Dennis Kucinich

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Don Schirmer and his many years of service to the community of Maple Heights as a high school varsity football referee. Don's five decades of tireless dedication to the game of football is a testament to his heartfelt love of sports and the Maple Heights community. Don began his tenure as a referee in 1954 in Maple Heights, where his knowledge of sports translated into a position as a varsity official. Over the years, the students playing the game changed, but their referee, Don Schirmer, remained a staple of the community. Through all the victories, losses, and dramatic twists of the sport, one man has stood behind it all. More than just a referee, Don served as a pillar of his community by volunteering, often cooking for the homeless. It is this spirit of giving, sharing, and brotherly love that Don Schirmer has contributed to the community of Maple Heights. A modest man of many accomplishments, Don can count being an umpire in Major League Baseball, a veteran of the U.S. Navy, and the Captain of the Maple Heights Fire Department all as notches in his all-American belt of experience. Even at the ripe age of 79, Don's energy, passion, and love of life are at an all-time high. An avid hunter, Don is giving up his striped referee uniform for an orange vest. Though nearly an octogenarian, his zesty vigor keeps him active in the outdoors. Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring Don Schirmer as a true American sportsman. His undying presence on the field has been a joy, honor, and privilege to the students of Maple Heights for over 50 years.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Arthur F. Westfall, whose personal service to the Valley View community in Ohio is a shining example of the commitment and devotion that holds this great country together. Arthur's life was marked by his dedication to country, community, and family. Arthur graduated from Cuyahoga Heights High School and worked as a homebuilder as a young man, before he was elected mayor in 1971--a position he held for almost 30 years before he retired in 1999, along with being a public insurance adjuster. During these years, his work and commitment as a mayor helped Valley View prosper and become one of the main economic power centers in Northeast Ohio. Throughout his life Arthur was enthusiastic about and devoted to the citizens of his community. As a public insurance adjuster, he did appraisals that helped claimants receive compensation from insurance companies following catastrophes. And, as a devoted citizen and mayor, Arthur studied law enforcement and criminology at Case Western Reserve University to inform development of a strong police department. Arthur also helped to improve infrastructure for the citizens of Valley View by building capacity in the water supply, developing a transportation program, as well as a number of benefits for the elderly, things that were not available for the small farmland village back in 1971. Arthur's legacy continues through his wife, Helen; three children, Sharon White, Randall and Lance; six grandchildren; and three great- grandchildren. Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring the memory of Arthur F. Westfall as a loving community leader. Arthur's lifelong commitment to both community and family is a great example of how one man can dedicate his life to helping others.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, assuming we get there, how strange the politics of today will seem to future generations. Here we are debating whether to send more troops into a nation we are already illegally occupying for oil. Here we are contemplating the U.S. invading another nation, Iran. I wonder if we would be having that discussion if Iran did not have a tremendous amount of oil. All around us we are in conflict because we are addicted to oil. Our energy consumption choices are causing global warming which is causing weather patterns to change. Think about what we have seen in the last few weeks alone: snow in Los Angeles, billions of dollars in damage to California citrus crops because of a freeze. The burning of fossil fuels has contributed to erratic weather. Last year, we had the warmest weather in the United States continent in 112 years. Now, instead of separating the world with our politics, it is imperative that we bring the world together to meet the challenge of global climate change. I am hopeful that in his State of the Union Address next week, the President is going to take a direction to do that.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. My colleagues, a few years ago I was doing some climbing of hills and mountains in Colorado, and when I had started my journey I looked up into the hills and it looked like it would take a few hours to climb to a hill. I started my climb and I finally got there, it took about a half a day. And when I got to the top of this hill, when I was first starting I thought I would just get there and I am right at the top, I am at my destination; but as I got to that top of that hill, I saw there was another hill, and I had to climb another half day. This Congress is about to climb a hill, and that hill is opposition to the escalation. But when we climb that hill, we are only going to be halfway there because the top of the hill we've got to reach, that second hill, is called ``ending the occupation.'' Stopping the escalation is only half the journey here, we have to end the occupation. Similarly, people say, well, now they oppose the war. Well, opposing the war, well, that is halfway up that hill. Take that journey. But going all the way up the hill you are going to have to say, stop the funding for the war. The Kucinich plan enables us not only to stop the funding for the war, but to secure Iraq and create a whole new America and world.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, it has been said several times but bears repeating. When you're in a hole, stop digging. Our dependence on oil-- foreign and domestic--requires us to stop making the problem worse by giving oil companies billions upon billions of dollars in truly unnecessary subsidies that worsen our dependence. This bill redirects $14 billion away from these subsidies and toward more sustainable energy production. The transition to a renewable energy economy is not optional. The question is whether we will wait so long to create the transition that we do not make it on our own terms. Europe gets it. They are pouring orders of magnitude more money into research on renewables, positioning their industries to thrive in the future. On the other hand, this Administration has been digging its heels in by throwing billions of taxpayer dollars at an industry that made record profits on the backs of hard working Americans. We have a long way to go to catch up and this bill steers us firmly in that direction. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes''.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, as the first person on either side of my family to be able to have the opportunity to graduate from college, I understand what it is like for members of American families to have this dream of higher education and to have to work full-time, sometimes two jobs, and to go to school and to try to balance all that and see tuition keep climbing and climbing and the reach of a higher education starting to elude one's grasp. Millions of Americans are facing this. This is why the College Student Relief Act is so important. Last year, over the strong objections of students and many Members of Congress, Congress cut approximately $12 billion from the Federal student aid program. But at the same time the price of a college diploma at a public university has continued to grow at a rate that far outpaces inflation. Since 2001, tuition and fees at public universities have increased by 41 percent after inflation. Now, are students suddenly finding themselves in a market where they are making 41 percent more? Not a chance. They are lucky to have a job at all. Are their parents making more money? No. Most of their parents are maxed out on their credit cards. This bill is critical when we consider what the needs are. We have to encourage innovation and talent of our youth and ensure that every American is given the skills and training necessary to reach their fullest potential. This Congress must work together to help ensure