Bill Delahunt

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. Really dark.

Mr. DELAHUNT. If the gentleman will yield for a moment, I want to welcome Congressman Miller and Congressman Holt to the 30-Something Group. The two of you have created, of course, a new definition of the 30-Something Group, but we will let that pass for the moment. I think it is important to frame the issue that we have, you or Congressman Miller, detail for those of us here and those who are watching the international comparisons that you have expressed a concern about. Because I think we all hear terms like the global village and the global economy, and I think we recognize that that is the reality. But I know I hear figures, for example, where China is going to graduate a multiple of four or five times what this country will do in terms of students that have majored in the sciences and math.

Mr. DELAHUNT. I think these are the points we have to stress is that the trends, as you allude to, are running in the wrong direction; and I guess if we do not jump start with this initiative and work with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, we are going to suffer. The future of the 30-something generation is at risk here.

Mr. DELAHUNT. And we want to fully fund, if the gentleman would yield, we want to fully fund the landmark legislation that was passed in a bipartisan way under the leadership of Mr. Miller and others and Republicans that was described as the No Child Left Behind Act. What has happened to that, Mr. Miller?

Mr. DELAHUNT. Can I suggest that what we will see with that trend line in terms of the increase of the number of scientists and mathematicians and computer personnel is those jobs, those well-paying jobs will also trend towards China and India and OPEC and all those countries that we are borrowing from today. And we discussed this last night, that we have borrowed from that, are funding those tax cuts that translate into 1 percent of Americans, the most affluent, receiving 40 percent of the benefits. We are putting ourselves on a trajectory that will put America permanently behind.

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. I find it particularly interesting that we are borrowing money from OPEC. Not only are we purchasing oil from OPEC, but we are borrowing money from OPEC. And yet to hear the rhetoric in this Chamber and our committee rooms about OPEC, one would consider them, well, to use George Lucas, the Darth Vader of the international order in terms of its impact on America. Mr. Speaker, we have borrowed, we owe them almost $70 billion. What are we doing?

Mr. DELAHUNT. I think it was interesting to hear our friends and colleagues on the other side say we have to hold them accountable in Washington. We have to hold those bureaucrats, we have to hold them accountable. Let us get on with the job. I find that confusing. I thought, now maybe you can give me some guidance here. I thought the Republicans were the majority party in this House and in the Senate for a substantial period of time, and I am confident that President Bush was elected in 2000 and it is 2006 and it has been 6 years. Who is in charge? Who is in charge, Mr. Speaker? They are the ones that should be held accountable. This is not about bureaucrats. I understand it is an election year and all of a sudden they are going to position and posture themselves as outsiders. Outsiders, that is a bad joke. They run this place. They run this town. They know how to exercise power.

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. And to pay the interest and our debts off to the Chinese, Japanese, the Koreans and OPEC.

Mr. DELAHUNT. A $450 tattoo. Federal money also paid for $375 a day beachfront condos and almost 11,000 trailers that were stuck in the mud and unusable.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Are you aware with the President's budget that 263,000 of our veterans will be denied access to veterans health care?

Mr. DELAHUNT. And the Chinese and OPEC.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Along with the dollars we are using to buy oil at $60- plus a barrel to heat our homes.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Now, of course, we are presented with a plan that would cut Medicare and cut Medicaid. So if you are a senior in this country, and, of course, we are here representing the generation of 30 somethings, but if you happen to be getting close to that point in your life where you receive a Medicare card, be careful. Do not count on it. A while back there was a speaker who preceded over this Chamber who said Medicare, let it wither on the vine. Well, I wonder if that particular submission to cut and slash Medicare is the beginning of the withering process. It just is not right. But, as we were saying earlier, a lot of it is just rank incompetence. But when you combine this magnitude of incompetence that we have witnessed surrounding Katrina and surrounding the reconstruction of Iraq, it easily evolves into corruption. There was an audit done or at least a preliminary audit done by the General Accountability Office which, as Members know is a nonpartisan, independent agency to review government expenditures; and they discovered that the government has squandered millions of dollars in Katrina disaster aid, including handing 2,000 debit cards to people who gave phony Social Security numbers and used the money for such items as a $450 tattoo.

Mr. DELAHUNT. If I can, just for a moment, just to digress, because we have been talking about Katrina and the fraud and the mismanagement associated with the Katrina spending, I think it is important to remember, too, that about half of the 700 contracts that have already been issued were issued on a no-bid basis, and they were issued to corporations that have obvious political ties. But that is a subject for another night. But, again, it goes back to just incompetence and lack of planning.

Mr. DELAHUNT. It was a long process all day, Mr. Meek. But I just about accounted for everybody that it was appropriate. And a happy Valentine's Day to you and to your family. I had an opportunity to meet your family recently, and they are great folks. They really are.

