Lynn Woolsey

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, about a year ago, the President of the United States quite clearly laid out a plan to begin redeploying troops out of Afghanistan in July of 2011. It was not soon enough for me, but it demonstrated at least the recognition that this could not go on forever and a commitment to do the right thing, the thing that the majority of Americans want, bring our troops home was on the table. But now top officials are telling us not to start planning our welcome-home parades for our soldiers, that U.S. combat troops would actually be on the ground in Afghanistan until 2014. The Commander in Chief has said that this war will begin to end next July, and it appears that the generals who work for him are actively trying to undermine that deadline by painting a rosy picture of conditions on the ground, often in direct contradiction of intelligence reports. The most galling moment and the most galling comment of all came from Lieutenant General William Caldwell, who leads NATO's training of Afghan security forces. He not only talks of the 2014 date as it's established policy; he says he needs more resources and more military trainers just to get Afghanistan ready to provide for their own security by that date. So we've gone from the military saluting President Obama and saying they could get it done by July 2011, to saying that current levels of personnel aren't adequate to get the job done in four more years' time. Lieutenant General Caldwell also echoed what other officials have said, that the 2014 date comes not from the Oval Office or the Pentagon or the situation room, but was initially put forward by Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai. But since when, I ask you, Mr. Speaker, does a foreign head of state set our goals? I thought U.S. foreign policy and decisions about our national security were made by the elected representatives of the American people. The truth, Mr. Speaker, is that things have gotten far worse in Afghanistan since we committed more troops. Our troops are dying at a greater pace than at any other point in the 9 years of war. Civilian casualties are also on the rise. The Afghan people have little confidence in our mission and its ability to improve their lives. The insurgency remains as nimble and sophisticated as ever. Effective local government is barely in existence. We've heard all the arguments before about why accelerated time tables supposedly don't work; that they embolden the enemy; that the insurgents will simply wait us out until the date of departure. But they're not waiting us out now. They effectively control vast swaths of the country, and the one thing that is giving them greater strength and moral authority is the continued presence of our combat troops on Afghan soil. How much more do we have to fail before we change strategies, I ask? How many chances are we going to give this military occupation? How much patience are we supposed to have? I say, not a minute more, Mr. Speaker. I say it's time to bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today with my colleague, Representative Mike Thompson, to honor the Benzinger family, whose economic, environmental, and philanthropic contributions in the Sonoma Valley have earned its businesses due recognition as 2010 Sonoma Valley Business of the Year. Both Benzinger Family Winery and Imagery Estate Winery have pioneered a sustainable approach to agriculture and a humanitarian approach to business. Their active presence continues to strengthen and enrich Sonoma Valley communities. Starting in the mid-1990s, Benzinger Family Winery began its transition into biodynamic agriculture. They eliminated chemicals and other artificial elements in favor of a more holistic and organic method that capitalizes on the vitality of a vineyard that is allowed to thrive in a natural state. Benzinger Family Winery has even been recognized by the National Resources Defense Council for its water conservation strategies. Imagery Estate Winery was founded in the same tradition, and the result is not only a greener footprint, but richer and more distinctive products that embody their unique places of origin. Indeed, Benzinger Family Winery and Imagery Estate Winery have earned reputations as producers of exceptional quality not only in California, but worldwide. The Benzinger family has brought the same care and commitment to its active role in Sonoma Valley communities, supporting local charities and volunteerism. It has been particularly instrumental in supporting Becoming Independent, a North Bay nonprofit dedicated to empowering people with developmental disabilities, and its wineries are a regular presence at the Sonoma Valley Harvest Wine Auction. Earlier this year, Benzinger Family Winery also joined with the local Red Cross to support earthquake relief efforts in Haiti and in Chile. Madam Speaker, I ask you to join us in thanking the Benzinger family for its contributions to Sonoma Valley and in congratulating its wineries on their success and well deserved recognition. Benzinger Family Winery and Imagery Estate Winery are powerful examples of the value of community-minded business, and Sonoma Valley is stronger because of them.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, on September 23, 2010, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to record my vote for rollcall No. 537. Had I been present I would have voted: rollcall No. 537: ``Yea''--Casa Grande Ruins National Monument Boundary Modification Act of 2010. Stated against:

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, the bad news in Afghanistan just continues to pile up. This week, a helicopter crash in the southern part of the country brought the number of 2010 coalition fatalities to 529. That makes this the deadliest of the 9 years we have been mired in this war. And, of course, we still have more than 2 months remaining before the calendar turns. Meanwhile, these deaths appear to be in vain. While Afghan citizens who turned out to vote this weekend must be saluted for their courage, well, the fact that courage was required to exercise a basic democratic right is rather telling in and of itself. But the parliamentary elections were marred by violence, not to mention all kinds of fraud and irregularities. Time Magazine quotes one candidate as saying, ``It was complete anarchy. Everyone was trying to manipulate this election.'' Mr. Speaker, Afghanistan's financial infrastructure is crumbling almost as badly as is its democratic infrastructure. One of the nation's most prominent banks is teetering on the brink of collapse, at the same time that cronies and relatives of President Karzai appear to have used the bank to line their own pockets. And in yesterday's New York Times, there was a long story about how families are dressing their little girls as boys, just so they can get a job and an education--and even so they can preserve the family's honor to have more boys than girls. Steven Walt of Harvard University, a member of the Afghanistan Study Group, summarizes the bleakness of the situation. In the last few years, Walt says, ``We have had a fraudulent presidential