that every American, regardless of their income level, has the opportunity to continue their education. Our Nation benefits from an educated and skilled workforce. We must not hesitate to invest in education for our students. The passage of this bill is a vital step in our efforts to increase access to college. With the passage of this bill, we can take the first step towards increasing access to college and ensuring that students graduating from college are not weighed down for life with debt. I rise in support of H.R. 5, the College Student Relief Act. Last year, over the strong objections of students and many Members of this body, Congress cut approximately $12 billion from Federal student aid programs. However, the price tag on a college diploma at a public university has continued to grow at a rate far outpacing inflation. Since 2001, tuition and fees at public universities have increased by 41 percent after inflation. The prior Congress cut student aid, as the costs of attending a public university continued to rise. Therefore it is no surprise that over the next decade financial barriers will prevent 2 million high school graduates from continuing on to post-secondary education, even at a local community college. Furthermore, as Federal student aid programs have faced funding cutbacks, students have increasingly been forced to rely on loans as their primary source of support. It is outrageous that easy access to a college education be restricted to the wealthy while students from less advantageous circumstances must either do without or be saddled with a paralyzing debt. These plights make the passage of H.R. 5 all the more necessary. Cutting these interest rates is a first step towards ensuring the rising cost of tuition does not continue to place a college education beyond the means of many Americans. Today, with the passage of this bill, this House can take the first step toward increasing access to college and ensuring that students graduating from college are not weighed down for life with debt. When the interest rate reduction in this legislation is fully phased in the average borrower will save approximately $4,400 over the life of their loan. This action will cut the cost of college for over 5 million students. This Congress must work together to help ensure every American, regardless of their income level, has the opportunity to continue their education. The benefits of expanded access to college are not limited to the individuals continuing their education, but extend to society as a whole. We must encourage the innovation and talent of our youth and ensure that every American is given the skills and training necessary to reach their fullest potential. Our Nation benefits from an educated and skilled workforce and we must not hesitate to invest in the education of our students. The passage of H.R. 5 is a vital first step in our efforts to increase access to college and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, Congress is beginning to focus on the necessity to take a new direction with respect to Iraq. There are some in the administration who are saying well, there is no plan. What can we do? We have to stay the course. We have to send more troops. We have to make a renewed effort. Once again I am offering for the attention of this Congress a plan that I put together that meets the requirements of being able to bring our troops home and create stability in Iraq and reunite the United States with the world community in the cause of peace and security. Here are the elements of the Kucinich plan: First, the U.S. announces it will end the occupation, close military bases and withdraw. The insurgency has been fueled by the occupation and the prospect of a long-term presence, as indicated by the building of permanent bases. A U.S. declaration of intention to withdraw troops and close bases will help dampen the insurgency which has been inspired to resist colonization and fight invaders and those who have supported U.S. policy. Furthermore, this will provide an opening for parties in Iraq and in the region to set the stage toward negotiations and peaceful settlement. Second, the U.S. announces it will use existing funds to bring the troops and the necessary equipment home. Congress appropriated $70 billion in bridge funds on October 1 for the war. Money from this and other DOD accounts can be used to fund the troops in the field over the next few months and to pay for the cost of the return of the troops, which has been estimated at between 5 and $7 billion while a political settlement is being negotiated and preparations are made for a transition to an international security and peacekeeping force. Number three, order a simultaneous return of all U.S. contractors to the United States and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi government. The contracting process has been rife with corruption with contractors stealing from the U.S. Government and cheating the Iraqi people, taking large contracts and giving a few percentages to Iraqi subcontractors. Reconstruction activities must be reorganized and closely monitored in Iraq by the Iraqi government with the assistance of the international community. The massive corruption as it relates to the U.S. contractors should be investigated by congressional committees and Federal grand juries. The lack of tangible benefits, the lack of accountability for billions of dollars while millions of Iraqis do not have a means of financial support, nor substantive employment, cries out for justice. It is noteworthy that after the first Gulf War, Iraqis reestablish electricity within 3 months despite sanctions. Four years into the U.S. occupation, there is no water or reliable electricity in Baghdad despite massive funding from the U.S. and the Madrid Conference. The greatest mystery involves the activities of private security companies who function as mercenaries. Reports of false flag operations must be investigated by an international tribunal. Fourth, convene a regional conference for the purposes of developing a security and stabilization force in Iraq. The focus should be on a process which solves the problem of Iraq. The U.S. has told the international community, ``This is our policy and we want you to come and help us implement it.'' The international community may have an interest in helping Iraq, but it has no interest in participating in the implementation of failed U.S. policy. A shift in U.S. policy away from unilateralism and toward cooperation will provide new opportunities for exploring common concerns about the plight of Iraq. The U.N. is the appropriate place to convene, through the Office of the Secretary General, all countries that have interests, concerns and influence, including the five permanent members of the Security Council and the European Community, and all Arab nations. The end of the U.S. occupation and the closing of military bases are necessary preconditions for such a conference. When the U.S. creates a shift of policy and announces it will focus on the concerns of the people of Iraq, it will provide a powerful incentive for nations to participate. It is well known that while some nations may see the instability in Iraq as an opportunity, there is also an ever-present danger the civil war in Iraq threatens the stability of nations throughout the region. The impending end of the occupation will provide a breakthrough for cooperation between the U.S. and the U.N. and the U.N. and the countries of the region. The regional conference must include Iran, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan. The fifth point in the Kucinich plan is to prepare an international security and peacekeeping force to move in, replacing U.S. troops who then return home. Mr. Speaker, this is a 12-point plan, and I will be presenting more features of it in future sessions.