Mr. DELAHUNT. That is right. That is what this is all about.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Meek, if I can. I think you made a reference to reports that are now being released, and you indicated that it is a partisan report. I think it is very important to explain that the report from the House committee that reviewed this, the aftermath and the prelude, if you will, to Katrina and what went wrong, was for all intents and purposes a Republican effort. Two Democrats sat with our Republican colleagues; and in the aftermath of their effort, these two Democrats, both from Louisiana, have recommended that it is essential to create, as we did in the aftermath of September 11, an independent commission that reviews again the prelude, during, and the aftermath of the natural disaster that devastated this country in the form of Hurricane Katrina back on August 29. Maybe like the 9/11 Commission, we can have an 8/29 Commission that all Americans can have confidence in--in its integrity. But I think, too, that we ought to review really the damning findings of the Republican effort that really, in my judgment, speaks to the incompetence of this administration. You know, we use the word or the term ``culture of corruption'' frequently in explaining what is occurring here in Washington. But I think you might agree with me that it is incompetence combined with cronyism that really are the building blocks, if you will, of that culture of corruption that creates a huge cost to the American taxpayers. I am speaking in terms of billions of dollars and multiple lost opportunities, dashed dreams, and unfortunately this, let me use the term ``corruption tax,'' that even cost lives. And I think we have witnessed this because of what occurred by way of a natural disaster on August 29 and what has occurred in Iraq in the aftermath of our invasion. And I do not want to delve tonight into the disagreement that I have in terms of the rationale for this administration to invade Iraq. I do not want to talk about weapons of mass destruction. I do not want to talk about links to al Qaeda. I do not even really want to talk about the failures to bring democracy to far corners of this world according to the Bush doctrine. But I think it is important that we talk about the corruption that is ongoing and reveals itself on a frequent basis by reports coming from independent sources, coming from, actually, the special inspector general for the reconstruction of Iraq and coming from trials that are now occurring in Federal district court. But before we get to that I think it is important to review what went wrong with this administration's response for Hurricane Katrina. And again, I think we have to, in a sense of fairness, applaud some of our Republican colleagues who really said it better than you and I can say it, and I am sure they cannot be accused of being partisan since they are Republicans. But I thought what was particularly interesting to me was a quote in my hometown paper or one of my hometown papers, the Boston Globe. It was an observation by Tom Davis, who is the respected chair of the Government Affairs Committee. He made the observation that President Bush is in Texas, Chief of Staff Card is in Maine, and the Vice President is fly fishing wherever. I mean, who is in charge? And I guess that is really the question. We have had a Department of Homeland Security for several years with the ultimate Federal responsibility to prepare Americans for disasters, whether they are triggered by a terrorist attack or whether they come via a natural disaster; and the performance of this administration can only be described as a disaster, a debacle, if you will. I thought it was rather ironic that today, as I was watching the news, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Mr. Chertoff, announced he was going to hire 1,500 disaster specialists. I guess my response was, what took so long? What took so long? How long has it been? Since 8/29, since August 29.

Mr. DELAHUNT. The GAO auditor, Gregory Kurz, told senators during a hearing that the amount of waste and abuse and fraud could be hundreds of millions of dollars. They just do not know yet. As he indicated, FEMA may also have brought too many temporary homes, including 11,000 units that currently sit empty in sinking mud in Hope, Arkansas, while they are needed in Louisiana and Mississippi. It is the incompetence of the planning process that was nonexistent. Today, the Secretary of Homeland Security announces, I am going to address that, I am going to hire 1,500 disaster specialists. Good job, Mike, heck of a job.

Mr. DELAHUNT. If the gentleman would yield for just a moment, today I was at a hearing and the hearing happened to be on China. It was a subcommittee on which I serve as ranking member, and there was a reference made to the Bush doctrine. Well, I would submit, given that President Bush has accomplished in one term more than all of his predecessors combined in terms of accumulating debt held by foreign nations, some of whom are particularly hostile to the United States, that we should describe the Bush doctrine as one of borrow and spend, not pay as you go, but borrow as you cut taxes. And I made the observation if you connect the dots how are we conferring a massive tax cut, 40 percent of which is reserved for 1 percent of Americans. Who is paying for that particular tax cut? Well, at least a trillion of it is being funded by Japan, China, Britain, the Caribbean, Taiwan. And listen to this, that tax cut is also being paid for by money borrowed from OPEC, OPEC. That means that we are not just buying our oil from the OPEC cartel, but we are also borrowing money for them to support a tax cut for 1 percent of our affluent citizens. And then Korea, Germany, Canada and others makeup the difference. This is extraordinary.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Happy Valentine's Day, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. DELAHUNT. It is going back to OPEC.

Mr. DELAHUNT. And OPEC.