election, an inconclusive offensive in Marja, a delayed and downgraded operation in Kandahar, and a run on the corrupt bank of Kabul. Casualty levels are up, and aid groups in Afghanistan now report that the security situation is worse than ever, despite a heightened U.S. presence.'' Mr. Speaker, other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play? Seriously, there is little to be encouraged by in Afghanistan. And that is the situation that it is in now. Now, a new book that has come out this week by Bob Woodward reveals that even top White House officials were deeply skeptical about escalating the war. The Special Envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan is quoted as saying of our strategy, point blank, ``It can't work.'' He is right, Mr. Speaker. But what can work is a smart security approach, one that replaces the military surge with a civilian surge. At this point, a military occupation can't cure what ails Afghanistan; it can only spread the disease. But an influx of humanitarian aid can deliver a brighter, peaceful future for Afghanistan, elections that are free and fair, government leaders with legitimacy and integrity, schools that educate all children--even the Afghan girls, or especially the Afghan girls--and an economy that creates opportunity and lifts people out of poverty. The current policy is not redeemable. It will continue to engender death, destruction, instability, and chaos. There is only one answer, Mr. Speaker: Bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. First, I'd like to thank Chairman Payne and Majority Leader Hoyer for reserving this valuable time tonight to bring attention to Sudan. While it may have slipped from the front page of the newspapers and headlines of the nightly news, the crisis in Sudan is still in a very critical stage. In Darfur, rape is being used as a means of terror and warfare. Hundreds of thousands of people are living in refugee camps or are displaced from their homes. Militias with strong ties to the government in Khartoum brutalize Darfurians. So we have a long way to go before the people of Darfur can feel safe and return to a normal life. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement was supposed to lay out a framework for peace between the north and the south, but as we get closer to the date for the referendum, security and fairness seems to have become farther out of reach than it was earlier on. The south is forced to hope that President Bashir, a man indicted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, they are to hope he will support an honest and clean election, free from intimidation and free from corruption. Many remain skeptical that, when the time comes, President Bashir will actually allow the south to vote unobstructed. As Chairman Payne knows, because he has visited with and he has been honored by the people in my district who are working in regards to Darfur and have been on top of this issue from the beginning, they know that the people of Darfur are suffering. They have long supported the rights of the Sudanese people from a project called Tents of Hope, to letter writing and fundraising. I think the project is called Dear Darfur, Love Petaluma. That was the first one. That is where I live. Then there was, Dear Darfur, Love Marin County; and later, Dear Darfur, Love San Francisco. So Marin and Sonoma Counties, where I represent, consistently have stood for peace and justice in Sudan, and they have been really outraged at what they have seen. In fact, they teach about the issue in schools where their students are raising funds for the people of Darfur, and they're helping paint the tents for the Tents of Hope. With their support, I join my colleagues in the House on calling on the Obama administration to put more pressure on the Government of Sudan. We must demand that Khartoum and President Bashir allow a fair referendum and to permit international assistance and monitoring. Further, the plight of the Darfurians must not be pushed to the side in deference to the north-south situation. The genocide continues, and Sudan will never be free of oppression and violence until President Bashir and his reign of terror is brought to an end and he is held accountable. Thank you, Mr. Payne.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Duane Irving who passed away July 19, 2010, at the age of 75 on Halleck Creek Ranch, his family ranch, on which he established Halleck Creek Riding Club for Handicapped Children. An iconic figure in West Marin, Duane was a hero to hundreds of children and community members who admired his unique blend of cowboy skills, sense of fun and adventure, and big heart. Born on December 8, 1934, in San Rafael, CA, Duane grew up on his family's ranch in Nicasio. He excelled in athletics, and after San Rafael High School, he turned down an offer to join the San Francisco Giants minor league team to enlist in the Marine Corps where he excelled in both football and baseball. Despite an innate distrust of authority and a tendency for pranks, he was proud to be a Marine and remained loyal to the Marines and their ethics his entire life. After his discharge, Duane returned to Nicasio where he married Nellie Woodard in 1959. The couple had three children, Peter, Jeannette, and Buck, before divorcing in 1985. Duane also coached Little League in Nicasio for twelve years, maintaining the baseball diamond by attaching a length of chain link fence to his belt and dragging it over the diamond. Duane trained horses and managed several ranches in West Marin as well as working for Marin Municipal Water District for 12 years. Legendary West Marin Rancher Boyd Stewart enlisted his help in establishing the Morgan Horse Ranch in Point Reyes National Seashore, where Duane set up a breeding program and trained young Morgans to become ranger mounts throughout the national park system. At the Morgan Horse Ranch, volunteer Joyce Goldfield was bucked off a horse named Dill Pickle and spent five months in a full body cast. While Duane was sympathizing with her inability to get out and enjoy the wilderness, he spoke of some of the children who came to the park confined to wheelchairs and were unable to join in tours or mount horses due to insurance issues. The two decided to use their gentle horses to take disabled children riding into the wilderness of Duane's Nicasio ranch. Thus, in July, 1977, Halleck Creek Riding Club for the Disabled began. Since that time, thousands of youngsters and adults with any and all disabilities have been served, and many have had their conditions improve dramatically. Duane and Joyce expanded activities to include camping, rafting, snow trips, hose shows, parades, sailing, kayaking, and beach trips in which Duane pushed children in wheelchairs right into the surf. Since all this was free of charge, Duane became a prodigious fundraiser as well. Today over 300 disabled riders per week enjoy the benefits Halleck Creek offers--improved self-esteem, greater freedom and mobility, adventurous activities, and the therapeutic effects of horseback riding. Duane received many honors for his work including President Bush's Thousand Points of Light award, J.C. Penny Golden Rule Award, and Marin County's Volunteer of the Year. He was also active in helping Joyce collect and distribute clothing and bedding for the homeless and in an annual benefit for Heifer International. Joyce became Duane's beloved companion, and for nearly 30 years they lived at Fairwinds Farm on Inverness Ridge with her children Cindy, John, and Danny. In Joyce's words, ``Duane, the beloved native son of Nicasio and West Marin, shall be ever missed. This handsome, gentle, loving, immensely talented, free- spirited man was part of all our lives and resides in all our hearts.'' Madam Speaker, I echo Joyce Goldfield's words. Duane Irving was a special man who knew how to direct his spirit and generosity when he saw he could make a difference for so many. His legacy is an inspiration to us all.