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Thank you, Mr. Conyers, Mr. Lewis and all Members of Congress. Madam Speaker, as we honor Dr. King's legacy, let's remember it is a living legacy. We are not talking about cold prose and someone who is so distant from this moment. His ideas are so alive today and so needed today; that is why a month from now, I will be introducing legislation to create a Cabinet level Department of Peace, which takes Dr. King's vision of an America which organizes around principles of nonviolence and brings it to life in addressing the issues of domestic violence, spousal abuse, child abuse, violence in the schools, racial violence, violence against gays, police, community relations conflicts, and provides the resources so that we can deal with these as a living testimony to the love that we are showing today for Dr. King. But he also was a visionary on the matter of war. He spoke many times warning this country about the danger of what happened in Vietnam. He spoke about the price that was being paid for the people of two nations in a speech at Riverside Church nearly 40 years ago. At Ebenezer Baptist Church he spoke about the interrelationship of all people, but how all people are one. It was that understanding of oneness that drove him to take a stand for peace. Let us celebrate not only his life, but let the principles of his life continue to guide us as Americans. This is the moment to take a stand as we grapple with the question of Iraq. I met with representatives of over 1,000 soldiers today who say it is time to get out of Iraq. Let us protect Dr. King's memory by standing for peace. Madam Speaker, I would like to put into the Record Dr. King's speech from Ebenezer Baptist Church and part of his speech from Riverside Church, which need to be read today. I would also like to put in the Record a speech that I gave recently called ``Out of Iraq and Back to the American City,'' which shows that only when we take a stand for peace are we able to get the resources that we need to provide jobs and health care and education and retirement security and housing for the American people. Make Dr. King's legacy a living legacy. A Christmas Sermon on Peace Dr. King first delivered this sermon at Ebenezer Baptist Church, where he served as co-pastor. On Christmas Eve, 1967, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation aired this sermon as part of the seventh annual Massey Lectures. Peace on Earth. . . . This Christmas season finds us a rather bewildered human race. We have neither peace within nor peace without. Everywhere paralyzing fears harrow people by day and haunt them by night. Our world is sick with war; everywhere we turn we see its ominous possibilities. And yet, my friends, the Christmas hope for peace and good will toward all men can no longer be dismissed as a kind of pious dream of some utopian. If we don't have good will toward men in this world, we will destroy ourselves by the misuse of our own instruments and our own power. Wisdom born of experience should tell us that war is obsolete. There may have been a time when war served as a negative good by preventing the spread and growth of an evil force, but the very destructive power of modern weapons of warfare eliminates even the possibility that war may any longer serve as a negative good. And so, if we assume that life is worth living, if we assume that mankind has a right to survive, then we must find an alternative to war--and so let us this morning explore the conditions for peace. Let us this morning think anew on the meaning of that Christmas hope: ``Peace on Earth, Good Will toward Men.'' And as we explore these conditions, I would like to suggest that modern man really go all out to study the meaning of nonviolence, its philosophy and its strategy. We have experimented with the meaning of nonviolence in our struggle for racial justice in the United States, but now the time has come for man to experiment with nonviolence in all areas of human conflict, and that means nonviolence on an international scale. Now let me suggest first that if we are to have peace on earth, our loyalties must become ecumenical rather than sectional. Our loyalties must transcend our race, our tribe, our class, and our nation; and this means we must develop a world perspective. No individual can live alone; no nation can live alone, and as long as we try, the more we are going to have war in this world. Now the judgment of God is upon us, and we must either learn to live together as brothers or we are all going to perish together as fools. Yes, as nations and individuals, we are interdependent. I have spoken to you before of our visit to India some years ago. It was a marvelous experience; but I say to you this morning that there were those depressing moments. How can one avoid being depressed when one sees with one's own eyes evidences of millions of people going to bed hungry at night? How can one avoid being depressed when one sees with one's own eyes thousands of people sleeping on the sidewalks at night? More than a million people sleep on the sidewalks of Bombay every night; more than half a million sleep on the sidewalks of Calcutta every night. They have no houses to go into. They have no beds to sleep in. As I beheld these conditions, something within me cried out: ``Can we in America stand idly by and not be concerned?'' And an answer came: ``Oh, no!'' And I started thinking about the fact that right here in our country we spend millions of dollars every day to store surplus food; and I said to myself: ``I know where we can store that food free of charge--in the wrinkled stomachs of the millions of God's children in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and even in our own nation, who go to bed hungry at night.'' It really boils down to this: that all life is interrelated. We are all caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied into a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. We are made to live together because of the interrelated structure of reality. Did you ever stop to think that you can't leave for your job in the morning without being dependent on most of the world? You get up in the morning and go to the bathroom and reach over for the sponge, and that's handed to you by a Pacific islander. You reach for a bar of soap, and that's given to you at the hands of a Frenchman. And then you go into the kitchen to drink your coffee for the morning, and that's poured into your cup by a South American. And maybe you want tea: That's poured into your cup by a Chinese. Or maybe you're desirous of having cocoa for breakfast, and that's poured into your cup by a West African. And then you reach over for your toast, and that's given to you at the hands of an English-speaking farmer, not to mention the baker. And before you finish eating breakfast in the morning, you've depended on more than half of the world. This is the way our universe is structured, this is its interrelated quality. We aren't going to have peace on earth until we recognize this basic fact of the interrelated structure of all reality. Now let me say, secondly, that if we are to have peace in the world, men and nations must embrace the nonviolent affirmation that ends and means must cohere. One of the great philosophical debates of history has been over the whole question of means and ends. And there have always been those who argued that the end justifies the means, that the means really aren't important. The important thing is to get to the end, you see. So, if you're seeking to develop a just society, they say, the important thing is to get there, and the means are really unimportant; any means will do so long as they get you there--they may be violent, they may be untruthful means; they may even be unjust means to a just end. There have been those who have argued this throughout history. But we will never have peace in the world until men everywhere recognize that ends are not cut off from means, because the means represent the ideal in the making, and the end in process, and ultimately you can't reach good ends through evil means, because the means represent the seed and the end represents the tree. It's one of the strangest things that all the great military geniuses of the world have talked about peace. The conquerors of old who came killing in pursuit of peace, Alexander, Julius Caesar, Charlemagne, and Napoleon, were akin in seeking a peaceful world order. If you will read Mein Kampf closely enough, you will discover that Hitler contended that everything he did in Germany was for peace. And the leaders of the world today talk eloquently about peace. Every time we drop our bombs in North Vietnam, President Johnson talks eloquently about peace. What is the problem? They are talking about peace as a distant goal, as an end we seek, but one day we must come to see that peace is not merely a distant goal we seek, but that it is a means by which we arrive at that goal. We must pursue peaceful ends through peaceful