Dennis Kucinich

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding me this time and for his leadership and his work with all of us here. Mr. Speaker, yesterday students held a peace rally on the west front of the Capitol. It may have been the first rally on the Capitol grounds in opposition to war with Iraq I attended, and I heard representatives of America's youth asking questions. Why? Why war against the people of Iraq? Why assert military power, which threatens innocent civilians? Why war to settle differences? Why separate our Nation from the world community? Why not give peaceful resolution a chance? I looked into the eyes of our youth. I looked at their fresh faces, faces hopeful and optimistic yet challenging, asking why. Soon the voices of our youth will be heard across this Nation, and we should pay them heed. They will be heard on campuses, in town halls, and many marches. They will be raised to challenge and to confront senseless violence, mindless war, the death of innocents, the destruction of villages to save villages. Voices will be lifted up in urgency because the future knows when the place it needs to build could be destroyed. The future knows and is skeptical about promises of peace that are wrapped in fire and brimstone. Our young people opposing war represent a message from the future America, the America that can be, and with the upwardly- spiraling aspirations of millions of Americans of all ages, the America that will be. The future America works to make nonviolence an organizing principle in our society. The future America works to make war archaic. It is a Nation that lives courageously in peace, working to settle differences at home and abroad, without killing. The future America comprehends the world as an interconnected whole. It understands that changes in transportation, communication, and trades have made people throughout the world neighbors. The future America believes that each person is sacred, that each person makes a difference, that each choice we make affects others, that an injury to one person is an injury to all, that justice ought to be international, and that vengeance is reserved to the Lord. It is an America where human rights and workers' rights and environmental quality principles are within the arc of the human covenant. It is a Nation where each life is given an opportunity to unfold, where all have access to health care, to higher education, to jobs, and to a secure retirement; where quality of life matters, where people build families, build communities, build an American community of our dreams; where our highest aspirations light the way to a better Nation and to a better world. The future America is a Nation which works to sustain life on Earth. It champions protection of the global environment. It works with all nations to abolish nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, and biological weapons. It is a Nation which preserves the heavens for the restless human soul, and it rejects putting weapons in space because it knows that the kingdom that will come from the stars should bring eternal peace and not war. While some voices clamor for war, a future America looks for deeper unity of all people worldwide and seeks not empire but harmony. So to you, young America protesting this war, I sing a hymn of praise. Because while some may want to send you marching off to fight yesterday's wars, you are advancing from the future, reminding us that our Nation has a higher calling, reminding us of an America that can be, reminding us that there has to be a better way, reminding us to find that better way, joining with us to make straight the path of democracy. This is a time for caution as we would face war; but it is also a cause for joy, because the same revelry that sounds a battle cry and clangs the toxins of war brings forth legions of others enlisted in a holy cause to relight the lamp of freedom in our own land. So come forth young and old, prepare for America's future.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Oh say does that Star Spangled Banner yet wave, o'er the land of the free, and the home of the brave? America, let us remember on this day the connection between freedom and bravery, that to preserve our freedom we must be courageous. Let no fear, no threat, let no premonition obscure our vision and lead us down the dark path of preemptive war against a people who have not attacked us. Let us be guided by the truth, the truth which shall set us free, the truth which keeps us free. Let us lift this Nation up into the light of peace, into the eternal promise where we are all one, where nations shall not take up arms against nation, where we shall turn our swords into plowshares, our spears into pruning hooks. America has a higher calling. Our Founders call us on this day to defend our country by defending universal truth, by defending international justice, by defending the very spirit of our Constitution, which calls us to form a more perfect union with each other and with the world.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the underlying resolution. The resolution presented to Congress by the administration gives authority to the President to act prior to and even without a U.N. resolution. It authorizes the President to use U.S. troops to enforce U.N. resolutions, even without the United Nations' request for it. In other words, America would be going it alone, and we would be stuck alone. This is a violation, this resolution, of Chapter VII of the U.N. charter which reserves the ability to authorize force for that purpose to the U.N. Security Council alone. My esteemed colleague, who is the chairman of the committee, quoted Abraham Lincoln. I, too, would like to quote Abraham Lincoln. ``With malice towards none, with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right.'' Lincoln spoke of principles of unity, not only unity in this Nation but unity in the world, and Lincoln's prayer was for unity. At the beginning of this new century, our prayer should be for a world united by international law, for a world as an interconnected world. That prayer is already being answered. Changes in transportation and communication and trade have brought the world together. Wherever the world is divided, let the world community work together to heal those divisions. Where global security is threatened, let the global community respond. No nation should be above international law. All nations must confirm international law. All nations should seek to bring back into the international community any nation which sets itself apart. Inspections should occur in Iraq, through the United Nations, and the inspections should be unfettered and they should eliminate any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to the extent that they exist. But the argument to destroy weapons of mass destruction in Iraq if they exist should not be a license to destroy the people of Iraq. Let our concerns about weapons of mass destruction cause America to lead the way toward destruction of all weapons of mass destruction anywhere and everywhere in the world. I would say, Mr. Speaker, that of nations that possess, pursue, or are capable of acquiring weapons of mass destruction, there are 17 nations pursuing nuclear; 20 nations that have biological weapons capability or are seeking them; 26 nations that have chemical weapons capability or are seeking those capabilities; 16 nations that have missile capabilities or are seeking them. Are we to suddenly declare war on the world? Now, we know about Saddam Hussein and that he does not respect the law. There is no question about that. But the question which the resolution that we will be voting on in the next few days poses is whether we, the United States, respect international law and whether we will act preemptively and whether we will uphold the United Nations, the Security Council, and the principles of our own Constitution.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, the nations of Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania have long awaited accession to NATO; and throughout this country, people representing various communities supporting Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania have been seeking for recognition not only for NATO but also recognition so that there can be a full involvement with the European community. It is so important that this Congress recognizes the importance of Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania to the world community and encourage not only excision but also encourage the full integration into the European community and the world community of these nations. These nations have much to offer in terms of their commitment to democratic values, in terms of their commitment to development of their economies, in terms their commitment to technological development and in terms of their friendship with the United States. I think that this resolution, which seeks to support Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, is a step along the way towards rewarding those nations that not only have pursued democratic traditions but also are attempting to be integrated with the economies of Europe and of the United States. NATO accession is seen as not simply being participation in the defense of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization member states, but also it is seen as an opportunity towards a more full participation in the world community on all the economic issues. So I am pleased to work with my good friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), and others who are concerned that this resolution receive this attention and support, and to stand here on behalf of those citizens in the Baltics, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, who have long awaited this moment when their nations would be recognized, and all of their friends in this country who have long awaited the moment for the United States to show support for the integration of these nations and for accession of these nations. This is an important moment, and I am proud to be here on the floor to join with my colleague from California and to state to the world community that Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania are ready, they have been willing, they are able, and they deserve the support of the Congress of the United States.