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, yesterday Speaker Pelosi and the Congress recognized the anniversary of 9/11 with a moving remembrance ceremony on the steps outside the Capitol. It's critical that we never forget the cruelty of those attacks and the tragedy of so many innocent lives. But just as importantly, we must use this occasion to examine the war that we launched in response to 9/11. Nine years later, have we achieved our original objectives? Is the continued military occupation advancing or undermining our national security interests? You'll recall that the original purpose was to clear al Qaeda out of Afghanistan. That's been accomplished. There are barely any al Qaeda operatives left in the country, and there is little hope that they could gain a foothold there in the future. But our continued military footprint is not helping us realize any worthy goal. In addition to putting our troops' lives in danger, it is fueling the rise and aiding the recruitment of Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan. And on a global level, Madam Speaker, it is stoking the extremism of al Qaeda and other anti-American jihadists. But it's just not me saying that. The Afghanistan Study Group comprised of centrist experts and academics just issued a report concluding that, and I quote them as saying, ``It is time to abandon the current strategy that is not working. The continuation of an ambitious U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan,'' the group adds, ``will likely work against U.S. interests.'' Madam Speaker, the report notes that the war costs more annually than does the new health care reform bill. And yet curiously, very few of my friends on the other side of the aisle are railing about the excessive spending on Afghanistan. It appears that in their eyes, a failed war is worth the investment, but health security for millions of Americans is wasteful. The Afghanistan Study Group offered some prescriptions and alternatives, including political reconciliation; an emphasis on regional diplomacy; and investments in Afghanistan's economic development--all of which are developments of the SMART security plan that I've been promoting for years. But instead of heeding this advice, we're pressing forward stubbornly with failed policy. And the more it fails, the more resources we devote to it. As Robert Dreyfuss writes in The Nation, the prevailing wisdom (if you can call it that) seems to be . . . if sending 30,000 troops to the wrong place isn't getting results, sending 30,000 more to that same wrong place might help, and then when that doesn't work, why, send another 30,000 troops.'' Madam Speaker, conditions in Afghanistan have gotten so bad that humanitarian groups can't move freely to deliver the aid that is so badly needed. The gruesome murders of medical aid workers last month underscored the deteriorating security situation. The New York Times cites the Afghan NGO Safety Office as saying there were more than twice the number of insurgent attacks this August than August of 2009. I don't agree with everything the Afghanistan Study Group has to say. In fact, by calling for a gradual military drawdown, I believe they are just not being bold enough. But Madam Speaker, this disastrous war has gone on long enough. It's done enough damage. It's time now to bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the sesquicentennial of the Two Rock Valley Presbyterian Church in Two Rock, a small community outside Petaluma, California, of which I am a member. This small church has a special history in our community for the past 150 years. The Two Rock Valley Presbyterian Church was founded in 1860, approximately 10 years after the first settlers arrived. Fire has destroyed the church sanctuary twice, only to be rebuilt by the community. The first building dedicated in March 1863 was destroyed in October 1895. The second building was dedicated in March 1896 and destroyed in July 1949 by a controlled burn that got out of control on the nearby United States Army property, now a Coast Guard Base. The third and current church sanctuary was dedicated on February 1, 1953. The congregation owns and operates the Two Rock Valley Presbyterian Church Cemetery located adjacent to the church structure. The first internments date back to 1861. Unfortunately, the fire of 1949 destroyed most of the records. A community project was organized in 1992 to identify plot locations and prepare a detailed plot map. The members of Two Rock Valley Presbyterian Church have a long history of community involvement as their mission states ``a tradition of witness and service.'' In 1865, they helped found the Tomales Presbyterian Church which they now consider their sister church. More recently, the church members are involved with the work of the Petaluma Food Pantry by working with a coalition of other churches to feed the hungry in our community. Their mission extends to regular contributions to the Cents-Ability Hunger Program of the Presbyterian Church (USA) which provides much needed funds both nationally and to Africa. Congregants are also volunteers at the Two Rock Volunteer Fire Department and the Two Rock Elementary School. Many annual community events including the Abelskiver Breakfast on Mother's Day, the Harvest Festival in September, and the Turkey Dinner in November rely on the volunteers from the church to help bring people from the surrounding community together. Churches are a place for community members to come together not just to worship but to build the community. Two Rock Valley Presbyterian Church is that church to the residents of Two Rock. Madam Speaker, I am proud to represent the congregation of the Two Rock Valley Presbyterian Church in Congress, and I ask that you join me in congratulating them on their accomplishments of the past 150 years and wishing them the best for the future.