means. All of this is saying that, in the final analysis, means and ends must cohere because the end is preexistent in the means, and ultimately destructive means cannot bring about constructive ends. Now let me say that the next thing we must be concerned about if we are to have peace on earth and good will toward men is the nonviolent affirmation of the sacredness of all human life. Every man is somebody because he is a child of God. And so when we say ``Thou shalt not kill,'' we're really saying that human life is too sacred to be taken on the battlefields of the world. Man is more than a tiny vagary of whirling electrons or a wisp of smoke from a limitless smoldering. Man is a child of God, made in His image, and therefore must be respected as such. Until men see this everywhere, until nations see this everywhere, we will be fighting wars. One day somebody should remind us that, even though there may be political and ideological differences between us, the Vietnamese are our brothers, the Russians are our brothers, the Chinese are our brothers; and one day we've got to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. But in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile. In Christ there is neither male nor female. In Christ there is neither Communist nor capitalist. In Christ, somehow, there is neither bound nor free. We are all one in Christ Jesus. And when we truly believe in the sacredness of human personality, we won't exploit people, we won't trample over people with the iron feet of oppression, we won't kill anybody. There are three words for ``love'' in the Greek New Testament; one is the word ``eros.'' Eros is a sort of esthetic, romantic love. Plato used to talk about it a great deal in his dialogues, the yearning of the soul for the realm of the divine. And there is and can always be something beautiful about eros, even in its expressions of romance. Some of the most beautiful love in all of the world has been expressed this way. Then the Greek language talks about ``philia,'' which is another word for love, and philia is a kind of intimate love between personal friends. This is the kind of love you have for those people that you get along with well, and those whom you like on this level you love because you are loved. Then the Greek language has another word for love, and that is the word ``agape.'' Agape is more than romantic love, it is more than friendship. Agape is understanding, creative, redemptive good will toward all men. Agape is an overflowing love which seeks nothing in return. Theologians would say that it is the love of God operating in the human heart. When you rise to love on this level, you love all men not because you like them, not because their ways appeal to you, but you love them because God loves them. This is what Jesus meant when he said, ``Love your enemies.'' And I'm happy that he didn't say, ``Like your enemies,'' because there are some people that I find it pretty difficult to like. Liking is an affectionate emotion, and. I can't like anybody who would bomb my home. I can't like anybody who would exploit me. I can't like anybody who would trample over me with injustices. I can't like them. I can't like anybody who threatens to kill me day in and day out. But Jesus reminds us that love is greater than liking. Love is understanding, creative, redemptive good will toward all men. And I think this is where we are, as a people, in our struggle for racial justice. We can't ever give up. We must work passionately and unrelentingly for first-class citizenship. We must never let up in our determination to remove every vestige of segregation and discrimination from our nation, but we shall not in the process relinquish our privilege to love. I've seen too much hate to want to hate, myself, and I've seen hate on the faces of too many sheriffs, too many white citizens' councilors, and too many Klansmen of the South to want to hate, myself; and every time I see it, I say to myself, hate is too great a burden to bear. Somehow we must be able to stand up before our most bitter opponents and say: ``We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We will meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will and we will still love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws and abide by the unjust system, because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good, and so throw us in jail and we will still love you. Bomb our homes and threaten our children, and, as difficult as it is, we will still love you. Send your hooded perpetrators of violence into our communities at the midnight hour and drag us out on some wayside road and leave us half-dead as you beat us, and we will still love you. Send your propaganda agents around the country, and make it appear that we are not fit, culturally and otherwise, for integration, and we'll still love you. But be assured that we'll wear you down by our capacity to suffer, and one day we will win our freedom. We will not only win freedom for ourselves; we will so appeal to your heart and conscience that we will win you in the process, and our victory will be a double victory.'' If there is to be peace on earth and good will toward men, we must finally believe in the ultimate morality of the universe, and believe that all reality hinges on moral foundations. Something must remind us of this as we once again stand in the Christmas season and think of the Easter season simultaneously, for the two somehow go together. Christ came to show us the way. Men love darkness rather than the light, and they crucified him, and there on Good Friday on the cross it was still dark, but then Easter came, and Easter is an eternal reminder of the fact that the truth- crushed earth will rise again. Easter justifies Carlyle in saying, ``No lie can live forever.'' And so this is our faith, as we continue to hope for peace on earth and good will toward men: let us know that in the process we have cosmic companionship. In 1963, on a sweltering August afternoon, we stood in Washington, D.C., and talked to the nation about many things. Toward the end of that afternoon, I tried to talk to the nation about a dream that I had had, and I must confess to you today that not long after talking about that dream I started seeing it turn into a nightmare. I remember the first time I saw that dream turn into a nightmare, just a few weeks after I had talked about it. It was when four beautiful, unoffending, innocent Negro girls were murdered in a church in Birmingham, Alabama. I watched that dream turn into a nightmare as I moved through the ghettos of the nation and saw my black brothers and sisters perishing on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity, and saw the nation doing nothing to grapple with the Negroes' problem of poverty. I saw that dream turn into a nightmare as I watched my black brothers and sisters in the midst of anger and understandable outrage, in the midst of their hurt, in the midst of their disappointment, turn to misguided riots to try to solve that problem. I saw that dream turn into a nightmare as I watched the war in Vietnam escalating, and as I saw so-called military advisors, sixteen thousand strong, turn into fighting soldiers until today over five hundred thousand American boys are fighting on Asian soil. Yes, I am personally the victim of deferred dreams, of blasted hopes, but in spite of that I close today by saying I still have a dream, because, you know, you can't give up in life. If you lose hope, somehow you lose that vitality that keeps life moving, you lose that courage to be, that quality that helps you go on in spite of all. And so today I still have a dream. I have a dream that one day men will rise up and come to see that they are made to live together as brothers. I still have a dream this morning that one day every Negro in this country, every colored person in the world, will be judged on the basis of the content of his character rather than the color of his skin, and every man will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. I still have a dream that one day the idle industries of Appalachia will be revitalized, and the empty stomachs of Mississippi will be filled, and brotherhood will be more than a few words at the end of a prayer, but rather the first order of business on every legislative agenda. I still have a dream today that one day justice will roll down like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream. I still have a dream today that in all of our state houses and city halls men will be elected to go there who will do justly and love mercy and walk humbly with their God. I still have a dream today that one day war will come to an end, that men will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks, that nations will no longer rise up against nations, neither will they study war any more. I still have a dream today that one day the lamb and the lion will lie down together and every man will sit under his own vine and fig tree and none shall be afraid. I still have a dream today that one day every valley shall be exalted and every mountain and hill will be made low, the rough places will be made smooth and the crooked places straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together. I still have a dream that with this faith we will be able to adjourn the councils of despair and bring new light into the dark chambers of pessimism. With this faith we will be able to speed up the day when there will be peace on earth and good will toward men. It will be a glorious day, the morning stars will sing together, and the sons of God will shout for joy.