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Speaker and the leadership for providing me with this opportunity. Mr. Speaker, it was just a few moments ago that 25 Members of Congress, in temperatures that outside were over 90 degrees, stood one after another to announce their opposition to the war resolution that has been presented to this Congress. As the vote on whether or not this Nation goes to war approaches in this Chamber, a vote which most surely will come within a few days, I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, for us to be able to make the case to the American people as to why it is not appropriate for this country to go to war and to encourage the American people to call their Members to make sure that government of the people, by the people, and for the people does prevail. The Members who joined me today, Members for whom I have the greatest gratitude, include the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano), the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), the gentleman from California (Mr. Filner), the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver), the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Rivers), the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis), the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson), and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey). One after another they came before the national press to make their case as to why this Congress should vote against any resolution which would put us on a path towards war. And one after another, in front of the National Press Corps, they called out to the American people to tell the American people to make sure that they called their Members of Congress; that if they did not want war, these Members told the National Press Corps, that if the American people do not want war, to call their Congressman. So, Mr. Speaker, today, I intend to do a number of things. I intend to present to this Congress an analysis of the joint resolution which was offered to this Congress; and, after presenting that analysis, I want to put in perspective where we are in this moment in history. The resolution which this Congress is facing says: ``Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against an illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq.'' The American people need to know that the key issue here is that in the Persian Gulf War there was an international coalition. World support was for protecting Kuwait. There is no world support for invading Iraq. The resolution goes on to say: ``Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism; ``Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated.'' But the key issue here that the American people need to know is that U.N. inspection teams identified and destroyed nearly all such weapons. A lead inspector, Scott Ritter, said that he believes that nearly all other weapons not found were destroyed in the Gulf War. Furthermore, according to a published report in The Washington Post, the Central Intelligence Agency, yes, the Central Intelligence Agency, has no up- to-date accurate report on Iraq's capabilities of weapons of mass destruction. The resolution that is presented to this Congress says: ``Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998.'' What the American people need to know, and the key issue here, is that the Iraqi deceptions always failed. The inspectors always figured out what Iraq was doing. It was the United States that withdrew from the inspections in 1998, and the United States then launched a cruise missile attack against Iraq 48 hours after the inspectors left. And it is the United States, in advance of a military strike, the U.S. continues to thwart, and this is the administration's word, weapons inspections. Now, this resolutions, and what I am doing here obviously is stating the resolution as a point and then making the counterpoint so the American people can understand that this is a capsule summary of the debate that is going to take place in this House next week. In the resolution the administration contends: ``Whereas, in 1998 Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened U.S. vital interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations and urged the President to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations.'' The resolution says: ``Whereas Iraq both possesses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations.'' The American people deserve to know that the key issue here is that there is no proof that Iraq represents an imminent or immediate threat to the United States of America. I will repeat: there is no proof that Iraq represents an imminent or immediate threat to the United States. A continuing threat does not constitute a sufficient cause for war. The administration has refused to provide the Congress with credible evidence that proves that Iraq is a serious threat to the United States and that it is continuing to possess and develop chemical and biological and nuclear weapons. Furthermore, there is no credible evidence connecting Iraq to al Qaeda and 9-11, and yet there are people who want to bomb Iraq in reprisal for 9-11. Imagine, if you will, as Cleveland columnist Dick Feagler wrote last week, if after this country was attacked by Japan at Pearl Harbor in 1941, if instead of retaliating by bombing Japan, we would have retaliated by bombing Peru. Iraq is not connected by any credible evidence to 9-11, nor is it connected by any credible evidence to the activities of al Qaeda on 9-11. The resolution says, and I quote, continuing in this comparison point by point, the resolution says, that we will be voting on the administration's resolution: ``Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait.'' The counterpoint, and what the American people deserve to know, the key issue here, is that this language is so broad that it would allow the President to order an attack against Iraq even though there is no material threat to the United States. Since this resolution authorizes the use of force for all Iraq-related violations of U.N. Security Council directives, and since the resolution cites Iraq's imprisonment of non- Iraqi prisoners, this resolution could be seen by some to authorize the President to attack Iraq in order to liberate Kuwaiti citizens, who may or may not be in Iraqi prisons, even if Iraq met compliance with all requests to destroy any weapons of mass destruction. The resolution goes on to say: ``Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against any other nations and its own people; ``Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council.'' The counterpoint of this, Mr. Speaker, and the key issue here, is that the Iraqi regime has never attacked, nor does it have the capability to attack, the United States. The no-fly zone was not the result of a U.N. Security Council directive. Now, many people do not know that. They think the U.N. Security Council established the no-fly zone. It did not. The no-fly zone was illegally imposed by the United States, Great Britain, and France, and is not specifically sanctioned by any Security Council resolution. The resolution goes on to say, and I quote from the resolution: ``Whereas members of al Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, are known to be in Iraq.'' Well, the American people need to know there is no credible evidence that connects Iraq to the events of 9-11 or to participation in those events by assisting al Qaeda. The resolution states, and I quote: ``Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens.'' The key issue here, and the counterpoint that the American people need to know, is that any connection between Iraq's support of terrorist groups in the Middle East, Mr. Speaker, is an argument for focusing great resources on resolving the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. It is not a sufficient cause for the United States to launch a unilateral preemptive strike against Iraq. Indeed, an argument could be made that such an attack would exacerbate the condition in the Middle East and destabilize the region. The resolution states: ``Whereas the attacks on the United States of America of September 11, 2001 underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations.'' And, again, and I stress, the American people need to know that there is no connection between Iraq and the events of 9-11. However, this resolution attempts to make the connection over and over and over. And just saying that there is a connection does not make it so, because the Central Intelligence Agency has not presented this Congress with any credible information that indicates that there is in fact a tie between Iraq and 9-11, between Iraq and al Qaeda, or Iraq and the anthrax attacks on this Capitol. And if we are to go to war against any Nation, and I oppose us doing this in this case, we ought not be taking such action in retaliation, and ought not put it in a document like this in retaliation, attacking a nation that had nothing to do with 9-11. The resolution goes on to say, ``Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself''; that is the assertion. The key issue here is that there is no credible evidence that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction. If Iraq had successfully concealed the production of such weapons since 1998, and let us assume that somebody has information they have never told Congress, they have never been able to back up, but they have this information and it is secret, and they secretly know Iraq has such weapons, there is no credible evidence that Iraq has the capability to reach the United States with such weapons, if they have them, and many