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Robert D. Puett and recognize his contributions to homeless families and adults in Marin County, CA. Mr. Puett is retiring after 23 years of service with Homeward Bound of Marin. Born and raised in San Francisco, Bob earned a degree in sociology at San Francisco State University in 1972 and trained as a disaster shelter manager for the American Red Cross in 1983. In 1987, Bob began working as a counselor in Marin's winter emergency shelter program and joined Homeward Bound as a program director the following year. He managed shelters for the Red Cross following the Loma Prieta earthquake in 1989 and the Oakland Hills wildfire in 1991. Always an advocate for those in need, Bob stayed involved when neighbors of the winter shelter protested its location at the Marin County Armory. With authorization from then-Marin County Supervisor Bob Roumiguiere, he managed an encampment at the Marin County Civic Center from April to October 1992 to demonstrate the need for a year-round shelter. The program moved several times in the next two years, landing at the former Hamilton Air Force Base in Novato in 1994. Bob recalls managing the shelter in a large surplus Army tent on a site that flooded regularly and, at least once, lost its roof. Eventually the shelter moved to the warehouse on the site of today's Homeward Bound headquarters. Taking advantage of legislation that authorized homeless services on decommissioned military bases, Bob helped lead a public education campaign to persuade neighbors of the Hamilton base to create a year- round shelter. I am proud to have worked with Bob, the City of Novato and the Navy, which led to the opening of the 80-bed New Beginnings Center in 2000 with full community support. It was the first such shelter built in the country on a decommissioned military site. Bob became deputy director at Homeward Bound in June 2000, continuing to build on his desire to offer homeless people not only ``a hot and a cot''--a meal and a bed--but an avenue out of homelessness. He oversaw development of the Next Key Center, also at Hamilton, which opened in November 2008 with 32 studio apartments, new offices for Homeward Bound, an expanded kitchen for job training and an event space for public rental. The Marin County Human Rights Commission honored Bob's commitment and contributions to improving opportunities for people in need with its Martin Luther King, Jr., Award in 2006. At his retirement party, Bob accepted a ``Hair Raising Challenge'' and allowed his trademark ponytail to be cut in exchange for a $30,000 contribution to support shelter and job training programs at Homeward Bound In retirement, Mr. Puett plans to join Homeward Bound's board of directors. Madam Speaker, it is appropriate at this time that we thank Mr. Robert Puett for his many years of service on behalf of the people of Marin County. He has worked tirelessly to demonstrate his unwavering belief that people can overcome great obstacles to change their lives for the better. For this, he deserves our appreciation.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the work of Celia Kupersmith, who departs from her position as General Manager of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway, and Transportation District on September I, 2010. Over the past 11 years, Ms. Kupersmith has overseen improvements in the infrastructure and services on which millions of people in the San Francisco Bay Area depend. Her leadership has been a source of strength during an especially active period for the Bridge District. With over 800 employees running the Golden Gate Bridge, five transbay ferries, and a network of nearly 200 buses, the Bridge District manages the most critical linkages between San Francisco and the North Bay. It provides residents with over 50 million trips annually, and it maintains services for the six million tourists who come each year to visit the Bridge itself. In 1999, after serving for several years as Executive Directive of the Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County, Nevada, Ms. Kupersmith took on the challenge of leading this important agency at the outset of a number of significant technological and administrative changes. During her period of service, Ms. Kupersmith has worked tirelessly to ensure that the people of the Bay Area can rely on the physical safety of the Golden Gate Bridge. She was called on to respond to the increased security demands placed on the Bridge District after September 11, 2001, and she has led the reform of Bridge security that followed. I am also particularly proud to have worked with her through several Congresses to secure federal funding for the ongoing seismic retrofitting of the Bridge. Under Ms. Kupersmith's leadership, the past decade has seen the Bridge District make substantial improvements in its speed and interconnectedness within the Bay Area transportation network. This includes the implementation of electronic toll collection on the Golden Gate Bridge and the introduction of region-wide public transit cards-- the TransLink and Clipper cards--on our buses and ferries. The Bridge District has also worked to enhance the speed of ferry service, which now offers a connection between Central Marin and downtown San Francisco in only 30 minutes. Ms. Kupersmith will be leaving the Bridge District for a Deputy CEO position at Sound Transit, a transportation agency serving Washington's Puget Sound region. However, she will also be leaving behind a legacy of service that will endure in the Bridge District's improved infrastructure, modernized services, and sounder long-term financial outlook. Madam Speaker, I ask you to join me in thanking Ms. Kupersmith for her contributions to the Bay Area and in wishing her all the best in her new endeavors. Ms. Kupersmith leaves our Bridge, buses, and ferries stronger than when she arrived, and with a sound footing for building on recent progress.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, beginning in January 2005, speaking from this very spot just about every single night that I could on the House floor, I've declared again and again my conviction that we must bring our troops home from Iraq. I was actually the first Member of Congress to bring legislation to the House floor to end the war in Iraq, and now at long last it is finally happening. Eighty-eight months after President Bush declared ``Mission Accomplished,'' President Obama has kept his promise to redeploy our fighting forces out of Iraq. To be sure, however, there is still a long way to go before we can declare that this war is over. There are still Americans in harm's way in Iraq--50,000 servicemen and -women as well as countless contractors, but they are remaining behind to train Iraqi Security Forces, and it is expected they will leave by the end of next year. Every single American, Mr. Speaker, has sacrificed for this policy of invading a sovereign nation without provocation and under false pretenses. The Iraq war has drained the American people of nearly three-quarters of $1 trillion. This is money, much of it borrowed from foreign creditors, which we are essentially taking from our children and grandchildren. And then there are the things you can't quantify--the moral authority we have squandered; the national credibility we have lost; the trust of our global neighbors that we won't soon recover. Of course no sacrifice was greater than the one borne by our men and women in uniform and their families; 4,400 Americans died unnecessarily, upwards of 30,000 are wounded, and tens of thousands more are suffering from post- traumatic stress. The men and women deployed to Iraq, Mr. Speaker, have served with courage, they have served with honor, and we owe them our never-ending gratitude, and we owe them our concern and our support. Now that the occupation is drawing to a close in Iraq, however, the Iraqi people have a chance to build the brighter future that they deserve. To help them in that endeavor, even as we phase out the military campaign, we must step up our commitment on other fronts. We must embrace the smart security platform I have spoken of so often in these chambers. That means a civilian surge of aid workers, diplomats and other experts who can help the Iraqi people rebuild their country, strengthen democratic institutions, and empower their citizens with education and economic opportunity. Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me say this: We are still a Nation at war. The conflict in Afghanistan, often forgotten when Iraq was at its worst, lingers on hopelessly and disastrously. There are some who believe more time is needed in Afghanistan to turn the corner. But if we've learned one lesson from Iraq, it's that prolonging the war only emboldens the very forces we're trying to defeat. Just as President Obama kept his word to end combat operations by a date certain in Iraq, he must do the same in Afghanistan. I strongly urge the President to stick to his own deadline of next July, and I, for one, will not rest until all of our troops are out of danger and brought safely home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, the documents released to the news media this past weekend by WikiLeaks add to the mounting evidence that the war in Afghanistan remains fiscally unsustainable and morally unjustifiable. The New York Times puts it bluntly. They say, ``The documents illustrate why, after the United States has spent almost $300 billion on the war in Afghanistan, the Taliban are stronger than at any time since 2001.'' Madam Speaker, I don't know how we can possibly reach any other conclusion: This war is not worth the huge investment in blood and treasure which the American people have been asked to make for nearly a decade. WikiLeaks uncovers much that has been missing from the official accounts of the situation on the ground in Afghanistan. To give just one important example, they reveal that the Taliban gained access to sophisticated heat-seeking missiles, which they used to kill U.S. and NATO troops. Afghan security forces do not enjoy any trust or legitimacy in the eyes of Afghan citizens. They are not just incapable, according to specific WikiLeaks reports, they are often brutally cruel and corrupt. Petty bribery; a police chief selling ammunition on the black market; commanders stealing their underlings' salaries--this is just the least of it, Madam Speaker. In one account, a police commander takes advantage of a teenage girl and then shoots his own bodyguard when the bodyguard refuses to open fire on a civilian complaining about the rape. Most shockingly of all, perhaps, is the revelation that the Government of Pakistan, our purported ally, is actively assisting the very militants we are fighting in Afghanistan. Pakistan is a country that we lavish with foreign aid, one that U.S. officials repeatedly praise as an important partner in the struggle against terrorism, and it appears they're using our money to support our enemy. We are not just talking about the passive enabling of terrorism. There are reports of Pakistani intelligence officials recruiting and training suicide bombers and helping to plan major Taliban offensives. Perhaps most galling of all is the collective shrug from many in the foreign policy community about the WikiLeaks reports. We have known about this stuff all along, they say. This is nothing new. Well, first of all, Madam Speaker, I am willing to bet a good percentage of the American people didn't know that their tax dollars are helping Pakistan fight against our interests. Second, I think it is important to ask everyone who has responsibility for prosecuting this war: If you knew about these things, what are you doing about them? As if I needed any more persuasion, the WikiLeaks revelations left me with no other choice earlier this week than to vote against the supplemental, Madam Speaker. How could I, in good conscience, endorse continued financial support for an unwinnable war, one that does violence to our values and is undermining our national security objectives? There is only one option, Madam Speaker: End this war and bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Concurrent Resolution 308, 111th Congress, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5851, the Offshore Oil and Gas Worker Whistleblower Protection Act of 2010. Chairman Miller, I want to thank you and commend you for the commitment to the health and safety of American workers. And Ranking Member Kline, thank you very much for outlining exactly the confusion that we are faced with regarding employee safety, particularly on our oil rigs. Now, following the Gulf of Mexico disaster, it is clearer than ever that providing strong protections to offshore oil and gas workers would be a positive step in encouraging workers to speak out about work safety and health issues at the worksite. Obviously, inspectors cannot be at all workplaces at all times, and so the system relies on willingness of employees to come forward, because these employees, these workers, know their worksite better than anyone else. Yet too many workers fear doing so because they fear repercussions. They don't fear imagined repercussions; they fear real ones. We heard this from the families of the 29 miners who were killed at the Upper Big Branch Mine in West Virginia and from the families of those miners who died at the Crandall Canyon, Darby, Sago, and Aracoma mines. We've heard this in the wake of other workplace disasters as well. And now we have discovered that before the BP disaster in the gulf which took the lives of 11 workers, workers did not come forward about safety hazards because they were afraid they would lose their jobs. Sadly, their fears were well-founded. Those brave souls who blow the whistle often do lose their jobs and suffer other indignities such as harassment, intimidation, and blacklisting. In this situation of the BP disaster, they lost their lives. In May of 2007, my Subcommittee on Workforce Protections held a hearing on the adequacy of whistleblower protections. The now famous whistleblower Jeffrey Wigand, who ``blew the whistle'' on Big Tobacco, testified at that hearing. He was not protected by any antiretaliation law when he lost his job. He was not protected when he was threatened, harassed, and intimidated for his actions. Like Mr. Wigand, offshore gas and oil workers have no whistleblower protections. This is absolutely unacceptable, and we know it. In crafting H.R. 5851, we ensure workers are actually encouraged to come forward to report unsafe conditions by providing a meaningful process to adjudicate complaints that also comports with due process, and by providing sufficient remedies to whistleblowers, including temporary reinstatement, backpay, and other damages. H.R. 5851's provisions are similar to the whistleblower provisions in the Protecting America's Workers Act, which brings the Occupational Safety and Health Act into the 21st century. H.R. 5851 also emulates other modern whistleblower statutes, such as the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act. I'm proud to be an original cosponsor of the Offshore Oil and Gas Worker Whistleblower Protection Act, and I urge my colleagues to vote to protect all vulnerable workers. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, on July 28, 2010, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to record my vote for rollcall No. 476. Had I been present I would have voted: rollcall No. 476: ``yes''--Providing for consideration of H.R. 5822, making appropriations for military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes and providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support wholeheartedly Mr. Kucinich's and Mr. Paul's resolution to remove U.S. Armed Forces from Pakistan. The War Powers Act clearly states that the President must seek congressional approval before committing U.S. troops and before committing funds. As recent media reports confirmed, our troops are in Pakistan without congressional authorization, and they, as well as we, ask, To what end? Mr. Speaker, we are running up record deficits with two wars which have cost the United States in blood and treasure. Together, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost the American taxpayers over $1 trillion and, worst of all, more than 5,600 men and women in uniform have given their lives. And what do we get for all of this, Mr. Speaker? Instead of winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi and Afghan people, we're fueling hatred and insurgency, and now we want to export that to Pakistan. I don't think so. Let's not do it. I urge my colleagues to demand that the administration comply with the War Powers Act and remove our troops from Pakistan.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I think we have seen this movie before. Last week, President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, before an audience of international leaders on whose support he depends, pledged to root out corruption, implement reforms and run a better government, but we heard the same promises at an earlier conference this January ;and we heard them again when President Karzai came to Washington for a state visit in May. There seems to be little accountability when he fails to keep his word, as he never comes away from any of these gatherings with more than a slap on the wrist, if that. If Mr. Karzai is serious about cracking down, why doesn't he start by reining in his own brother, a strongman who rules Kandahar with iron- fisted intimidation? What does President Karzai have to say about the fact that billions of dollars in cash have been flown out of Kabul Airport in the last few years? Lip service and vague promises are really not enough, Madam Speaker. What is sustaining the Taliban more than anything else is the Afghanistan Government's failure to have any competency or legitimacy. No one is more frustrated than the Afghan people, who voiced their displeasure with government corruption in a recent survey conducted by an Afghan watchdog group. Bribery shakedowns are increasingly seen as a way of life. The cost of securing basic services from the government depends on paying somebody off. Even when the government isn't dishonest, it is slow and ineffective. Embarrassingly, in the provinces where they have established a foothold, the Taliban runs a tighter ship than does the Afghan Government, doing a competent job of making the trains run on time. This cannot go on, Madam Speaker. Our continued support for a feckless regime is eroding our national credibility. The American people, who are fighting off a recession and who are badly in need of the money right here at home, resent sending that money to Afghanistan. They can't be expected to keep on doing this. They can't be expected to keep giving their bravest young people and their hard-earned tax dollars to prop up leaders who have no ability to govern responsibly. Yet, even as skepticism about the war in Afghanistan grows here in our country, our leaders could be going in the opposite direction. There is legitimate concern that they might be going wobbly on the commitment to start the military redeployment out of Afghanistan 1 year from now. At the conference in Kabul, Secretary of State Clinton said that the July 2011 date represented the start of a new phase, not the end of our involvement. She added that the United States has ``no intention of abandoning our long-term mission of achieving a stable, secure, peaceful Afghanistan.'' Well, Madam Speaker, if the Secretary means that we would achieve that mission with civilian resources--a Smart Security strategy which is focused on development projects, on humanitarian aid and on more support for anti-corruption efforts--then count me in, but if she means that our military commitment and occupation to Afghanistan will extend well beyond next summer, I think the American people will have something to say about that. In fact, they are saying it now. They are saying it loud and clear. We have sacrificed enough for a failed war. It is time to bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I imagine many of my colleagues have read The Washington Post report on ``Top Secret America,'' and I hope they are reacting as I am, with horror and outrage at the sprawling national security and intelligence bureaucracy that has grown like a weed in recent years. This series of articles should shock us into action, at the very least leading us to question the conventional wisdom about how best to keep America safe. According to the Post, the counterterrorism and homeland security apparatus has ballooned to some 1,271 government organizations working in roughly 10,000 locations around the country. There are now so many agencies analyzing so much information and issuing so many reports that the whole thing has become redundant, unmanageable, and ineffective. Actually, we can't measure its precise effectiveness because so much of it is shrouded in secrecy. Much of the information about these agencies is classified and therefore not subject to the scrutiny it so badly needs. If this system, which is so big that the Post refers to it as a fourth branch of government, were a domestic social program, my friends on the other side of the aisle would call it out-of-control spending. Yet somehow, when the antigovernment rhetoric starts flying, it is never the wasteful defense and intelligence programs that come in for the harshest criticism. I'd be curious to hear, for example, why we can afford this behemoth, but we can't afford to pass a comprehensive jobs package. The organizational chart for this system looks like an octopus family on steroids, Mr. Speaker, and there are so many tentacles that it makes the proper information sharing and dot connecting nearly impossible. I couldn't help but note the irony. If memory serves me, 9/11 exposed the inability of our intelligence agencies to coordinate and communicate properly with