Mr. Speaker, today Congress again considers the important issue of providing additional funding for military and reconstruction activities in Iraq and Afghanistan. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I appreciate the valiant service of our men and women in uniform, and we must not hesitate to provide them with the appropriate resources to continue their success in the global war on terrorism. However, I have serious concerns with this measure - not because I believe the U.S. should not contribute to rebuilding Afghanistan and Iraq, but because so much of the burden is falling upon American taxpayers. I am frustrated that we are paying for this request through increased deficit spending - thereby shifting the cost to future generations - without considering the options of international loans through the World Bank, as Congressman Obey has recommended, or other revenue sources that would spread the burden to those who can most afford it. Nonetheless, I believe that the United States ultimately has a responsibility to follow through on our international commitments.

While much discussion about the supplemental will focus on the reconstruction request, we must not forget that the majority of its funding goes toward ensuring the safety and success of our troops. For example, the bill will increase the number of protective body suits, flak jackets and armored vehicles available to our military’s men and women serving in hostile areas. Just last week, I visited Walter Reed Army Medical Center and spoke with soldiers whose injuries might have been prevented if they had been driving the armored vehicles included in this bill. Additionally, the measure recognizes that the difficult terrain and often inhospitable climate of Iraq have necessitated frequent maintenance of military equipment, and therefore provides funding for parts replacement and much-needed upgrades.

A far more controversial aspect of the bill is the $18.6 billion for reconstruction activities in Iraq and $1.2 billion for Afghanistan. I was concerned with some of the items in the President’s original request - including the establishment of postal codes and the purchase of a fleet of pricey garbage trucks - and am pleased that the Appropriations Committee deemed them unworthy of emergency funding. The remaining items, such as utility infrastructure projects, health care improvements and security upgrades, are important building blocks that will help improve the safety of the Iraqi people while allowing them to develop self-sufficiency and independence. While some regions in Iraq are still hostile to U.S. presence, we must build on the progress that we have made in other areas of the nation. Insufficient investment now in Iraq could lead to the spread of religious extremism, an increase in illegal arms trading, and an explosion in anti-American sentiment. To fall short in our reconstruction efforts could have a devastating effect on the stability of the region, causing it to descend into chaos and become a breeding ground for terrorists.

However, I am disappointed that the reconstruction portion of the request was not considered separately from the military component so that Congress could have provided immediate assistance to our troops while having greater opportunity for deliberation and consideration of the longer-term reconstruction proposals and the larger issue of U.S. involvement in Iraq.

Unfortunately, the military improvements and reconstruction efforts come at a high cost, and no one in this chamber should have any question about the impact of this measure on our nation’s financial situation. To an already historic deficit projected at $480 billion in fiscal year 2004, we are adding $87 billion. This combination translates into larger interest payments on the national debt and less funding for important domestic priorities such as health care, education, and homeland security. My constituents are fully aware of the impact on our budget; I recently met with a man who has been unemployed for two years who questioned why we are not focusing our spending efforts on job training and other programs to address the nation’s unemployment problem. I believe that the costs of this package fall unfairly on American taxpayers, and we must rectify this problem. Consequently, I sent a letter to President Bush asking that he aggressively pursue international cooperation to help defray the costs of reconstruction. Absent a major influx of foreign aid, I requested that he consider options that would require small sacrifices from those Americans who can most afford them. One possibility would be to reduce a portion of the recent tax cut for the top income tax bracket to generate enough revenue to cover the $87 billion request. This reduction would slightly impact fewer than one million taxpayers, while maintaining the tax cuts for the middle class. Our men and women in uniform have served heroically to safeguard our nation’s security, and we must now endure other sacrifices to keep from endangering the economic security of future generations.

What frustrates me most about the current situation is that it was not unforeseen. Many of my colleagues and I cautioned the Bush Administration about the consequences of pursuing military intervention in Iraq without a broad coalition of support. Almost exactly a year ago, I came to the floor to speak on the resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq. At that time, I said that I could not vote for it because it lacked a clear mandate that the President seek U.N. Security Council support for military operations in Iraq. I specifically noted that an international coalition would broaden regional support for military intervention and would be essential in promoting a new government in Iraq and undertaking reconstruction efforts. Unfortunately, those words were not heeded, and the onus of reconstruction now falls heavily on our nation.

The bill before us is a flawed bill, not because of the provisions it contains or the programs that it funds, but because the circumstances that brought us to its consideration could have been different. However, we must not judge this bill based on its history, but on what it can do to shape the future. As Shakespeare wrote, "What’s past is prologue," and we cannot allow finger-pointing to obscure the task at hand. Our nation successfully toppled two oppressive regimes and freed the Afghan and Iraqi people from cruelty, abuse and torture. We bear responsibility in assisting their nations as they transform themselves into successful democratic entities. In so doing, we can also prevent the dire conditions of poverty and political and religious extremism that have led to terrorism and tyrannical regimes throughout the region and the world.

While I will support this measure because our nation must complete what we have started, my vote is by no means an endorsement of the Administration’s policies in Iraq, which are severely deficient in accountability, clarity and vision. I know that many of my colleagues share my reservations, and I look forward to the upcoming amendment process as an opportunity to address some of these concerns. I urge the Administration to pay close attention to our debate and recognize that a serious shift in strategy and attitude is needed immediately if we are to avoid having this same discussion again in the near future.