of us believe no evidence has been presented that they do. In 1991, the Gulf War, Iraq had a demonstrated capability of biological and chemical weapons, but they obviously did not have the willingness to use them against the Armed Forces of the United States. Congress has not been provided any credible information which proves that Iraq has provided international terrorists with weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Speaker, this resolution will be presented to this Congress to vote on as a cause of war. I am reading the exact quote from the resolution, and then I am making the counterpoint. In effect, this is the first step towards a debate on this issue on this floor. The resolution says, ``Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687, repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688, and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949.'' The counterpoint and what the American people need to know is that the U.N. Charter, and we participate in the United Nations, we helped form the United Nations, we helped set up this international framework of law that is represented by the United Nations, that the United Nations Charter forbids all Member nations, including the United States, from unilaterally enforcing U.N. resolutions. We cannot do this on our own. We cannot decide that some nation is in violation of U.N. resolutions and we take it upon ourselves to render justice. The resolution states, that will be before this House as a cause of war, ``Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has authorized the President to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 612, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, 677''; and the point is the same. If those Security Council resolutions are not being implemented, that is up to the United Nations and the Security Council to take up the matter. It is not up to the United States to initiate unilateral action enforcing U.N. resolutions with military force. The resolution which is being presented to this House next week says, ``Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1), that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region, and that Congress supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688.'' Well, the counterpoint here is this, and what we are going to be asserting on the floor of this House is that this clause demonstrates the proper chronology of international process in contrast to the current march to war. In 1991, the United Nations Security Council passed the resolution asking for enforcement of its resolution. Member countries authorized their troops to participate in a U.N.-led coalition to enforce the U.N. resolutions. Now the President is asking Congress to authorize a unilateral first strike before the U.N. Security Council has asked its member states to enforce U.N. resolutions. If we believe in international law, then we ought to look to what this country did in 1991 when it joined the United Nations' effort on this matter on global security and not go it alone, not initiate a unilateral action or attack or preemptive strike. The resolution here says, ``Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.'' Well, the counterpoint is this, and the American people should know this, this sense of Congress resolution which is referred to in that paragraph was not binding. Furthermore, while Congress supported democratic means of removing Saddam Hussein, and I voted for that, we clearly did not endorse the use of force contemplated in this resolution. Where does it end? Is there some other leader we do not like that we are going to use force to take out? Nor did Congress endorse assassination as a policy. It is absolutely horrific that a Nation which has prided itself as celebrating the rule of law, as believing in the rights of all people, that we would have any document in our government, have any public official in our government, have anybody working for this government implying or openly advocating that we would use assassination as a policy. This country has suffered from assassination of some of our greatest leaders, some of our greatest Presidents, and we know that once that principle goes out there, that it can only go against the highest principles this country stands on. Mr. Speaker, this resolution says, ``Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge posed by Iraq and to work for the necessary resolutions, while also making it clear that the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and that the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable.'' It goes on to say, ``Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary.'' That is their cause of war. Now what the American people need to know, and the other side of that key issue is, unilateral actions against Iraq will cost the United States the support of the world community, adversely affecting the war on terrorism. No credible intelligence exists which connects Iraq to the events of 9/11 or to those terrorists who perpetrated 9/11. And under international law, the United States does not have the authority to unilaterally order military action to enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions. The point that the administration is trying to make, and it is in this resolution, that it is a cause of war is that, ``Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations.'' The key issue here and what the American people need to know and what will be in debate on this floor next week is that the administration has not provided Congress with any proof that Iraq is in any way connected to the events of 9/11. The American people are fair people. They do not believe in hitting someone who did not hit them. They believe in self-defense, but they do not believe that we should bomb Iraq if Iraq is not connected to 9/11. The administration in the resolution that we will be voting on next week, their cause of war says, ``Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations.'' Again, I repeat, the answer to that is obvious. By now people need to understand, the American people need to know, the counterpoint is the administration has not provided Congress with any proof that Iraq is in any way connected to the events of 9/11. Furthermore, there is no credible evidence that Iraq has harbored those who are responsible for planning the attacks. The resolution says, ``Whereas the President has the authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40);'' and what the American people need to know and the key point here, the counterpoint is that this resolution that we passed, the one we passed last year, that was specific to 9/11. It was a limited response to 9/11. It did not authorize war without end. We did not vote for that. We did not vote to conduct war against Iraq a year ago. The resolution states, ``Whereas it is in the national security of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region.'' The key issue here, Mr. Speaker, what do we mean by national security interests? If by national security interests of the United States the administration means oil, it ought to communicate such to the Congress. A unilateral attack on Iraq by the United States will cause instability and chaos in the region, and it will sow the seeds of future conflict all over the world. Mr. Speaker, we have an enactment clause in all laws which is effectively the stuff of which the law is made. All of the things that I have cited before are substantially prefatory clauses, even hortatory language, but the real guts of the law comes in the enactment clause. The short title is the Authorization for the use of Military Force Against Iraq. Section 2. Support for United States Diplomatic Efforts. The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions applicable to Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and, B, obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions. Mr. Speaker, Congress can and Congress should support this clause. However, the section I am about to read, which is section 3, undermines the effectiveness of this section 2. Any peaceful settlement requires Iraq compliance. The totality of this resolution, however, indicates the administration will wage war against Iraq no matter what. This approach, of course, would undermine negotiations. I am going to cite from section 3 which is the section that all Americans are going to want to know about: Section 3. Authorization for Use of United States Armed Forces. Authorization. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to, 1, defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and, 2, enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq. Mr. Speaker, the key issue here and the counterpoint and what will be the focus of debate in this House next week is this fact: this clause is substantially similar to the authorization that the President originally sought. It gives authority to the President to act prior to and even without a U.N. resolution, and it authorizes the President to use U.S. troops to enforce U.N. resolutions, even without United Nations' request for it. So what we are talking about here is unilateralism. Go it alone. Policeman of the world. Strike first. Send a signal to every other nation; strike first. This is a violation of chapter 7 of the U.N. charter, which reserves the ability to authorize force for that purpose to the Security Council alone. Under chapter 7 of the charter of the United Nations, it says that the Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to peace and shall make recommendations to maintain or restore international peace and security. That is from article 39. It says that only the Security Council can decide that military force would be necessary. The Security Council may decide what measures are to be employed, to give effect to its decisions. Article 41. And it may take such action by air, sea or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. That is article 43. Furthermore, the resolution that will be before us authorizes