Ike Skelton

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I have, and I offer as part of the Record, Mr. Speaker, a letter I just received dated July 12 from Lee H. Hamilton from the Woodrow Wilson International Center of Scholars, who is the national president thereof. And I will read just part of it and not take any more time. But it says, ``Dear Ike, thank you for sharing H.R. 2956 on responsible redeployment from Iraq. The legislation outlines the right change in mission for U.S. forces in Iraq, and redeployment within a responsible time frame. It effectively outlines the functions of the residual force that would remain in Iraq after redeployment, and makes an important contribution by focusing on the need for an accounting of U.S. interests in both Iraq and the wider region.'' I offer this letter at this time. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC, July 12, 2007. Congressman Ike Skelton, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Ike: Thank you for sharing HR 2956 on responsible redeployment from Iraq. The legislation outlines the right change in mission for U.S. forces in Iraq, and redeployment within a responsible timeframe. It effectively outlines the functions of the residual force that would remain in Iraq after redeployment, and makes an important contribution by focusing on the need for an accounting of U.S. interests in both Iraq and the wider region. Beyond what is outlined in the bill, much needs to be done in Iraq. The training of Iraqi Security Forces must be intensified. An aggressive diplomatic offensive is urgently needed to press for national reconciliation in Iraq, and to advance stability in the region. And some measure of consensus needs to be reached in the country--and between the President and Congress--so that we can move forward with unity of effort. The American people want a responsible transition for U.S. forces out of Iraq. This resolution provides that transition. It is not perfect, but it moves our national debate forward. With best wishes, Sincerely, Lee H. Hamilton. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend and colleague, the gentleman from South Carolina who is our distinguished majority whip, Mr. Clyburn.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), my friend, my colleague, the Honorable Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I just heard the minority leader say that we are willfully ignoring the consequences of Iraq. That is what I'm talking about, the willful consequences of Iraq when I spoke a few moments ago about the stretch and the strain and the difficulty of gluing our Army and Marines back together again. This is serious business. We have a readiness crisis due to our extended operations in Iraq. Readiness in the Army's combat units has fallen to a dangerous level. Half of the Army's active brigades are in combat, and the remaining units are preparing for deployment. Units preparing for combat do not have all of their assigned personnel or equipment when preparing for combat. Combat units are experiencing equipment shortfalls; and let me mention that we have lost over 2,000 trucks and Humvees, over 100 tanks and armored vehicles, and over 100 aircraft. Combat units' readiness is being sustained at the expense of nondeployed units through the use of emergency war stocks. I am worried. My heart breaks because no one seems to be listening on the other side, and no one who is opposed to this legislation mentioned in this debate anything about the stretch and the strain on our ground forces of the United States. That concerns me. That is the willful ignoring of consequences of Iraq. Something must be done. Lee Hamilton, the co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group, spoke in a letter to me, which I read a few moments ago, endorsing this legislation as a responsible bill: We must do something, and it must be done today. This is serious business. Let me salute the eloquence of my friend from California, Mr. Hunter. He asked us to wait until September. We have had four Septembers already in Iraq. And you know what? It reminds me, and maybe some of those who have a little gray in their hair, Mr. Speaker, will recall a song that was popular decades ago, and that line in that song, the September song, that says, we haven't got time for the waiting game. We don't have time for the waiting game. This is the right time, the right measure, the right issue. It is right for our ground forces. It is right for those in uniform. It is right for their families. It is right for our country. We have been engaged in Iraq since March of 2003. We have threats yet unforeseen. If we continue to strain our ground forces as they are, we will not be ready for them. Hopefully they never come, but as sure as God made little green apples, those threats will be there. That's the purpose of this. The readiness of our forces and the capability of what they need to do for us in the days ahead, that is our job under the Constitution, to raise and maintain. That's what we are doing. So with that, Mr. Speaker, I say that we need to pass this legislation. We need to do so to pass the responsibility back to the Iraqis, to keep our forces in a higher state of readiness, and to make sure that the future is all the more safer for those of us here in our country.