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, today I received a petition, an appeal for redress from over 1,000 active duty members of the armed services. Many of these honorable soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines have served in Iraq. They did not challenge their orders, they did not challenge their duty to serve, they do assert their constitutional rights and their military code rights to speak with Members of Congress. Article 3.5.7, Department of Defense directive 1325.6 provides the right of servicemembers to request redress and grievances against the actions of their commanders. The action taken and presented to me by individual servicemembers is an appeal for redress to end the war in Iraq. Troops are risking their careers to present this message to Congress. They have all individually signed the following statement: As a patriotic American proud to serve the Nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to support the prompt withdrawal of all American military forces and bases from Iraq. Staying in Iraq will not work and is not worth the price. It is time for U.S. troops to come home.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, Members of the House of Representatives, last week the President of the United States gave a speech to this Nation that he intends to escalate the war against Iraq. Compounding his speech was the point-by-point recitation of his intention to continue to escalate tensions between the United States and the sovereign nation of Iran. At this moment, when this Congress has honored the memory of Dr. King, it bears reflection as to whether or not we in this Nation have the capacity to begin to pursue a path of nonviolence in our relations with other countries. Our President is intent on escalating a war against Iraq. He is intent on precipitating a war against Iran. Whatever happened to the science of human relations? Whatever happened to using our head in dealing with people so that war is not an acceptable option, but that peace becomes inevitable because we pursue talking to one another? If we had taken the case for Iraq to the U.N., we would not have gotten approval for an attack against Iraq. How much better it would have been if this Nation had not decided to attack Iraq, because Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, did not have the intention or capability of attacking the United States, was not trying to get uranium from Niger, did not, in effect, constitute a threat to the United States of America. And yet, we attacked a nation which did not attack us, at tremendous consequence, the death of over 3,000 American men and women who served this country valiantly, the deaths of over 650,000 innocent Iraqis, according to the Lancet Report, during the conduct of the war; complete annihilation of so much of the cities of Iraq. What are we doing? What do we stand for as a nation? Does this really represent what America is all about? Or does America have a higher destiny? Is it our destiny to rule the world with our military might? Or is it our destiny to hold up our values of peace and justice, and to live them in our own Nation, and to nourish them abroad through following international law? It is a critical moment for America, Mr. Speaker. This Congress must stand up. We must not just set aside the escalation, we must set aside the occupation. We must not simply challenge this President and his buildup to war in Iran. We must let this President know that any action he takes against Iran will have constitutional consequences. We are at a moment when we need to defend our Constitution. We need to stand up for the American way, which is not the way of war. It is not the way of aggressive war. It is not the way of preemption, unilateralism and first strike. Mr. Speaker, it is really time for America to take a new direction in the world, and that direction is to work with the nations of the world. I put forth a 12-point plan for Iraq. It called for America to announce the end of the occupation, the closing of the bases, withdrawal of our troops. But we cannot do that unless, simultaneously, we let the nations of the world know that we are going to take a new direction in world affairs. We need to ask the world community to help us, to mobilize a peacekeeping and security force that will move in as our troops move out so that the people of Iraq can be secure. When we do that we can build a basis for a reconciliation in Iraq between the Kurds, the Shiites, the Sunnis. When we do that we can have a legitimate program for reconstruction and reparations for the Iraqi people. We can help safeguard their oil wealth for the people of Iraq, not for private American oil companies. Iraq should be a turning point for this Nation. It should be a turning point away from war as an instrument of policy. It should be a turning point where we address the needs of the people of the United States, the real human needs, for health care, education and jobs. And that is what my 12-point program leads to.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and accomplishments of Dee Benson, whose fierce dedication to family, friends, faith and community serves as a model for all who have been blessed by her presence. Born in Altoona, Pennsylvania to Edward and Maggie Heintel, Dee demonstrated her strength and determination from an early age. When she was only a year old, Dee wandered on to a scorching floor grate that severely burned her feet; pneumonia set in during her bed rest. With the support of friends, family and many faiths, Dee recovered and went about dedicating her life to the forces that helped her preserve it. In 1945, fate introduced Dee to Private Bud Benson, and a year and a half courtship culminated in their 1947 marriage. Dee and Bud moved to Cleveland, Ohio to put down roots and start a family, giving birth to Robert, Patrick, Jacqueline, Mary, Elizabeth, Denise and Christine. Dee never wavered from her family, in fact she redoubled her efforts in the most trying times. During Bud's battle with health problems, she never left his side; when her granddaughter needed open-heart surgery, Dee kept vigil by her side. Dee's generosity of spirit extended to her friends and the larger community as well. Dee has never passed up an opportunity to help a friend or even a complete stranger. All the while, Dee has sustained herself with the abiding commitment to faith that delivered her from her early challenges. When her sons served in Vietnam, prayer supported her; when she herself battled health problems later in life, faith carried her through. She even helped found Saint Anthony of Padua Parish. Moreover, Dee has committed herself to civic engagement and community empowerment, embodying the ethic that ``all politics is local.'' Dee has served as precinct committeewoman and has held numerous leadership positions in Democratic institutions throughout Northeast Ohio. Madam Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring Dee Benson, whose generosity, kindness and vitality have and will continue to inspire all who cross paths with her.