use of force illegally since the U.N. Security Council has not requested it. According to the U.N. charter, members of the U.N. such as the U.S. are required to make available to the Security Council on its call and in accordance with the special agreement or agreements, armed forces. The U.N. Security Council has not called upon its members to use military force against Iraq at the current time. Furthermore, changes to the language of the previous use of force resolution drafted by Congress and objected to by many Members of Congress are cosmetic. I want it stated, Mr. Speaker, if I thought for a moment that this country was facing a threat and was under attack, I and every Member of this Congress would rise in a single voice. By voice we would have a unanimous resolution defending this country, because that is our proud tradition. As a matter of fact, that is one of the foundational principles of this country, to provide for the common defense. We have an obligation to provide for the common defense. But we also have an obligation not to let that hallowed principle, that sacred principle of providing for the common defense be misused. It says provide for the common defense, not provide for the common offense. It is called the Department of Defense, not the Department of Offense. America is not an aggressor Nation, but the resolution that is brought in this House next week would for the first time in the history of this country make America an aggressor Nation. We have to remember that we are heirs to an incredible tradition, a tradition of standing up for honesty and decency and human rights in this world, a tradition of truth telling, a tradition upon which 226 years rests. In that tradition there are no Democrats or Republicans; there are only Americans. Before this Congress defames the purpose of this country by voting for such a resolution, we owe it to the American people to go over every aspect of this resolution to make sure that we are not making a grievous mistake that would set this country on a path towards destruction. Mr. Speaker, many of us remember last month when we left this Chamber to join hundreds of Members of Congress in a solemn commemoration of 9- 11 and in solidarity with New Yorkers at Federal Hall in New York City. I know the Speaker and other Members of Congress, all of us, could sense a special energy at that sacred shrine to democracy where George Washington was sworn in, where a Congress of 2 centuries ago received the Bill of Rights. As I stood there, Mr. Speaker, in a moment of reflection, I could envision the Congress of long ago gathering as a galaxy of stars just cascaded from the sky through that circular opening above the rotunda of Federal Hall. In my mind's eye, I could see this galaxy of stars coming through representing universal principles pouring into this venerable site, in forming the pledge that Washington made to a new Nation, freedom's holy light illuminating the Bill of Rights. In that moment, I had a new understanding about our flag. Our flag as spangled with stars as a bolt of heaven itself connects the United States with eternal principles of unity, of brotherhood and sisterhood. Look at that flag. Those stars are not just 50 States. They are principles. And the energy of the stars, present at the birth of this Nation, is still with us. It is upon that dark blue cloth of our flag. One bright star there shines for hope, another star for optimism, another for well-being, one for freedom, one star for abundance, one star for creativity, one for togetherness, and one for peace. One star to wish upon to create our highest aspirations, to make our dreams come true. This, our country and our very selves are all made of such stars. As the popular song goes, ``This is who we are.'' This is what gives higher meaning to our being an American. This is what gives higher meaning to patriotism. I love our flag. Though some would make it stand for chaos and war, I see the field of stars as standing for the highest expression of human unity. A higher meaning of the United States is that we express wholeness through the unity of 50 States. Out of many, we are one. That is the motto up there, Mr. Speaker, e pluribus unum, Latin for ``out of many, we are one.'' We present ourselves to the world as an exemplification of the principle of oneness, of the universality of all, of the confirmation of one in the many. The world. Out of many nations we are one. Universality, that is where we come from. The idea of America emerged from the intellectual energy, the heart energy, the spirit energy of the Renaissance, the genesis and a journey of lovers marrying their fortunes together, bound for America, looking for that lamp lifted beside the golden door of liberty. The quest for universal principles, of justice, of human rights, of civil rights, of opportunity, of a meaningful future is what caused millions, millions to see America as the light of nations. These universal principles are the stars by which those who came to our shores sailed. These are the stars that can guide us past the shoals of arms dealers and oil interests who today would crash our ship of state upon the rocks of war. America has a higher destiny. As with generations past, our destiny can take us to places we have never been before or can only imagine, places of peace, places of plenty, places of hope, places of love. We have a right to live up to our ideals. That is our birthright. We should not trade it for the pretensions of empire, nor for delusions of grandeur, nor for all the gold in Fort Knox, all the tea in China, nor all the oil in Iraq. America has a higher destiny. Mr. Speaker, I want to speak about the America that can be, about reestablishing the context of our Nation, about a second renaissance which can begin in this Nation with this generation. First, let us travel to the place where civilization was born thousands of years ago, upon the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates. Let us see there, instead of dancing with death and killing untold thousands of innocent civilians, we can change directions, pull back from war with Iraq, change the outcome, connect with our aspirations for peace and reclaim our ingenuity and creativity in human relations. Why is this war and why has this war that we are facing with Iraq, why has it been presented as inevitable? Is it not time to insist that our leaders stop incessant war talk, this assumed right to unilateral action? Is it not time that we insist on preventive diplomacy and our obligation to work with the world community on matters of global security? Why is this war being presented as inevitable? The headlines from The New York Times the day after we visited to commemorate 9-11 read, ``Bush to Warn U.N., Act on Iraq or U.S. Will. He Leads Nation in Mourning at Terrorist Sites.'' There is no credible evidence linking Iraq with 9-11, with al Qaeda, or with anthrax attacks. There is no credible evidence Iraq has usable weapons of mass destruction, the ability to deliver such weapons, or the intention to do so. When Iraq possessed such weapons, quite sad to say, they did it with the knowledge and sometimes with materials from the United States. During the administration of President Reagan, 60 helicopters were sold to Iraq. Later reports said Iraq used U.S. helicopters to spray Kurds with chemical weapons. According to The Washington Post, Iraq used mustard gas against Iran with the help of intelligence from the CIA. Intelligence reports cited the use of nerve gas by Iraq against Iran. Iraq's punishment? The U.S. reestablished full diplomatic ties around Thanksgiving of 1984. Throughout 1989 and 1990, U.S. companies, with the permission of the first Bush government, sent to Iraq, the government of Saddam Hussein, tons of mustard gas precursors, live cultures for bacteriological research, helped to build a chemical weapons factory, supplied West Nile virus, supplied fuel explosive technology, computers for weapon technology, hydrogen cyanide precursors, computers for weapon research and development, and vacuum pumps and bellows for nuclear weapons plants. ``We have met the enemy,'' said Walt Kelly's Pogo, ``and he is us.'' Unilateral action on the part of the United States or in partnership with Great Britain would for the first time set our Nation on a blood- stained path of aggressive war, a sacrilege against the memory of those who fought to defend this country. America's moral authority would be undermined throughout the world. It would signal for Russia to invade Georgia; China, Taiwan; North Korea, South; India, Pakistan; and destabilize the entire Gulf and Middle Eastern region. There is a way out. We need a comprehensive solution to the crisis in Iraq. It must involve the United Nations, and it can be facilitated by Russia, which signed a $40 billion trade agreement with Iraq. Inspections for weapons of mass destruction must begin immediately. Inspectors must have free and unfettered access to all sites. Negotiations must begin. Concerning the counterproductive policies, a regime change and sanctions, emergency relief must be expedited. Free trade except in arms should be permitted. Foreign investments should be allowed, and the assets of Iraq abroad must be restored. A regional zone free of weapons of mass destruction should be established. If we could take a new direction in Iraq and the region, we could begin a new era of peace. We do not have to go to war. We could refocus our effort on the conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis. We could bring new initiatives to help Pakistan and India resolve Kashmir. Mr. Speaker, in total, the United States can repair its position in the world community through cooperation, not confrontation. We can change the world for the better, and we can look to the heavens itself for guidance. We can begin by banning any research planning or deployment of weapons in outer space. Human destiny has always been linked with the stars. How grim that America is planning to put weapons in outer