one another. So what have we done in response to 9/11? We've grown our intelligence infrastructure in a way that makes it even harder to coordinate and communicate. Of course, we would tolerate a little bit of bloat if the evidence were clear that the system were working; but according to the Post's analysis, both the Fort Hood shooting and the Christmas Day bomber could have been intercepted early on if this bureaucracy hadn't been so unwieldy, so inefficient and unresponsive. The intelligence was there, but it never got into the right hands or it was lost in an avalanche of other data. Mr. Speaker, when it comes to protecting America, we are thinking big instead of thinking smart. There has to be a better way. We can have the intelligence capabilities we need at a fraction of the current cost, and we can use much of the savings on initiatives that attack terrorism at its roots--in places where despair and hopelessness lead people to turn to terrorism in the first place. We need to dramatically increase our investment in everything from agriculture to education to democracy-building to conflict resolution in the trouble spots of the world. Maybe if we increased our global humanitarian outreach, if we empowered nations instead of invading and occupying them, then top secret America wouldn't even be necessary.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. I would like to thank Chairman Gordon and Chairman Baird, the chairman of the Energy Subcommittee, and Ranking Member Hall for leadership and for cooperation and for making a base bill even better. Madam Speaker, in 2007, the container ship Cosco Busan collided with the San Francisco Bay Bridge, spilling 58,000 gallons of oil into the San Francisco Bay and causing great harm, great harm to the surrounding environment, great harm to the economy of my district, and great harm to the surrounding Bay Area. Although this spill was minor compared to the current gulf coast catastrophe, the impact to the Bay Area was widespread. Thousands of birds, including 50 different species, were killed, coastal fisheries were impacted, and marine mammals died. All told, more than 200 miles of coastline was polluted by the Cosco Busan oil spill, costing more than $70 million in environmental cleanup costs. What occurred to me throughout the ordeal was the question and the confusion regarding who was in charge and what technologies were available to assess and clean up the mess. That's why I introduced H.R. 2693 last year, before the catastrophe of the Gulf of Mexico, to strengthen coordination of Federal research and development of science and technologies that will prevent, combat, and clean up spills. And that is why Chairman Baird held a hearing on the very issue. Madam Speaker, if we learned anything from the Cosco Busan spill, it was that we need to strengthen coordination and leadership of oil spill response, research and development. And everything that we learned from the BP Gulf of Mexico disaster magnifies my concerns. Madam Speaker, following the Exxon Valdez oil spill, Congress passed the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which created an interagency coordinating committee to coordinate research and development of oil spill prevention and response among 14 Federal agencies. Not one, not two, not three, not four--14 Federal agencies. It was confusing during the Cosco Busan spill, but that was nothing compared to the confusion of the gulf disaster. Chairman Gordon, I want to thank you. Chairman Baird, I want to thank you for helping to streamline the structure of the interagency coordinating committee in H.R. 2693. And Ranking Member Hall, I want to thank you for accepting the changes we've made and the improvements. I also want to thank the members of the Science and Technology Committee and the staff who worked so hard to improve this legislation and ensure that it reflects recent developments in the gulf. Madam Speaker, H.R. 2693 streamlines the interagency coordinating committee to include representatives from NOAA, the Coast Guard, EPA, and the Department of the Interior, while retaining the Coast Guard as the chair of the interagency committee. This ensures that the agencies with the most research expertise in oil spill prevention, detection, and recovery and mitigation are working together for common solutions in an effective and efficient way. Additionally, the interagency committee is required to collaborate with the other Federal agencies listed in the Oil Pollution Act. And my bill now includes the National Science Foundation to this list. My bill increases the authorized level of funding for Federal oil pollution research and development from $22 million to $48 million, all of which is drawn from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. This level of funding hasn't been changed since 1990. H.R. 2693 also authorizes $12 million in funding for a regional research program to provide peer-reviewed competitive grants to institutes of higher learning and research facilities to improve technologies used to prevent and respond to oil spills. Following the Cosco Busan oil leak, we heard time and again from people responding to the bill that the technology they were using was inadequate, and was, in fact, almost the same technology used to respond to Exxon Valdez decades earlier. During the Science Committee markup of H.R. 2693, as the chairman mentioned, nearly 20 bipartisan amendments were adopted that strengthened this bill. With estimates putting the total amount of oil spilled in the gulf at nearly 200 million barrels, it's essential that we have the best science and technology possible to deal with a disaster of this magnitude. As long as we extract, use, or transport oil in the United States, there will be some risks of oil spills along our shores. It is obvious that oil spills negatively affect our coastlines, our marine ecosystems, and our fishing and tourism industries. Madam Speaker, we must do our best to protect the public and the environment from future oil spills. This bill brings us closer to that goal through targeted and coordinated research, development, and demonstration that will help us better prevent, better combat, and better mitigate future oil spills, no matter the size. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, on June 23, 2010, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to record my vote for rollcall No. 384. Had I been present I would have voted: rollcall No. 384; ``yes,'' Supporting the goals and ideals of National Hurricane Preparedness Week.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, on June 22, 2010, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to record my vote for Rollcall Nos. 376-378. Had I been present I would have voted: Rollcall No. 376: ``yes''--Supporting National Men's Health Week. Rollcall No. 377: ``yes''--Recognizing the historical significance of Juneteenth Independence Day, and expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that history should be regarded as a means for understanding the past and more effectively facing the challenges of the future. Rollcall No. 378: ``yes''--Supporting the goals and ideals of High- Performance Building Week.