Mr. DELAHUNT. And lack of due diligence. But it also exists, tragically, in a far greater magnitude, with American tax dollars that are being used to build schools, roads, hospitals, dams, and levees in Iraq. I mean, I have a major concern about the fraud and the corruption that is going on in Iraq with the use of American taxpayer dollars. I don't know if either one of you, but I am sure many who might be watching this evening, witnessed the CBS news ``60 Minutes'' program that aired this past Sunday. It really was remarkable. They highlighted one firm called Custer Battles. Custer Battles was started by an individual with the name Scott Custer, a former Army Ranger, and Mike Battles, an unsuccessful congressional candidate from Rhode Island, who claimed to be active in the Republican Party and have connections at the White House. They arrived in Baghdad without any money; yet within a year, they had $100 million in contracts. They have now been charged with fraud and abuse, mismanagement, et cetera. They were supposed to provide some security services for the Baghdad airport. The security director at the airport communicated via e-mail and had this to say: ``Custer Battles, this is the company, has shown themselves to be unresponsive, uncooperative, incompetent, deceitful, manipulative and war profiteers. Other than that, they are swell guys.'' The number two man at the Coalition Provisional Authority's Ministry of Transportation, the American-run temporary government running the affairs of Iraq immediately after the invasion, had this to say: ``It was the Wild West. There were $100,000 bricks of $100 bills. The money was a mixture of Iraqi oil revenues, war booty and U.S. Government funds ear marked for the coalition authority.'' This is a member of the administration. When asked about Custer Battles' performance, the top Inspector General for the Army in Iraq reviewed it to see if the company was living up to its contract, such as it was. His name is Colonel Richard Ballard. When asked, he said: ``The contract looked to me like something that you and I would write over a bottle of vodka. Complete with all the spelling and syntax errors and annexes, to be filled in later. They presented it the next day and they got awarded about a $15 million contract.'' They were supposed to provide security for commercial aviation at the Baghdad airport, but the airport never reopened for commercial traffic. Now, do you think that they canceled or voided the contract? No, they got another contract after that. It was for a bomb-sniffing canine team.

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for yielding me time, and I want to associate myself with his remarks. Mr. Speaker, at least this resolution provides us an opportunity to pose a serious question, an opportunity that, unfortunately, Democrats are usually denied in this people's House. I want to read some findings of a recent poll about the realities on the ground in Iraq. Forty-five percent of Iraqis believe that attacks against American and British troops are justified; 72 percent do not have confidence in coalition forces; 82 percent are strongly opposed to the presence of coalition troops; and less than 1 percent of the population believes that coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security. That is the reality. Let me note too, by the way, that this poll was conducted by Iraqis and commissioned by the British ministry of defense. This data provokes a question for the proponents of this resolution: Now that we have a free, democratically elected Iraq, are we prepared to leave on their timetable? If the new Iraqi Government tells us, we want you to leave immediately, will we do so? Will we listen to them? For if we listen to the views of the Iraqi people as reflected in this poll, we can anticipate such a request in the very near future. Or will we insist on staying until we believe they are ready to stand up? Will this administration attempt to influence what the democratically elected Iraqi Government asks us to do in this regard, or will they be pressured to be quiet on this particular issue? Because the American people deserve to know the answer to this question now, and the Iraqi people deserve to know the answer to this question now, as well as the duly elected representatives of the Iraqi people from the elections that occurred this past week. I guess the real question is here, Will we really respect democracy in Iraq and the democratic process, or will we simply give it lip service?

Mr. DELAHUNT

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I am going to refer in a moment to this chart to my left, but I think in fairness we have to note that just this past week, for the first time, President Bush has acknowledged that mistakes were made. I want to commend him for that, and I know we all share that. He acknowledged last week ``that the multibillion dollar reconstruction of Iraq,'' and I am using his words now, ``has `been uneven' and hobbled by corruption, misplaced priorities and insurgent attacks.'' This report is from the Washington Post. It is dated December 8. It goes on to state: ``In an unusually stark assessment of the situation in Iraq,'' the President ``described several strategic errors in managing a rebuilding effort that he said proceeded in `fits and starts.' By learning from its mistakes,'' the President said ``the administration has reshaped its approach.'' I think it is important that we note that. We welcome that. But it is long, long overdue, and as I said earlier, we are anticipating receiving in the next several months a request, a supplemental request, for an additional $100 billion. Let us talk about what our priorities are in terms of the American people and our involvement in Iraq. I was here when a supplemental budget came before us. I, and others, advocated that rather than just simply giving this money for reconstruction to the so-called interim government that we put it in the form of a loan. Every other major donor country insisted, clearly providing favorable terms and conditions and years to repay, but that they would be reimbursed so that their children and grandchildren would not have to confront the order of magnitude that we see in terms of our deficits. Look at this chart for a minute. We are cutting $505 million on student loans, and the interest rates, therefore, will be higher. That is a cut to a generation of students that we need to be engaged at the highest level to compete in this global economy. Yet, at the same time, we are providing $508 million of transportation and communication, including construction of 28 railroad stations in Iraq's southern provinces, and we will never see a dime of that. That is a giveaway. That is a grant. Despite the words of Secretary Rumsfeld and Under Secretary Wolfowitz, that said that we would not have to pay a dime of American taxpayer dollars, what we are doing is we are funding that project and cutting necessary programs for Americans, and we are giving it away overseas. The tragedy of it all is that there is pervasive corruption going on in Iraq today with those dollars, and the President has acknowledged that. He has acknowledged the fact that there is corruption today in Iraq and American taxpayers dollars are being misused and wasted and stolen. Meanwhile, our own people are suffering. That is wrong, Mr. Speaker. That ought not to be happening, and there is a responsibility on the part of this Congress, because we have not had a single oversight hearing, despite the requests of many Members, including myself, to take a good and hard look at this massive corruption that is ongoing today as we speak in Iraq.