space, to seize the ultimate high ground, to attempt to gain strategic advantage over every nation on Earth. We must turn back from such arrogance. We must let the name of peace be hallowed on Earth as it is in the heavens. With a space preservation treaty, we must direct our efforts towards solving conflicts on this planet rather than spreading war and perpetuity throughout the universe in a plan paradoxically called Vision 2020. I have a vision of nations working together cooperatively, using what President Franklin Roosevelt called the science of human relations. That is the basis for the creation of a department of peace which seeks to make nonviolence an organizing principle in our society for domestic as well as international policy. War is not inevitable unless we refuse to work for peace patiently and tirelessly. I envision a U.S. leadership which will end the threat of nuclear destruction by realizing the promise of the Nonproliferation Treaty. Seventeen nations possess, are pursuing, or are capable of acquiring nuclear weapons. Now is the time to stop the drive towards nuclear rearmament. Now is the time to provide incentives to stop the nuclear arms race, to stop building nuclear weapons, and to stop testing. America should restore the ABM Treaty and begin again with Russia true arms reductions towards the day when all nuclear weapons are abolished, and America can lead those 26 nations which possess or they are pursuing or are trying to get chemical weapons of mass destruction. We need to move towards participation in the chemical weapons convention and agree to have such weapons eliminated worldwide. America can lead the way towards the destruction of all biological weapons of mass destruction by signing on to the biological weapons convention. Twenty nations have designs on such weapons. Let America lead the way towards abolishing biological weapons. We have much work to do to regain world leadership in ending the proliferation of small arms by signing the small arm treaty and to eliminate the scourge of land mines. America can help strengthen the cause of international justice by agreeing to the International Criminal Court. Certainly, certainly a Nation which has an interest in bringing to justice those in violation of international law should support an international court which would accomplish just that. Mr. Speaker, last month I represented the United States at the World Summit on Sustainable Development. There with the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), I called for our Nation to join with the world community in solving the challenge of global climate change and working to reduce carbon emissions, greenhouse gases. America must lead the way towards sustainable and renewable energies. As a first step, I joined with Mayor Brown of Oakland, proposing a $50 billion solar initiative in cooperation with Mikhail Gorbachev's Global Green. It is the United States that lead the way towards a global community which is inclusive and sustainable, which promotes democratic values, and which enables the growth of potential and the health of each person by putting human rights and workers' rights and environmental quality principles into each and every trade agreement. There is much work to do on the world stage, but we cannot do it by creating war when we ought to be working for peace. Iraq is not an imminent threat, but an unemployment rate which is reaching 6 percent is an imminent threat. Forty-one million Americans without health insurance is an imminent threat. The high cost of prescription drugs, an imminent threat. Unregulated energy companies which charge confiscatory rates for electricity and gas, an imminent threat. Large corporations which lie about their value and deprive stockholders of their life's savings, an imminent threat. Seniors losing their pensions, an imminent threat. So, too, is the climate of fear being cycled in this country. Every time a civil liberty is rolled back or undermined in America, a little bit of our free Nation dies. Each government report which drums terror and fear weakens our Nation. When Francis Scott Key wrote ``Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave, o'er the land of the free and the home of the brave,'' he made the essential connection between democracy and courage. Courage will guide our Nation through this crisis. Courage will enable us to set our government right. Courage will enable us to go to the campuses, to labor halls, to churches and to the streets to organize against a war which will undermine our Nation, ruin our reputation, kill innocent people, and damage the economy of our Nation and the world. We are at a critical and creative moment in the human history where we have it within our power to change the world. It is about evolutionary politics which follows an evolutionary consciousness. We can do it by changing the way we look at the world, by contemplating and realizing universal brotherhood and sisterhood of all persons. We can do it by tapping into our own unlimited potential to think anew. Imagine, imagine if we could look at our Nation today with the same daring with which our Founders gazed. Imagine if we could regain the capacity of spirit which animated freedom of speech, the right to assemble, the right to vote, freedom from fear, freedom from want. I tell my colleagues that there is another America out there, and it is ready to be called forward. It is the America of our dreams. It is the America of the flag full of stars. It is the America which is in our hearts, and we can make it the heart of the world. I thank the people of the 10th Congressional District for giving me the honor to serve the State of Ohio in this Congress, and I join once again in gratitude to all those Members of Congress who today called on the people of America to reconfirm the commitment of government of the people, by the people, and for the people, to reconfirm the connection which you have with this country. And if you do not want war with Iraq, then the people have the right to contact their Members of Congress and tell them so. That is the essence of representative government; that is the process I am proud to be a part of. That is why it is a privilege to be a Member of the Congress of the United States.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of the Cuyahoga County Agricultural Society, for their creation, organization, support and promotion of the annual Cuyahoga County Fair—now in its 106th year. Although most of Cuyahoga County is no longer agricultural, the two hundred members of the Agricultural Society present the public with a glimpse of the agriculture and farming of days gone by, as well as current and future agricultural products and trends. The Cuyahoga County Fair is an annual rite of summer for the entire Cleveland community. Reflecting the mission of the Cuyahoga County Agricultural Society, the Fair is a yearly opportunity for education, exhibits, and demonstrations of agricultural products, past and present, that are unique to our community. Annual outings to the Fair, as families have done for over one hundred years, provide all ages with a fun and educational experience, and create memories that connect each new generation of fair-goers. Mr. Speaker, please join me in honor and recognition of the Cuyahoga County Agricultural Society, on the significant occasion of the Society's 106th Annual Cuyahoga County Fair. The County Fair has provided millions of citizens the opportunity to explore the County's agricultural existence in an educational, creative and inviting manner. This annual event has been a culturally significant aspect of our entire community, and a wonderful event for citizens of all ages.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of Dr. Michael Schwartz, who was named the fifth president of Cleveland State University. With a life-long commitment to higher education, Dr. Schwartz continues to be a true advocate of the students he serves. A long-time proponent of open dialogue between students and faculty, Dr. Schwartz fosters a positive campus atmosphere where student learning, achievement, and services are the focus. Dr. Schwartz brings extensive professional and educational experience to his role as President of Cleveland State University. He holds a Ph.D. in sociology, an M.A. in labor and industrial relations, and a B.S. in psychology, all from the University of Illinois. Dr. Schwartz served as professor and Chairman of Sociology, and Dean of the College of Social Science at Florida Atlantic University. While in Detroit, he taught sociology and psychology at Wayne State University, and served as research director for the Mayor's Committee for Community Action for Detroit Youth. Moreover, Dr. Schwartz served as President of Kent State University from 1982 to 1991, at which time he stepped down to resume teaching. Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor and recognition of Dr. Michael Schwartz, recently named the fifth President of Cleveland State University. Cleveland State University has evolved as a beacon of achievement, learning and hope for past, current and future generations within our Cleveland community. The leadership of Dr. Schwartz sets a tone of confidence, achievement and excellence for every student, faculty and staff member at Cleveland State University. The current and future leadership and direction from Dr. Michael Schwartz holds the promise of guiding, strengthening and enhancing our most treasured educational institution for many years to come.