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, on one hand we hear from the opposition that this bill will not save seniors money. But then we hear that Medicare's negotiation of prices is tantamount to price controls. To make that argument, one has to assume money will be saved. Which is it? Will it save money or won't it? The answer is that of course it will save money. It's particularly interesting that Pharma's response is to threaten to reduce innovative new drug research by withholding research funding. Pharma will not reduce their lobbying army that outnumbers Members of Congress. They will not reduce their profits which average almost $5 billion dollars among the top 8 Pharma companies in 2006 alone. They will not reduce their army of salespeople dedicated to influencing the prescribing habits of doctors. They will not stop paying scientists to influence clinical trial data that is supposed to be the basis for impartial judgment of a drug's efficacy and safety. No, they are threatening to cut research funds, which they claim will affect innovation. But they will not tell you that the number of truly innovative drugs they are producing has been declining since 1999 according to the Government Accountability Office. Why? Because they are instead spending their money on making minor changes to existing drugs in order to extend their highly profitable patent life. And by asking us to reject negotiation of prices for Medicare, they are asking us to fund not only their sub-par research agenda but their entire influence industry. I'm not buying it.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Congresswoman Waters and all of the members of the Out of Iraq Caucus for keeping the awareness in this Congress on the need for America to take a new direction in the world because we are not just speaking about opposition to a war which should be opposed as illegal, but we are talking about the need for America to take a new role in the world, one where our country does not engage in preemption or unilateralism or first strike, one where America cooperates with the world community on matters of international security. Remember, before 9/11, the felicity that America was held with in so many parts of the world. Remember, right after 9/11, how the world community opened its heart to the United States. But over at the White House, just off the Oval Office, at a meeting of the National Security Council, Donald Rumsfeld and people in the administration were plotting the attack on Iraq the day after 9/11. Yesterday the President mentioned 9/11 again. How many times does he have to mention 9/11 when he talks about Iraq? Why does he keep mentioning 9/11 when he talks about Iraq? Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. This is the big lie. And it is this big lie that the whole policy is based on. The Bible says, that which is crooked cannot be made straight. That becomes prophecy when you are talking about Iraq because everything about what the President is doing in Iraq is crooked. Let us look at his speech last night. Why did he spend so much time talking about Iran? Let us think about this. We know that in the last year, this administration has taken steps to try to move within the soft circumference of war against Iran. Our Air Force selecting bombing targets, moving in place 24 bunker busters with nuclear tips into the region. Last night talking about moving an aircraft carrier into the region, talking about Patriot missiles into the region, rattling sabers for war. He appears to be setting the stage for a wider war in the region. He has blamed Iran for attacks on America. He is saying that he is going to disrupt Iran. He is going to add this aircraft carrier. Isn't one war enough for this President? Isn't one misguided war enough for this President? You know, it is time that the media and the Congress, as Mr. Conyers pointed out, started to pay attention to what this President is saying and to what he does. It is imperative that Congress exercise its constitutional responsibility. And I think we are finally starting to see that. I think we are seeing people on both sides of the aisle realizing that there is a threat to our very democracy here; that our country is in peril by a Commander in Chief who has run amuck; who is without control; who stands by while Lebanon is basically annihilated south of the Litani River and actually, we found out later, was encouraging it; who is letting a civil war grow and fester in Iraq because he is going to send more troops and pour them into it. Or, Members of Congress, is the talk about a 21,000 troop increase in Iraq for the purposes of dealing with problems in Baghdad? Is that just a pretext? Since very few things are on the level with this administration, will some of those troops instead be sent to the border with Iran to provoke a conflict? These are questions we have to be asking because nothing this administration has said has been the truth. They don't have the capacity to tell a straight story to the American people, and they have spun the people of this country so much that people have become disoriented, but they are finally waking up, and they woke up in November. You want to talk about a surge? There was a surge in November. There was a surge to the voting booth, and that surge accomplished a new Congress. And the issue was Iraq, and our leadership told us that before the election. Three issues, they said, will guide this election: Iraq, Iraq, Iraq. And so was created a new Congress. And so it is imperative that Congress step up to its obligation. We have to say that we are not going to give this President any more money for the war, but we have to use the money that is in the pipeline right now to bring the troops home and, Mr. Speaker, to set in motion a process, because we understand; we don't want to abandon the people of Iraq. But we know that the only way that we can get our troops out is to establish an international process, and we are not going to establish an international process until such time that we give up the occupation, that we remove our troops and close our bases because that is what is fueling the insurgency. So we can turn this around. But this President and administration, which has such a talent for war, is determined to wreak chaos throughout the region. That is what they want. More chaos, more war, more control, as America moves towards fascism. Let's call it what it is. We are losing our democracy here. What do we stand for? What are those troops out there for? They believe in this country. They love this country. And if we love this country and the troops, we have to bring them home. But, instead, we have got an administration that is prepared to do something else because, in Iraq, his new plan is a plan for more door-to-door fighting. It is a plan for more war, more civilian casualties, more troop deaths, more wasted money, more destabilization in the region and more separation from the world community. This President wants to send more troops to Baghdad in the middle of a civil war. This President wants to continue a war that everyone knows in Iraq the situation cannot be won militarily. Does anyone in this administration have any sense at all? Does anyone in this administration have any heart, that we can send our troops into this miasma and cause not only their deaths but the deaths of innocent civilians when the President talks about taking the restrictions off our troops? What does that mean? Is that licensing wholesale slaughter of civilians and then a counter reaction which results in our troops getting slaughtered? This whole thing is wrong. This is not what America should be about. And everyone knows that. And yet the President last night had the nerve to talk about the Iraqi oil again. He can never talk about Iraq without talking about oil. They want to privatize Iraq's oil. Big surprise. Our troops were sent into Iraq. What was the first thing the administration had them do? Go to the oil ministry. They didn't have them go to protect antiquity, protect children. No. Protect oil. Do you know the Baker Report pointed out that 500,000 barrels of oil are being stolen every day? With 140,000 to 150,000 American troops there, how in the world can we have all that oil being stolen? How can that happen? Do you know what the market value of that oil is? If you run the numbers, about $62.25 a barrel. That is over $11 billion worth of oil a year stolen. The patrimony of Iraq is just being stolen. How are we going to have peace if the U.S. is sitting on top of oil, talking about