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

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support for the Responsible Redeployment from Iraq Act. Mr. Speaker, out of all of this Iraq business, there's one star, and that star, as every American should know and appreciate, is the young American in uniform. That is the purpose of this legislation, and I take this opportunity to compliment those who serve our country wherever they may be, those in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the world or here within our United States. I'm proud of them. And they are our stars. Mr. Speaker, we have been engaged in Iraq since March of 2003. And in hearing discussion on the rule, it's obvious that some people wish to confuse the effort in Afghanistan with the effort in Iraq. They are separate and distinct. The war in Afghanistan is something that we needed to do. The Taliban government gave sanctuary to the al Qaeda terrorists in that country of Afghanistan, and we did the right thing by going in there. The war in Iraq is one of choice. There have been discussions and difficulty and debate over how we got there, but we are there. But people should know that the insurgency in Iraq and the subsequent sectarian violence between the Shiite and Sunni is a different and distinct war from that in Afghanistan. You know, in history, we learn from the past. Strategic mistakes have been made, and we're supposed to learn from that. And we have to go to our revolution in 1776, when the British General Howell did not follow up his victories against George Washington's troops on Long Island. Consequently, George Washington's troops were able to encamp at Valley Forge and later attack successfully Trenton and New Jersey. That was a strategic mistake that allowed our revolution to be successful. Lee's invasion of the north, the battles of Antietam and Gettysburg, were strategic mistakes of the Confederacy. And, Mr. Speaker, sadly, we have seen not only strategic mistakes in Iraq, we have seen irretrievable strategic mistakes; no plan for the aftermath, the initial victory, the number of troops was not as General Shinseki recommended, far too few; the unguarded caches of weapons and ammunition, allowing the insurgency to have free access to them; the dismissal of the Iraqi Army, rather than giving them a pay check and a shovel, the closing of the Iraqi industries, the deBaathification, which put thousands of people out of work, including thousands of school teachers. These irretrievable mistakes made it very difficult for us to have any sort of positive success in that country. We hear the call, well, wait until September. There'll be another report. Well, we have been in Iraq for four Septembers. There is the old song that those of us with a little gray in our hair remember as the September song. And one line from that song of yesteryear, ``we haven't got time for the waiting game.'' That's where we are now. We don't have time for the waiting game. The purpose of this is a matter of readiness. It's a matter of national security. It's a matter that we must face now, or else the strain and stretch on our ground forces, particularly the Army and, of course, the Marines, will be beyond repair for many, many years. It's a matter of strategic importance that we redeploy from Iraq in a responsible manner, and that's what this bill does. And we are able to keep our forces strong. We never know what's going to happen. The last 30 years, we've had 12 military contingencies in which our Armed Forces have been engaged, four of which have been major in size; none of them predictable. We don't know what the future holds. But for national security interests, we need to have a ready force, particularly our ground forces, which are being strained so very much now. Further, it is important that we pass the security of Iraq over to the Iraqi government and to the security forces of that country. We cannot hold their hand forever. They must step up to the plate and take over their own security. It's important that that happen. This bill, Mr. Speaker, initially sets forth a sense of Congress that the authorization for use of military force against Iraq was enacted into law in October of 2002, and that the government of Iraq that was in power at that time has been removed and it's leader tried, convicted and executed by a freely elected government of Iraq; and further, that the government of Iraq, the current government of Iraq does not pose a threat to the United States, and for more than 4 years, the efforts of our Armed Forces have been valiant in their work and in their combat in that country. We need a responsible redeployment. This legislation gives it to us. It states that the Secretary of Defense shall commence the reduction of the number of armed forces in that country beginning not later than 120 days after the date of enactment. It also states that such redeployment shall be complete to a limited presence which is spelled out in the bill, not later than April 1, 2008. The question before us, are we, as a country, any safer now than we were when we went into Iraq in March of 2003? What has it done for the security of our country? We see the sectarian violence, on top of the insurgency, the insurgency being aided by foreign fighters, many of them al Qaeda, and consequently, we know that the end must be done by the Iraqi security forces. That's what we are trying to do in this legislation; responsible redeployment of the American forces, cause the Iraqi troops and forces to take over their own security, and restore the readiness to our ground forces here in the United States. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey, a member of the Armed Services Committee, my friend and colleague, Mr. Andrews. (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SKELTON. I yield 1 minute to the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel of the Armed Services Committee, Mrs. Davis of California.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 1 minute to my friend, my colleague, a gentleman who is a member of the Armed Services Committee, Mr. Courtney from Connecticut.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, my colleague, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my colleague, my friend, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Lincoln Davis).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland, my friend (Mr. Gilchrest).

Mr. SKELTON. I yield 2 minutes to my colleague, my friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to my friend and colleague, a veteran of the war in Iraq and member of the Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Patrick J. Murphy).

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina, who is the chairman of the Budget Committee and also a senior member of the Armed Services Committee, a friend, my colleague, Mr. Spratt.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to my colleague, my friend, the gentleman from Illinois who is the chairman of the Democratic Caucus, Mr. Emanuel.

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my colleague and friend, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown).

Mr. SKELTON. May I inquire, Mr. Speaker, of the time remaining?

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend from California (Mr. Baca). (Mr. BACA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to my colleague, my friend, the gentlelady from Ohio (Mrs. Jones).