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in honor and recognition of the tenth anniversary of the Ukraine Parliament's brave and historic Proclamation of Independence. The Ukraine Parliament embraced democracy, and declared independence under the visionary leadership of Leonid Kravchuk, on August 24, 1991—after years of Soviet rule. The Proclamation of Independence was followed by a nationwide referendum in which over 90% of Ukraine's 53 million people voted in favor of independence and elected Kravchuk the first President of the Independent Ukraine. This courageous step ended centuries of foreign rule and allowed Ukraine to make tremendous strides towards freedom and democratic rule. On this special day I recall the words of Ivan Plyushch, the Parliamentary chief as he proudly proclaimed at the 1991, inaugural ceremony, “A European State has appeared on the map, and its name is Ukraine!!” The bold actions of these patriotic leaders set a country that had known so much terror on a course of freedom, liberty and democracy. Mr. Speaker, on this day of celebration, I also rise to honor the men and women who fought hard and suffered dearly in their country's struggle to break the bonds of oppression, and who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country's independence. It is due to their grandparents and parents dedication and bravery that the children of Ukraine breathe the air of freedom. I ask my colleagues to join me in honor and recognition of this momentous occasion.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and remembrance of Father John M. Garrity, Pastor of St. Mary's Catholic Church in Berea. Father John M. Garrity led his flock at St. Mary's for twenty-five years, offering spiritual support to every member. In addition, Father Garrity was very active in the community, serving on many boards and assisting wherever he was needed. From 1973 to 1988, Father Garrity served as Chaplain for the Cleveland Fire Department. Throughout his vocation, he remained consistently focused on helping those in need. Father Garrity was an articulate and graceful liturgist. His sense of timing and wit, combined with his kindness and warmth, defined his ministry. Father Garrity leaves behind a rich legacy of a life dedicated to spiritual guidance and leadership, and healing and uplifting his congregation, and the entire community. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and remembrance of Father M. Garrity, whose compassion, understanding and inspiration in his words and deeds kept hope aloft in everyone he knew. Please join me as I extend my deepest condolences to the family, friends and congregation of Father John M. Garrity. Father Garrity's generous and vibrant spirit will live on in all of our hearts.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, in recognition and remembrance of Mr. Steve Yokich, former UAW President, family man, dedicated activist, and dear friend to many. Mr. Yokich, an exceptional leader, leaves behind a rich legacy of enhancing, protecting, and tenaciously fighting for the rights of America's auto workers. For over four decades, Mr. Yokich was the unwavering voice and champion of thousands of auto worker and their families, As a highly skilled tool and die maker, Mr. Yokich began his career as a dedicated and vocal union activist. As he ascended the ranks of the UAW, his strong leadership skills, tough negotiating skills, and creative conflict resolution abilities served him and his membership well in assisting the union in making major strides that greatly improved the lives of workers and their families. Additionally, Mr. Yokich procured strong relationships with other unions, including the United Steelworkers of America. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and remembrance of a truly outstanding individual, Mr. Steve Yokich, who dedicated forty-six years of his life toward the betterment of workers and their families. Please join me as I extend my sincerest condolences to the family and friends of Steve Yokich; and also to the members and leadership of the UAW—all of whom were witness to his personal integrity, tenacity, kindness and determination to help others.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and remembrance of Congressman Don Pease—civil leader, newspaperman, and professor—and most importantly—beloved family man, and friend and mentor to many. As the long-time representative of District 13, Congressman Pease's dedication to public service was characterized by integrity, hard work, creativity and kindness. His life-long commitment to progressive ideals and civic involvement began in his own community in the sixties, when he served two terms as a Councilman in the city of Oberlin. Shortly thereafter, Congressman Pease was elected to the Ohio State Senate, where he served until he was elected to represent the residents of Ohio's District 13 as a United States Congressman. From 1976 to 1992, Congressman Pease worked toward the betterment of his constituents with determination, unwavering principles, and courage to take on controversial issues. Congressman Pease was a gentleman and a scholar. His expertise and talent in the areas of writing, editing and managing a newspaper was clearly evident throughout his many years as writer and editor of the Oberlin News Tribune During that time, Congressman Pease garnered several editing and newspaper awards. Later, Congressman Pease brought his experience and knowledge to Oberlin College, in the position of Visiting Distinguished Professor of Politics. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and remembrance of Congressman Don J. Pease—a truly outstanding individual, public servant, and above all— beloved husband, father, and friend. I extend my deepest condolences to his wife Jeanne and daughter Jennifer, and also to his extended family and friends.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and remembrance of Madeline L. Ryan, social and community activist, and above all, devoted wife, mother and grandmother, and friend to many. Mrs. Ryan was born in Collinwood, Ohio, to working class parents who instilled values of social action and personal responsibility regarding the American labor movement. While working and raising her three sons, Mrs. Ryan also found time to volunteer on behalf of workers' rights. She was an active member of the Communications Workers of America, and later was elected Vice President of the CWA Retirees Club. She lived by example, teaching others that the path for change was action and involvement. Mrs. Ryan helped organize workers; she walked the picket line; attended countless meetings; and even traveled to Washington, DC, to lobby Congress to secure positive change on behalf of the CWA. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor and remembrance of Madeline L. Ryan, whose eloquent dedication to social justice, in word and deed, significantly impacted all who knew her. I extend my deepest condolences to her beloved husband, Arthur Ryan, sons Michael, Jeff and John; and also to her grandchildren, great grandchild, and extended family and friends. Mrs. Ryan's devotion to family and community will never be forgotten.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor, recognition, and remembrance of Christina Sunga Ryook, whose young and vibrant life was tragically cut short on the darkest day in the history of America. Despite their profound sorrow and pain, Dae Jin Ryook and Kyung Woo Ryook, father and mother of Christina, have found the courage to speak of their beloved daughter—to share their thoughts with the world, letting us know and understand the beauty within the heart, soul and spirit that characterized Christina. Christina's love for life, and love for her parents, extended family and close circle of friends, was a true gift—a gift she gave freely. She kindly extended her generosity, compassion and thoughfulness to everyone she knew, and her kind and loving spirit will live on forever in all who knew her. Mr. Speaker and Colleagues, please join me in honor and remembrance of Christina Sunga Ryook, who possessed a profound sense of joy for life, and whose inner light radiates within the hearts of everyone who loves her. Please join me as I extend my deepest condolences to Christina's beloved parents—Dae Jin Ryook and Kyung Woo Ryook. May you both find solace and comfort by the light and memories of your special, cherished and beloved daughter, Christina Sunga Ryook.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of Bishop Beuford J. Terry, on the occasion of his consecration to the office of Jurisdictional Bishop of the Ohio Northeast Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. Bishop Terry, who is also the Presiding Prelate to the Ohio Northeast Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, has dedicated his life to not only the spiritual enrichment of his congregation, but also to the overall enrichment and improvement of the East Cleveland community. Bishop Terry continues to demonstrate his commitment and dedication to his faith, and to the individuals and families he serves. He is the reason why his church, the Community Temple Church of God in Christ, is an ongoing source of comfort and inspiration for its members. Moreover, Bishop Terry provides a light of hope and beacon of possibility for the entire East Cleveland neighborhood. Mr. Speaker, please join me in honor and recognition of Bishop Beuford J. Terry, on the momentous occasion of his consecration to the office of Jurisdictional Bishop of the Ohio Northeast Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. Bishop Terry's life-long dedication to helping others, as well as his spiritual guidance, generosity, and activism, significantly inspires the lives of his family, friends and congregation, and continues to positively impact our entire community.