privatizing the oil for the President and all of his buddies in the oil industry? We are going to have peace in that region? Those people are going to step back and let that happen? No way. That is why we have to get out of Iraq, end the occupation, bring our troops home, close the bases and give the Iraqi people control of their oil once again and begin a process of reconciliation. We need to create a new context where the international community helps us, because we are on our way out of there. The international community is not going to help the United States as long as we are occupiers. You know, Mr. Speaker, this President wants to expand the war and the American people should be very concerned because it is not just the sons and daughters who are over there, but it is more who will be sent through an expansion of the war. It is the jeopardy of an escalation. Have we not learned anything from the experience in Vietnam? Have we not learned that this march of folly we are on has been duplicated in the past? Have we not learned that the attempt to use raw military power is doomed to failure in a world that is interdependent and interconnected? Don't we know that we have a capacity to evolve? Isn't the American Revolution really a series of evolutions of our upward march into something better than we are? Aren't we prepared to take that? I think we are. I think the American people know it is time for us to take this new direction, to reconnect and reunite with the world community. And we will begin that when this Congress takes a stand and says no more money for war; when this Congress takes a stand and says use the money that is there to bring the troops home; when this Congress takes a stand and says close those bases, don't privatize the oil. When we become actually a co-equal branch of government, which was the intention of our Founders in drawing up the Constitution and in ratifying the Constitution of the United States. That is what America was always supposed to be about, not about an imperial Presidency. We rejected kings. We rejected autocracy when this country was founded. We didn't come through this long constitutional experience to the administration of George Bush just to turn our back on everything America is about, turn our back on what our real purpose as a Nation is. It is about taking care of our people.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, the President's new plan is a plan for more door-to-door fighting, more civil war, more civilian casualties, more troop deaths, more wasted money, more destabilization in the region and more separation from the world community. Does anyone in this administration have any sense at all? They are sending our troops into the middle of a civil war, setting the stage for a wider war. The President is blaming Iran for attacks on Americans in Iraq; he is vowing to disrupt Iran. He is adding an aircraft carrier to the shores of Iran. He is promising to give Patriot missiles to our friends and allies. Isn't one war enough for this President? Congress needs to challenge the position of the President, take necessary steps to bring our troops home. We need to begin talks with Iran and Syria, not blame them for our misguided war in Iraq. Diplomacy is the only way to avoid a widening war. If we follow this President's path of war, we will get more war.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I began to circulate a plan among Members of Congress to establish a path towards the United States exiting Iraq. As we know, the administration is prepared to escalate the conflict. They intend to increase troop levels to an unprecedented number without establishing an ending date. It is important for Congress to oppose the troop surge, but that is not enough. We must respond powerfully to take steps to end the occupation, close U.S. bases in Iraq and bring our troops home. These steps are necessary preconditions to the U.S. extricating itself from Iraq through the establishment of an international security and peacekeeping force. Congress, as a coequal branch of government, has a responsibility here. Congress, under Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, has the war-making power. Congress appropriates funds for the war. Congress does not dispense with its obligation to the American people simply by opposing a troop surge in Iraq. It is simply not credible to maintain that one opposes the war and yet continues to fund it. And this contradiction runs as a deep fault line through our politics, undermining public trust in the political process and in those elected to represent the people. If you oppose the war, then don't vote to fund it. If you have money which can be used to bring the troops home or to prosecute the war, do not say you want to bring the troops home while appropriating money to keep them fighting a war in Iraq that cannot be won militarily. That is why the administration should be notified now that Congress will not approve of the appropriations request of up to $160 billion in the spring for the purposes of continuing the occupation and the war. Continuing to fund the war is not a plan. It would represent a continuation of a disaster. In addition to halting funding of the war, a parallel process is needed, and I have offered such a comprehensive plan to this Congress. And I am asking Members of Congress for their thoughtful consideration. I would like to review some of the aspects of that plan. First and foremost, the United States must announce that it will end the occupation, close military bases and withdraw. The insurgency has been fueled by the occupation and the prospect of long-term presence as indicated by the building of permanent bases. A U.S. declaration of an intent to withdraw the troops and close bases will dampen the insurgency which has been inspired to resist colonization and fight invaders and those who help support U.S. policy. Furthermore, this will provide an opening where parties within Iraq and in the region can set the stage for negotiations towards peaceful settlement. Now, it is urgent that Congress take a stand now to take a new direction. The President last night articulated a plan for more war. He will have our troops fighting door to door with greater intensity. We will be in Iraq longer. But there is another thing the President did, and this is another reason why it is urgent for us to act. This President, and I want everyone here to listen very carefully to this: This President is setting the stage for a war against Iran. We all know this. It is not a secret. He is talking about moving an aircraft carrier into the region, giving Patriot missiles to our allies in the region. He has rattled the saber with respect to Iran. He doesn't want to talk to their government; doesn't want to deal with Syria. This President has only one talent, and that is the talent to make war and an illegal war at that, I might add. Congress has to assume its power again to defend the American people, to defend the international community. This administration is on the rampage. That the President, at the delicate condition of things in Iraq, would rattle the saber against Iran shows you the extent to which the administration has no intention of working to achieve peace. That is why Congress has to push now for the administration to end the occupation, close military bases and withdraw. We have to announce that we are going to use the existing funds to bring the troops home and bring the equipment home. We have to order a simultaneous return of all U.S. contractors to the United States and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi Government. When we do that, when we take those steps, then the world community can be inspired that there is a new America that they will cooperate with. But until we do that, we are on our own, and our troops are on our own, caught in the middle of a civil war. I will continue this in the next hour with Congresswoman Waters.