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today along with my colleague, Representative Mike Thompson, to honor and pay tribute to Frank Kappeler, one of eight surviving members of ``Doolittle's Raiders'' who passed away Wednesday, June 23, 2010 in Santa Rosa, California at the age of 96. Lieutenant Colonel Kappeler was one of 79 U.S. Army Corps aviators who volunteered to fly the daring bombing mission over Japan for months after the surprise attack by the Japanese on Pearl Harbor. Sixteen B-25 bombers and the men aboard launched from an aircraft carrier in the Pacific on April 18, 1942 and headed for Japan, knowing that they did not have enough fuel to return and even if they could get back, the large bombers were not able to land on the American carriers. Lt. Col. Kappeler was the navigator on the No. 11 plane and was forced to bail out over China when the plane's engines stopped at 11,000 feet. Chinese partisans helped Lt. Col. Kappeler and his crew mates escape capture by Japanese forces. He eventually escaped from China and spent the rest of WWII in the European theater, where he flew 53 combat missions. He retired from the Air Force in 1966 as a Lieutenant Colonel. The Doolittle Raid was a significant episode in the war in the Pacific because it demonstrated to both the American and Japanese people that Japan was not invincible and that American forces could and would strike the Japanese homeland. All of the planes participating in the raid were lost and 11 crewmen were killed or captured. Lt. Col Kappeler is survived by his wife of 53 years, Betty Kappeler, his daughter, Francia Kappeler, and three grandchildren, all of Santa Rosa, California. Madam Speaker, Lt. Col. Frank Kappeler is a true American hero who served his county with great distinction. It is therefore appropriate that we honor him today and send our condolences to his family.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, after General Stanley McChrystal was relieved of his command last month and replaced by General David Petraeus, we read a lot of headlines that said things like this: ``Generals Change, But Afghan Doesn't.'' ``Afghan Policy Won't Change After Dismissal.'' But that is precisely, Madam Speaker, the problem. All the chatter about General McChrystal's indiscretion and firing obscured the critical point. The problem isn't with the personnel or the leadership, but with the strategy and the policy. The problem isn't with the generals, but with the war itself. There's a bit of a rearranging-of-the-deck-chairs-on-the-Titanic quality to all of this. No matter what the captains say and no matter who captains the ship, as long as we continue to prosecute this failed war, as long as we keep sending Americans to die on a mission that's doing nothing to defeat terrorists or stabilize Afghanistan, then we are headed straight for that iceberg. The more troops we deploy, the more violent Afghanistan becomes and the more Taliban grows its ranks. Unless General Petraeus is prepared to change that, then this change at the top doesn't amount to very much. If General Petraeus' appointment leads to any change at all, it may not be the kind of change we should be enthusiastic about. In his confirmation hearing, General Petraeus refused to take ownership of the July 2011 troop withdrawal deadline, stating very clearly that he did not recommend such a date to the President, nor did anyone else in uniform. And he once again equivocated about July 2011, calling it the beginning of a process, which sounds an awful lot like a diplomatic way to say he doesn't believe in it and will ask the President to extend it. He also added in his testimony, and I quote him, he said, ``The commitment to Afghanistan must be an enduring one.'' And on that point, Madam Speaker, I couldn't agree with the general more. But an enduring commitment doesn't have to be a military commitment. We need an enduring civilian commitment, a smart security approach that invests in Afghanistan infrastructure, bolsters Afghan education, fights Afghan poverty, invigorates Afghan democracy, and much more. But we can do it without combat troops occupying the country, without the military footprint that has earned us more enemies than friends. Madam Speaker, eight Americans were killed during a 24-hour period in Afghanistan early this week. We've had 35 fatalities already in July, putting it on track to be the deadliest month of the entire war. We are losing our people, we are losing our money, we are losing our credibility without advancing our goals. That has to end. It's time to bring our troops home.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, after thirty-three years of dedicated service, Alan Reuther is retiring from his position as legislative director with the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW. As legislative director, he has been responsible for supervising all aspects of the UAW's legislative program, including development of issues, presentation of testimony, lobbying Members of Congress, and grassroots organizing. During his tenure at the UAW, Alan championed significant legislative accomplishments, including: saving civil legal services for the poor, which were slated for elimination under the Gingrich ``Contract for America''; the enactment of minimum wage increases in 1996 and again in 2007; halting efforts by the Bush Administration and Congressional Republicans to privatize Social Security; the enactment of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, SCHIP, in 1997 and its expansion in 2009; the enactment of compromise Corporate Average Fuel Economy legislation in 2007 that included the Section 136 program to fund investment in U.S. production of advanced technology vehicles; fending off repeated attempts by the Bush Administration to erode the protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act; the enactment of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 and hate crimes prevention legislation; the enactment of federal extended unemployment benefits in economic recessions; and finally, the enactment of both the stimulus provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and health care reform. As chair of the Workforce Protections Subcommittee, I know first-hand the significance of Alan's accomplishments on behalf of the American worker. Just to use one recent example, my Subcommittee held the legislative hearing on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. This was the first piece of legislation that President Obama signed into law after he took office, and it is a significant step in the fight to achieve equal pay between men and women. In addition, tireless work in the passage of health care reform cannot be understated. Congratulations, Alan, and thank you for your contributions to the public good. You will be missed--that's for sure.

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Madam Speaker, on June 24, 2010, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to record my vote for Rollcall No. 394. Had I been present I would have voted: Rollcall No. 394: Yes--Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act.