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, let me take this means to recognize the exceptional service of Mr. David J. Rigby on the occasion of his retirement from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. Mr. Rigby is a graduate of the University of Tennessee, where he majored in Journalism, and the University of Oklahoma, where he completed a graduate program in mass communication. He also attended the Defense Information School in Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana and the Federal Executive Institute at Charlottesville, Virginia. Mr. Rigby has a distinguished history of outstanding work and service to his country. A U.S. Air Force Public Affairs Officer, he saw combat duty in Vietnam as an advisor to the Vietnamese Air Force. He was also responsible for directing the news media relations for the Strategic Defense Initiative, also known as ``Star Wars.'' Mr. Rigby has had multiple assignments in The Pentagon and also served on the Reagan White House Transition team. On October 1, 1998, Mr. Rigby began his most recent position as Chief of the Public Affairs Office in the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. From the office's inception, he played a central role in forging the agency's image, shaping its mission, and spreading its message around the world. His talent and leadership helped change what the U.S. Combatant Commands expect of the agency and better prepared U.S. military bases to respond to disaster. Please join me in sincerely thanking Mr. Rigby for his unwavering service to this country, and in wishing him the best in the future.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, let me take this means to recognize the outstanding military service and contributions to our country of Rear Admiral (Sel) Earl Lenell Gay, U.S. Navy, on the occasion of his completion of assignment as Director, Navy Congressional Liaison, U.S. House of Representatives. A native of Atlanta, GA, RADM (Sel) Earl Gay is a 1980 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy. After attending flight school, he earned his pilot wings of gold in 1981. During several tours, he commanded a fleet operational helicopter squadron and the Fleet Training Squadron for all SH-60 aircraft. Selected to major command, he served as Commanding Officer of the Amphibious Assault Carrier, USS Belleau Wood (LHA 3) from March 2003 to October 2004, participating in combat support operations during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Rear Admiral (Sel) Gay was selected to serve as Director, Navy House Liaison in December 2004. In this highly visible tour, he assisted in the passage of critical Navy budget legislation during the 108th, 109th, and 110th Congresses. Additionally, he planned and led 29 Congressional Delegations (CODELs) across the globe that included meetings with various world leaders in support of America's national security policy. His counsel to me and other Members of the House has proved invaluable in articulating the Navy's vision to Congress. Please join me and our colleagues in thanking Rear Admiral (Sel) Gay and his family for their tireless contributions to a grateful Nation and in wishing them the best in their future.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Madam Speaker, let me take this means to recognize the exceptional service of Mr. David J. Rigby on the occasion of his retirement from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. Mr. Rigby is a graduate of the University of Tennessee, where he majored in journalism, and the University of Oklahoma, where he completed a graduate program in mass communication. He also attended the Defense Information School in Fort Benjamin Harrison, IN, and the Federal Executive Institute at Charlottesville, Virginia. Mr. Rigby has a distinguished history of outstanding work and service to his country. A U.S. Air Force Public Affairs Officer, he saw combat duty in Vietnam as an advisor to the Vietnamese Air Force. He was also responsible for directing the news media relations for the Strategic Defense Initiative, also known as ``Star Wars.'' Mr. Rigby has had multiple assignments in the Pentagon and also served on the Reagan White House transition team. On October 1, 1998, Mr. Rigby began his most recent position as Chief of the Public Affairs Office in the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. From the office's inception, he played a central role in forging the agency's image, shaping its mission, and spreading its message around the world. His talent and leadership helped change what the U.S. Combatant Commands expect of the agency and better prepared U.S. military bases to respond to disaster. Please join me in sincerely thanking Mr. Rigby for his unwavering service to this country, and in wishing him the best in the future.

Mr. SKELTON

Mr. SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman. I strongly support H.R. 556, and I voted for it when it first came through House, passing by a vote of 423-0. I support the bill because it will protect the critical technologies and the critical infrastructure of this country by ensuring that these invaluable assets remain in friendly and responsible hands. In so doing, it strengthens our national security, and I think the bill makes many needed changes, especially by adding homeland security and critical infrastructure as essential elements to be considered for protection during national security investigations, and also by adding opportunities for congressional oversight in the process. In short, I'm in complete agreement with the intent of this bill. I've been working with the chairman, however, to try and clarify some elements of the bill that may not make the intent of Congress fully clear. I believe that it is the intent of the Congress in this legislation to extend the current practice of seeking consensus in the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States. This practice requires that transactions being reviewed and investigated by the committee must satisfy the concerns of all the agencies involved. I believe that it is also Congress' intent under this legislation that the appropriate committees of the House, including all relevant committees with a jurisdictional interest in the outcomes of specific transactions under review, be kept informed by the executive branch. And lastly, I believe that it's the intent of Congress in this legislation to require the executive branch to monitor and enforce the mitigation agreements imposed under this legislation to ensure compliance and to regularly review compliance with these mitigation agreements.

Mr. SKELTON. Well, I certainly thank the chairman. I agree that there is a technical change required in the bill to ensure that Congress' intent be followed. I note that one good opportunity for making this technical and clarifying change to this bill will come during the House-Senate conference on the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2008. Will the chairman work with me to ensure that this technical and clarifying change can be made to this bill, including having it considered during the conference on the National Defense Authorization Act?

Mr. SKELTON. I thank my friend, my colleague from Massachusetts, and I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.