, but there is a scandal brewing out there, and the American people are going to discover it. It was reported by two very conservative journalists in the conservative paper, the Washington Times. Let me quote for just a minute: ``The Bush administration is facing another scandal that is quietly bubbling away in the background as most press attention is focused on the'' Plame affair. ``Defense officials tell us the scandal involves massive corruption in Iraq related to U.S. and international funds meant for reconstruction efforts and the failure of the administration to control'' and monitor ``those funds. ``The officials say conservative estimates put the amount of stolen money at about $9 billion, and that it could be as high as $15 billion.'' So you know what, many of those projects that we had hoped to do to build a Nation, to build a Nation in Iraq, that money went into somebody's pockets. It was the wild West, and you know what, I, as ranking member, the senior Democrat on the subcommittee in the Committee on International Relations dealing with oversight and investigations, have asked repeatedly, let us investigate, let us conduct oversight hearings into what has happened to that money. And you know what I hear?

Mr. DELAHUNT. But they want $4 billion from the State of Louisiana, and the State of Louisiana's annual budget is $8 billion. So half of it would go to the Federal Government so that Louisiana can get relief from their Federal Government. That just does not make sense.

Mr. DELAHUNT. It is worse than that. You know what is happening in Louisiana, Mr. Speaker? You know what is happening? They have got a bill for $4 billion. That is the estimate. If they want help from the Federal Government they have got to come up with some $4 billion. I think it was the State treasurer there that requested the estimate, and he said we asked for a grant. We asked for a grant, and they gave us a loan. And yet we are doing the opposite in Iraq. As a Nation, a government, your primary obligation or responsibility goes to your own people. That is what we should be doing. And the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) is so right.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Well, if I can, when will that money be paid back to the American taxpayer?

Mr. DELAHUNT. How long does it take to train a Marine?

Mr. DELAHUNT. That is right.

Mr. DELAHUNT. They were going to try to pull the same thing in the gulf States. They were doing the same thing. They were importing the same practices from Iraq that have resulted in this incredible brewing scandal. They were going to do the same thing right here in the gulf States, but you know what, the American people have caught on and they are backing off.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Well, there are some things that we do know. We know this, that there was a debate on this floor several years ago where billions of dollars were appropriated to rebuild Iraq. And those of us on the Democratic side supported that funding, if, if it were going to be provided in the form of a loan because we were concerned about American taxpayers being repaid their money. But the Republican leadership, at the insistence of the White House, said, No way; we are going to give this money to Iraq. So what we have done, and I think there is an irony here, we have provided free of charge, no interest, no money to be returned, we have provided good health care for Iraqis. We have built 110 primary health care centers. We have educated 2,000 health care professionals. We have vaccinated 3.2 million children. And I think we all applaud that and support that. We have rehabilitated 2,700 schools. We have paid the salaries and trained 36,000 teachers in Iraq. We have provided $1 billion for safe drinking water and we have marshland restoration initiatives going on in Iraq. We have built, or we have completed some 3,100 community action programs. We have provided millions for the construction of housing and public buildings for Iraqi citizens. We have rebuilt railways for Iraqis. And you know what else we did? We rehabilitated a canal system. We built a dam, a beautiful dam, a dam that will hopefully serve well the Iraqi people. We built this dam in Mosul. At the same time, we are cutting millions from the Army Corps of Engineers, including funding for levee construction in Louisiana, Mr. Speaker, in Louisiana. We did that free of charge. Now, we support it. But you know what? We would hope, given the abundance of energy reserves that the Iraqis have that they would pay us back once they get on their feet. But, no, you know, here is the President that said he didn't believe in nation building. I did not know he was talking about America. But he must believe it when it comes to Iraq. How about doing it for our fellow citizens in Louisiana and Mississippi and Texas that have been devastated by natural disaster?

Mr. DELAHUNT. The entire country wants to have those questions posed, and let us be fair. There are Republicans, there are noted conservatives. We all know William F. Buckley, the founder of the Nation, a respected conservative journalist. When he heard what he has heard, he made this statement: If I knew then, meaning around the time of the debate on the war resolution, what I know now about what kind of situation we would be in, I, William F. Buckley, would have opposed the war. That should resonate among the Republican leadership and particularly the White House, but they do not want to acknowledge that they have made mistake after mistake after mistake and are compounding it, are driving our economy into a structural deficit in an order of magnitude that we have never seen, that we will never get out of, and most importantly, the lives that have been lost and the men and women that are permanently damaged by this war of choice.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Well, if I can ask a question, who is paying for the creation or the establishment of all of those primary health care centers in Iraq? Who is paying for that?