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor, recognition and celebration of the 100th Anniversary Celebration of St. Nicholas Croatian Byzantine Church in Cleveland, Ohio. St. Nicholas Church has been a significant spiritual, cultural and historical anchor for Croatian immigrants for one hundred years. In 1902, fifty families, who had recently immigrated to Cleveland from Croatia founded St. Nicholas Church. Father Mile Golubic arrived in the United States to celebrate first Divine Liturgy in an old building converted to accommodate liturgical services in spring of 1902. Parishioners, though very poor financially, were wealthy in spirit, hope and determination. Parishioners and church leaders kept St. Nicholas Church alive through their generous donations and volunteerism. In 1913, after years of challenges and difficulties for the fledgling church, members collected enough money to purchase a church building on the corner of East 36th Street and St. Clair—where St. Nicholas Church remains to this day. St. Nicholas Church has endured many changes over the past hundred years. The membership has increased considerably, and the church itself has been rebuilt and restored. Yet from its simplest beginnings as a group of Croatian immigrants—connected by faith, family, a past in Croatia and a future in America. The dreams, hopes, vision, and generous hearts that defined the founding members of St. Nicholas Church in the early days, carried the Church through a century, and remains the same today. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor, recognition and celebration of St. Nicholas Croatian Byzantine Catholic Church, on the momentous and happy occasion of their 100th Anniversary. May St. Nicholas Church, and its leaders and parishioners, continue their dedication to the enhancement of the spiritual, historical and cultural life of Croatian Americans, which continues to enhance our entire community.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of the Ukranian American Veterans, on the historic occasion of their 55th Annual National Convention. American veterans of Ukranian heritage have a rich and significant history in defending our nation's democracy and freedoms, during times of peace and times of war. American veterans of Ukranian descent have been an ongoing and vital source of strength in every branch of the United States military, dating back to the dawn of America. Ukranian American Veterans, here in Cleveland, and across our country, have reflected a dedication to promoting peace, goodwill, faith and community for all citizens. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor of all Americans of Ukranian heritage—especially our veterans—who proudly joined the United States Armed Forces to defend the liberties of America. Let us not ever forget those veterans, of every heritage, who made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of all Americans. Today, I congratulate the Ukranian American Veterans on the significant occasion of their 55th Annual National Convention. The deep dedication to justice and significant contribution to American society by Ukranian American Veterans has been, and continues to be, a vital strength within our community, and within our nation.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of the Spanish American Committee, as they celebrate thirty-five years of service to Hispanic Americans in the Cleveland area. Established in 1966, the Spanish American Committee, a United Way agency, is the oldest and largest non-profit social service organization in Ohio, existing to provide assistance for citizenry of Hispanic/Latino heritage in Northeast Ohio. This invaluable agency, comprised of caring, dedicated and hardworking individuals, provides essential services that improve the lives of families and individuals. Since the dawn of our nation, citizens of Hispanic/Latino heritage have greatly contributed to, and enhanced, every facet of our society. And through their meaningful action, the members of this worthy organization have elevated the quality of life for thousands of Hispanic/Latino individuals and families. Some of the significant services provided by the Spanish American Committee include: Counseling and crisis intervention, employment services, daycare services, job referrals, housing services, tenant and landlord counseling, English language classes, translation services, and voter education and registration. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor, recognition and admiration of the Spanish American Committee, as we join them in celebration of their 35th Anniversary. Please join me as I extend my deepest admiration and congratulations to the Spanish American Society, as its members continue to empower and assist Hispanic Americans to secure a brighter future for themselves—casting a light of hope and accomplishment over our entire community.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognition of the Club Azteca of Cleveland, Ohio, on the momentous occasion and celebration of their 70th anniversary. Club Azteca was formed in 1932 as a social club that offered individuals and families of Mexican heritage an opportunity for support, entertainment, and a continuation of the traditions and culture of Mexico—their beloved homeland. Club Azteca was progressive from the beginning. Since its inception in 1932, the Club admitted women on an equal basis, with the right to hold office and participate in all decisions concerning the organization. Many Mexicans emigrated to America in search of greater opportuniy for themselves and their families. Like many immigrants, citizens of Mexican heritage brought with them their faith, strong sense of family, and rich culinary dance, and musical traditions and talents. The Club Azteca has been a reflection of the Mexican American community in the Cleveland area for seven decades; its leaders continue their dedication to the celebration and promotion of their Mexican heritage and continue to provide cultural, educational and social services to its members. Mr. Speaker, please join me in recognition of the founding and current members of the Club Azteca, as they celebrate their 70th anniversary. This wonderful organization has provided support for Mexican Americans, and has greatly enriched Cleveland with their contribution of Mexican culture and heritage—a significant aspect of the multi-cultural fabric of our whole community.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, the Congress of the United States has just received from the White House a proposed draft which would put this Congress on the path of approving a war with Iraq. The text of the resolution is very instructive, because the text of the resolution seems to ignore some basic facts, and facts are important. They are urgent at this moment in our Nation's history. The first fact we must keep in mind: Iraq had nothing to do with 9- 11, yet the text of the administration's resolution implies that Iraq is connected to 9-11. Second: Iraq has not been connected to al Qaeda, but the text of the administration's resolution implies that somehow Saddam Hussein has something to do with the al Qaeda terrorist network. Even the United States' own intelligence agencies, which have considerable resources, have not been able to establish that. We also know that Iraq was not connected to the anthrax attacks upon this Nation. Yet the resolution which the administration has presented to this Congress would ask this Congress to wage war against Iraq as a matter of self-defense. Now, what is self-defense? Self-defense is when someone attacks you, you have a right to defend yourself. On September 11, the year 2001, the United States was attacked. We have a right to defend ourselves. On the vote that came before this Congress on September 14, I joined other Members of Congress in voting for America to defend itself and in voting for America to pursue the terrorists and to bring them to justice; a task, I might add, which is unfinished. Yet that is ignored in this resolution. This resolution instead will urge the American people to finance to the tune of over $100 billion a war against a nation which has not waged war against us. For the first time in our country's history, we are going to be asked to approve a resolution to wage a war of aggression, not a war of defense. This is an important moment in the history of our Republic. All credible intelligence says that Iraq does not have usable weapons of mass destruction. They were destroyed in the Gulf War. Those weapons capabilities, which Iraq got from, guess who, the Bush administration, the first Bush administration, capabilities for biological, chemical and nuclear weapons of mass destruction, they were all destroyed in the Gulf War. Yet the administration would have the people of this country believe that Iraq still possesses those capabilities. They do not. We have the ability to tell if anyone in the world is making nuclear weapons. We have technology that can tell if gamma rays are being emitted, which are an essential tell-tale proof of this work of construction of nuclear weapons. There are 17 nations in the world which either possess, are trying to get, or actually have nuclear weapons capability. Are we going to begin waging war against some of those nations? Because this resolution brought by the administration to this Congress would somehow enable the administration to pursue war wherever they wanted to in the region. Think about this, America: Iraq does not have any usable weapons of mass destruction. They do not have the ability to deliver those weapons to the United States. No one can come before this House and say that Iraq can launch a missile, if they had one, from Baghdad and send it here. We have to establish the truth. ``Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free,'' it says in the Scriptures. Let the truth guide America in this period. Let the truth create peace. Let the truth steer us away from war and find a path where America can protect the very soul of our Nation.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor and recognition of the Detroit Shoreway Community Development Organization, and neighborhood volunteers and community leaders, as they celebrate the success of the Bridge Square Project and the renovation of the historic Courtland Building. This tangible evidence of community renewal, fostered by the hard work, vision, and persistence of the public and private sector within and surrounding the Detroit Shoreway community, shines within the spirit of the neighborhood--from house to house, and street to street. Hope has risen in the form of the Bridge Square Project--twenty-nine new homes have been built, and over one hundred housing units have been renovated. This significant accomplishment is an example of the sustainability of the Detroit Shoreway neighborhood, and other neighborhoods within the Cleveland and Greater Cleveland area. The preservation and renovation of the Courtland Building, built in 1897, is also a testament to the renewed hope, energy and possibility of this neighborhood. This structure, once a dilapidated magnet for criminal activity, is now a monument to the focus and work of a neighborhood, whose unity, action and determination have made Detroit Shoreway better, safer, and brighter place for everyone. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honor, recognition and celebration of the residents and leaders of the Detroit Shoreway neighborhood, the Detroit Shoreway CDO, and all individuals and agencies connected to the rejuvenation of this historical, diverse and significant community. Due to the collective efforts of those who live and work in the Detroit Shoreway neighborhood--an effort that spans many years--a community has been reborn. Out of the darkness of illegal drug activity, blighted neighborhoods, and streets in decline, new life has risen--held aloft by those dedicated to their community--and accomplished one neighborhood meeting at a time, one nail at a time, and one brick at a time--rebuilding the heart and soul of this neighborhood.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman because when she spoke of sons and daughters, that is what this is really about. This is about the sons and daughters of American people. It is about the sons and daughters of the Iraqi people who have to suffer this dictator, Saddam Hussein; and it is also about future generations. And so I thank the gentlewoman for participating in this discourse and she is welcome to stay if she can. I want to go back to our good friend and my colleague, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), who has ended the last discussion. We were talking about the impact on oil as an issue here, and I thought she raised some good points; and I wanted to thank her and if the gentlewoman would continue.

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentlewoman is right. Today we have this new structure of the Web. They say I do not know how to use it. I say ask your kids. They have computers. They can get you on a site and you can start to talk to people. We need to use the available technology that we have; but the best technology in a democracy is the human heart because across this country people can feel in their hearts that this war is wrong. Across this country, people know that America has a higher destiny, that it is not our destiny to be the policeman of the world. It is not our destiny to choose who should be the ruler or leader of another nation. It is our destiny to fulfill the democracy here and to defend freedom when we must. I want to thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for participating here and for starting this discussion that war is not inevitable, that Iraq was not connected to 9-11, that there is a chance that we can move forward with our intelligence, that we can some day evolve to a place where what President Franklin Roosevelt called the science of human relationships can be used to resolve our problems, not weapons technology which destroy, but our own capability to evolve in heart and soul, to become more than we are so we fulfill this dream of our founders of a government which is enlightened and a government which has a special connection to its people.

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I have a report here that was done by Miriam Pemberton, who is with the Institute for Policy Studies. She delivered this to a congressional briefing. She said that fears that the U.S. might go ahead with an attack on Iraq have already begun to affect oil prices. When people are going around to the pumps, just the talk of war is starting to affect oil prices. Oil is already trading close to an 18-month high of $30 a barrel. Ten months ago, according to this report, we forget, but 10 months ago, the price was half that. So within 10 months, oil has doubled in the price per barrel. As the war fever keeps going, in effect what we have, the war fever has created a premium. So the oil companies are making more money on the war talk, and each time a U.S. official comes out and says something, she says in this report, that suggests an attack is actually imminent or is likely to happen, oil prices spike. Vice President Cheney made the first of two such speeches on August 26, for example, and by the end of the day the price of each barrel sold on the U.S. market had jumped 65 cents. Think about that, what war talk does. What does a real war do? The last invasion of Iraq, right after it, oil prices doubled. They stayed high, according to this report, for the better part of a year. A repeat would create ripple effects throughout our economy. Miriam Pemberton says that estimates by Wall Street analysts indicate that a $10 per barrel rise in oil prices, that would be half the amount of the last Gulf War, would over a year's time reduce U.S. GDP growth by about half a percent and add nearly 1 percent to inflation. She goes on to say the economic drag from this oil price shock is being felt most strongly across the transportation sectors, and she also says that most analysts expect that a U.S. attack on Iraq would send the price of oil beyond $50 a barrel. In other words, more than three times what it was 10 months ago. So I think that we need to understand that the cost of war is not only in our tax dollars, not only in this horrible cost of the lives of the young men and women we send over there, but also when we combine it with the tax cuts and the large increases in military spending, we are looking at a disaster for our economy. Slower growth, a recession. So we should be very concerned about the economic impact, the immediate impact of this war, and we should be concerned about the long-term economic impact of this war. This is still about the economy, and remember, all of these debates get swept aside with the war talk. Each time the administration stands up and talks about war, we pay for it at the gas pump. If we go to war, the prices are going to go up three times what they were 10 months ago. These are the concerns I have. Mr. Speaker, in the closing few minutes I would like to, with my colleague, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), talk about what I am hearing from my constituents in Cleveland. When they ask me what can we do, what can anyone do about this rush towards war, talk about a few things that are possible. I hear from the people in my district; they do not want a war. They expect us to solve this without going to war. They expect that we have the talent and the ability to solve these very difficult problems with other nations, particularly with a nation that used to be a good friend over in the gulf and to whom we sold chemical and biological and nuclear weapons capabilities; and if we could do that a few years ago, why not solve this. Look at the battlefields of World War II. We were at war with Japan and Germany, and they are our good friends now. We need to work with the international community now. Let us suppose this effort, despite all of our work, just keeps moving along. What can people do, they ask me. Here is what can be done. There needs to be meetings all over this Nation in city councils, town halls, in labor halls and community centers. People need to come together, and they need to talk about how they feel about this. They need to organize. When I was elected to city council in Cleveland many years ago, I got elected by knocking on doors. I did not have any money. I just went door to door and talked to people. We need to talk to each other again. We need an up-lifting of our civic consciousness. We need to recreate our civic soul in this country. We need to recreate our national sense of conscience; and we do it by talking to each other, by organizing door to door. Go to your neighbors, create a place for a meeting. Take the information door to door about the meeting. Let people know where they can come to talk about it and then talk about gathering more and more people. Gather by the thousands in your town squares. This is what I tell my constituents. We need a national revival of this concept of government of the people. Government of the people works because people stay involved. Lincoln's prayer, the prayer that he gave at Gettysburg, a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, the way it is realized is when people get involved. So knock on doors. Put a piece of literature in people's hands, I tell my constituents. Tell them how they can come to a meeting. Tell them that they are needed. Bring people together, set an agenda, invite your Member of Congress or other government officials. Invite church leaders to moderate it. We need it talk to each other about this. We can avoid this war. It is not inevitable. We need to connect again with each other. Each of us is an architect of the world, and our thoughts and words and our deeds are part of that structure of the world. We can recreate the world right now. War is not inevitable. Peace is inevitable if we begin talking to each other and organize at a community level. There are polling lists available. You can go to a board of elections and find out who the voters are in your precinct, and you can get a list of phone numbers and call people and go back to contacting people, hold those meetings and hold those rallies. I believe, as I tell my constituents about this, that we can turn this around, that we are not stuck with war; but we need to hear from the American people. And my constituents, I tell them, if you talk to your neighbors about it, we can catalyze a change in this country. And I know that the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) works closely with her constituents and tells them how they can make a difference.