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, the administration is preparing to escalate the conflict. They intend to increase troop numbers to unprecedented levels, without establishing an ending date. It is important for Congress to oppose the troop surge. But that is not enough. We must respond powerfully to take steps to end the occupation, close U.S. bases in Iraq and bring our troops home. These steps are necessary preconditions to the U.S. extricating itself from Iraq through the establishment of an international security and peacekeeping force. That is what the Kucinich plan which I am presenting Members of Congress today is all about. Congress as a co-equal branch of government has an urgent responsibility here. Congress under article I, section 8, has the war-making power. Congress appropriates funds for the war. Congress does not dispense with its obligation to the American people simply by opposing a troop surge in Iraq. It is simply not credible to maintain that one opposes the war and yet continues to fund it. If you oppose the war, then don't vote to fund it. The Kucinich Plan for Iraq Dear Colleague: In November of 2006, after an October upsurge in violence in Iraq, the American people moved decisively to reject Republican rule, principally because of the conduct of the war. Democratic leaders well understand we regained control of the Congress because of the situation in Iraq. However, two months later, the Congress is still searching for a plan around which it can unite to hasten the end of U.S. involvement in Iraq and the return home of 140,000 U.S. troops. The Administration is preparing to escalate the conflict. They intend to increase troop numbers to unprecedented levels, without establishing an ending date. It is important for Congress to oppose the troop surge. But that is not enough. We must respond powerfully to take steps to end the occupation, close U.S. bases in Iraq and bring our troops home. These steps are necessary preconditions to the U.S. extricating itself from Iraq through the establishment of an international security and peacekeeping force. Congress, as a coequal branch of government, has a responsibility here. Congress, under Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution has the war-making power. Congress appropriates funds for the war. Congress does not dispense with its obligation to the American people simply by opposing a troop surge in Iraq. It is simply not credible to maintain that one opposes the war and yet continue to fund it. If you oppose the war, do not vote to fund it. If you have money which can be used to bring the troops home do not say you want to bring the troops home while you appropriate money in a supplemental to keep them in Iraq fighting a war that cannot be won militarily. This is why the Administration should be notified now that Congress will not approve of the appropriations request of up to $160 billion in the spring for the purposes of continuing the occupation and the war. Continuing to fund the war is not a plan. It would represent the continuation of disaster. In addition to halting funding of this war, a parallel political process is needed. I am offering such a comprehensive plan today. I appreciate your consideration. Sincerely, Dennis J. Kucinich, Member of Congress.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007. Over the past 9 years, as the price of food has increased and the cost of housing swelled beyond the reach of many workers, the purchasing power of the minimum wage has fallen to its lowest level in 51 years. Since 1997, the Federal minimum wage has been stalled at $5.15 an hour without an increase or adjustment. This stagnation of the minimum wage has left families with no guarantee that a full-time job will enable their most basic needs to be met. At the current minimum wage, a worker spending 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year on the job, earns less than $11,000 a year, leaving them more than $5,000 below the poverty line for a family of three. That is shameful. The passage of the bill today will directly help those families. It is estimated that 5.6 million workers will receive an increase in their hourly wage if the minimum wage were raised to just $7.25 an hour. An additional 7.4 million workers earning up to a dollar above the new minimum wage would also benefit. In total, 13 million workers will be aided by this necessary legislation. The passage of this bill is a first step towards the greater goal of a living wage for every American worker because, even as it goes to $7.25 an hour, there are many families who are still going to find themselves within the circumference of poverty. There are people who are looking forward to the action of this Congress. But let it be said that the long-term objective, to ensure that workers are able to afford adequate housing and support their families, cannot be forgotten by this Congress.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, there is a compelling need for a new direction in Iraq, one that recognizes the plight of the people of Iraq, the false and illegal basis of the United States' war against Iraq, the realities on the ground which make a military resolution of the conflict unrealistic, and the urgent responsibility of the United States to use the process of diplomacy and international law to achieve stability in Iraq. Today, I am presenting to Congress what is called the Kucinich Plan for Exit from Iraq. These are some of the elements: 1. The U.S. announces it will end the occupation, close military bases and withdraw. 2. The U.S. announces it will use existing funds to bring the troops and necessary equipment home. 3. Order a simultaneous return of all U.S. contractors to the U.S. and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi government. 4. Convene a regional conference for the purpose of developing a security and stabilization force for Iraq. 5. Prepare an international security and peacekeeping force to move in, replacing U.S. troops who then return home. 6. Develop and fund a process of national reconciliation. 7. Reconstruction and jobs. 8. Reparations. 9. Political sovereignty. 10. Dealing with the Iraq economy. 11. Economic sovereignty for Iraq. 12. A process of international truth and reconciliation between the people of the United States and the people of Iraq. It is time for a new direction, and the Kucinich plan offers that direction.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Title IV Sec. 405 Pay-As-You-Go rules before the House today. I support these rules that will enable us to patch a sinking ship. The Republican tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans have driven us into permanent deficit spending. These rules will stop the sacrifice of the nation's well being for the benefit of the few. I continue to be concerned about our weakened economy and the shrinking industrial base. I believe Congress should be enacting measures that will expand the economy, revitalize the rust belt, expand our manufacturing base, prime the pump when needed in recession, and invest in infrastructure improvements. I believe Congress should enact universal healthcare for all and universal pre-kindergarten. Unlike the irresponsible tax cuts in the past 4 years, I am prepared to ensure these programs do not run up deficits over the long term. This can all be accomplished under these rules.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, Congress as a coequal branch of government must be prepared to act to bring our troops home from Iraq. Congress must have an exit plan and take steps to implement it. President Bush has every intention of keeping the troops in Iraq through the end of his term. However, the money is there to bring the troops home now. If Congress appropriates more money for Iraq, the war will escalate and more troops and innocent civilians will die. The American people voted for a new direction. That direction is out of Iraq. Let us rescue our troops. Let us rescue a domestic agenda. Let us reverse policies which have created chaos, massive civilian casualties and destruction in Iraq. Let us reunite the community of nations in the cause of stabilizing Iraq. The U.S. cannot do this as occupiers or as agents of contracting and oil interests. We can do this only once we have stated our intention to end the occupation. Next week I will be presenting to this Congress a workable plan which can enable our Nation to bring the troops home, assure an international peacekeeping force and begin to close this perilous chapter in our Nation's history.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my objection.

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. KUCINICH. Reserving the right to object, the title said ``for other purposes.'' Would you elaborate?

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation.

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.