October 09, 2007
“Thank you for being here with us this morning. I would also like to thank my colleagues for joining me today, and for their leadership in the effort to end the occupation of Iraq and to bring our troops home.
“Five years ago today, over my strong objections and the objections of my colleagues, Congress voted to authorize the use of force against Iraq.
“On this sad anniversary, I have to wonder what would have happened if the House had approved the amendment that I offered that would have allowed the UN inspectors to finish their jobs. If it had passed, the inspectors would have made clear what we believed then and the world now knows, namely that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
“Five years later, the President's failed policy in Iraq has not only claimed the lives of more than 3,800 brave servicemen and women, with more than 27,000 wounded, as well as the lives of countless Iraqis civilians, it has not only cost us more than $400 billion, with the President poised to ask for $200 billion more and no end in sight - the invasion and occupation of Iraq has undermined our nation's security and the security of the world.
“We are here today to say not only that Congress has the power to end the President's failed policy in Iraq, but that the American people support us doing so.
“The President wants to pretend that Congress' only choice is to provide the funds he has requested unconditionally or 'cut off funding for our troops.' That's just not true. We can use our constitutionally mandated appropriations power to end his failed policy, to protect our troops and to bring them home. We have the power to fully fund redeployment, and that is what we must do.
“During the debate on the supplemental, when I first proposed the idea of fully funding redeployment, we found that some people were unclear about the concept.
“The fact is that while there has been a lot of public opinion polling done about Iraq, no one has thus far asked people what they think Congress should do about additional funding, and specifically, how they feel about Congress using our appropriations power to end the President's failed policy by proving the funding to protect our troops and bring them home. That is why we worked with a well-known pollster to ask people that question, and I would like to share the results with you today.
“Our poll, which reached 1,000 people nationwide, asked them the following - "President Bush wants Congress to approve a $200 billion dollar request to continue funding the Iraq war and keep the troops in Iraq. Should Congress: vote against the $200 billion funding request; vote for the $200 billion funding request without conditions; or vote for the $200 billion funding request, but specify that it can be used ONLY to protect US troops and contractors and bring them home, rather than to continue the war."
“We found that fully 70 percent of those surveyed rejected giving the President further funding for Iraq without conditions, and people favored requiring funds be spent on redeployment over providing the administration funds without conditions by a two to one margin.
“Twenty four percent of respondents supported voting against the funding, 22 percent supported unconditional funding and 46 percent supported providing funding only for redeployment. Eight percent responded "don't know". Results were similar among registered voters.
“So with the support of the American people, we are going to continue to build support in Congress for fully funding redeployment. In July I joined with my colleagues Representatives Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters in sending a letter to President, signed by 67 other members of Congress, saying that the only funding we would vote for is funding to protect our troops and bring them home. We recently reopened that letter and the number of signers is up to 87, and we hope to add more before we send the letter next week.
“The truth is that the President's stay-the-course policy provides an exit strategy for him at the expense of our troops. It allows him to run out the clock on his failed policy and slip out the back door to leave the American people holding the bag.
“How many of our troops should die so the President can save face? How big a mortgage should we take out on our children's future so the President can avoid admitting he was wrong?
“The President is not going to take responsibility for his failed policy, so Congress must, and the best way for us to do that is to fully fund the safe, timely, responsible redeployment of our troops and contractors from Iraq.”
Barbara Lee: New Poll Shows Strong Opposition to Unconditional Iraq Funding, Support for Funding Redeployment
(Washington, DC) – On the fifth Anniversary of the House vote to authorize the use of force against Iraq, Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-Oakland) called on colleagues in Congress to support efforts to use the appropriations process to end the Bush administration’s policy in Iraq, citing new national polling data that shows strong opposition to providing further Iraq funding without conditions, and broad support for providing funds only for the purpose of redeploying troops. She was joined at a press conference on Capitol Hill by a number of the 87 members of Congress who have signed a letter, being circulated by Lee and Representatives Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and Maxine Waters (D-CA), saying that the only Iraq funding they will vote for would be for redeployment. The following is her statement as delivered:“Thank you for being here with us this morning. I would also like to thank my colleagues for joining me today, and for their leadership in the effort to end the occupation of Iraq and to bring our troops home.
“Five years ago today, over my strong objections and the objections of my colleagues, Congress voted to authorize the use of force against Iraq.
“On this sad anniversary, I have to wonder what would have happened if the House had approved the amendment that I offered that would have allowed the UN inspectors to finish their jobs. If it had passed, the inspectors would have made clear what we believed then and the world now knows, namely that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
“Five years later, the President's failed policy in Iraq has not only claimed the lives of more than 3,800 brave servicemen and women, with more than 27,000 wounded, as well as the lives of countless Iraqis civilians, it has not only cost us more than $400 billion, with the President poised to ask for $200 billion more and no end in sight - the invasion and occupation of Iraq has undermined our nation's security and the security of the world.
“We are here today to say not only that Congress has the power to end the President's failed policy in Iraq, but that the American people support us doing so.
“The President wants to pretend that Congress' only choice is to provide the funds he has requested unconditionally or 'cut off funding for our troops.' That's just not true. We can use our constitutionally mandated appropriations power to end his failed policy, to protect our troops and to bring them home. We have the power to fully fund redeployment, and that is what we must do.
“During the debate on the supplemental, when I first proposed the idea of fully funding redeployment, we found that some people were unclear about the concept.
“The fact is that while there has been a lot of public opinion polling done about Iraq, no one has thus far asked people what they think Congress should do about additional funding, and specifically, how they feel about Congress using our appropriations power to end the President's failed policy by proving the funding to protect our troops and bring them home. That is why we worked with a well-known pollster to ask people that question, and I would like to share the results with you today.
“Our poll, which reached 1,000 people nationwide, asked them the following - "President Bush wants Congress to approve a $200 billion dollar request to continue funding the Iraq war and keep the troops in Iraq. Should Congress: vote against the $200 billion funding request; vote for the $200 billion funding request without conditions; or vote for the $200 billion funding request, but specify that it can be used ONLY to protect US troops and contractors and bring them home, rather than to continue the war."
“We found that fully 70 percent of those surveyed rejected giving the President further funding for Iraq without conditions, and people favored requiring funds be spent on redeployment over providing the administration funds without conditions by a two to one margin.
“Twenty four percent of respondents supported voting against the funding, 22 percent supported unconditional funding and 46 percent supported providing funding only for redeployment. Eight percent responded "don't know". Results were similar among registered voters.
“So with the support of the American people, we are going to continue to build support in Congress for fully funding redeployment. In July I joined with my colleagues Representatives Lynn Woolsey and Maxine Waters in sending a letter to President, signed by 67 other members of Congress, saying that the only funding we would vote for is funding to protect our troops and bring them home. We recently reopened that letter and the number of signers is up to 87, and we hope to add more before we send the letter next week.
“The truth is that the President's stay-the-course policy provides an exit strategy for him at the expense of our troops. It allows him to run out the clock on his failed policy and slip out the back door to leave the American people holding the bag.
“How many of our troops should die so the President can save face? How big a mortgage should we take out on our children's future so the President can avoid admitting he was wrong?
“The President is not going to take responsibility for his failed policy, so Congress must, and the best way for us to do that is to fully fund the safe, timely, responsible redeployment of our troops and contractors from Iraq.”
------