Hon. Dennis Kucinich / Speech at the US Congress – 2006-12-09 08:59:55
Are Troops Dying for Oil Profits?
Hon. Dennis Kucinich / Speech from the floor of the US Congress
(Dec 7, 20060 — On October 25th, President Bush cited oil as a reason for our continued presence in Iraq. The Iraq study group is recommending Iraq law be changed to facilitate privatization of Iraq’s oil wealth.
The Iraq Study Group report says as much as 500,000 barrels per day—that is $11.3 billion per year—in Iraqi oil wealth is now being stolen, which is interesting, since the Ministry of Oil is the first place our troops were sent after the invasion of Iraq and we now have 140,000 troops there.
How can we expect the end of the Iraq war and national reconciliation in Iraq, while we advocate that Iraq’s oil wealth by handled by private oil companies?
It is ironic that this report comes at the exact time the Interior Department’s Inspector General says that oil companies are cheating the US out of billions of dollars while the Administration looks the other way.
Is it possible that Secretary Baker has a conflict of interest, which should have precluded him from co-chairing a study group whose final report promotes privatization of Iraq oil assets, given his ties to the oil industry?
Is it possible that our troops are dying for the profits of private oil companies?
A Quest for Integrity
Dennis J Kucinich
(December 7, 2006) — I am on a quest for integrity in Washington this week. The Democratic leadership plan to continue the war in Iraq by supporting yet another appropriations bill that is likely to go to the floor early next year granting an estimated $160 BILLION, the largest appropriation so far for the Iraq war. You can read my comments in an interview with Truthdig yesterday. [See interview below.]
There is $70 billion already in the pipeline that can be used to bring the troops home.
There is only one way to end the war in Iraq — by cutting off funds. In October this year, $70 billion was appropriated for FY 2007; the $160 billion supplement will take the budget for the war in 2007 to $230 billion. 2006 saw $117 billion spent on the war, 2007 will be almost double. This will expand war, increase the violence, send more troops to the region, and push our nation into even further indebtedness.
Already over 18% of our tax dollars goes to service the interest on our national debt and 28% to the annual military budget (not including wars in Afghanistan and Iraq), whilst only 2% goes on housing and 0.3% on job training. (See tax chart.)
Last week I published a series of articles on the web which analyze the responsibilities of congress, the Campbell v Clinton case, of which I was part, which rules that appropriating funds is implied consent for the war (i.e., voting for appropriations = voting in favor of the war), looks at the voting record in the House and Senate, and puts forth a plan for US withdrawal and UN handover. Click here to read the articles.
Yesterday the Iraq Study Group issued their Iraq report, which I read in full last night and spoke about on the floor of the house today.
The report cites how 500,000 barrels of oil are being stolen per day in Iraq. That is $11.3 billion worth per year. This is interesting, since the Ministry of Oil was the first place our troops were sent after the invasion of Iraq and we now have 140,000 troops there.
How can we expect the end of the Iraq war and national reconciliation in Iraq, while we advocate that Iraq’s oil wealth by handled by private oil companies?
It is ironic that this report comes at the exact time the Interior Department’s Inspector General says that oil companies are cheating the US out of billions of dollars, while the Administration looks the other way.
Is it possible that Secretary Baker has a conflict of interest, which should have precluded him from co-chairing a study group whose final report promotes privatization of Iraq oil assets, given his ties to the oil industry? Is it possible that our troops are dying for the profits of private oil companies?
What kind of logic is it that says we need to appropriate $230 billion in a single financial year? The largest appropriation for the war in Iraq? The money is there to bring the troops home now.
A defective logic has invaded Capitol Hill. Democrats won the election because the American people want to end the war in Iraq, yet members feel they can say they oppose the war in Iraq while at the same time support an appropriation of $160 billion. They say the appropriation is to “support the troops,” yet will result in keeping them in Iraq for another two years.
We must work together to transform this destructive thinking.
I need your help.
Please contact your member of congress and the Democratic leadership, urging them to vote NO on the appropriations bill next year. An appropriation of $160 billion is enough to keep us in Iraq for another two years. In Government Oversight Committee hearings, I have personally questioned military officials, who state clearly that this war cannot be won militarily.
Would you buy a used war from this administration?
There is $70 billion already in the pipeline that can be used to bring the troops home and implement a real plan for stability in the region.
Dennis Kucinich’s Showdown
With the Democratic Leadership
Joshua Scheer / TruthDig.com
Transcript of an interview with Truthdig research editor Joshua Scheer and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio). Kucinich criticizes the leadership of his own party for announcing Tuesday that it would support a massive increase in spending for the Iraq war.
Truthdig: What was the upshot of [Tuesday’s] Democratic caucus meeting?
Kucinich: At this point the Democratic leadership—the speaker and the majority leader and Rahm Emanuel—are all recommending that the Democrats support the appropriation that is going to be brought forward in the spring, for the purposes of [continuing to fund] the war in Iraq.
Truthdig: Why do you think that is?
Kucinich: The leadership feels that they can bring about greater transparency [in spending], that they can bring special committees to look at what’s gone wrong with the war, and that there’s going to be improved oversight.
Truthdig: Were there dissenting opinions … ? Do you think this will pass?
Kucinich: I think this is going to be a serious test of the Democratic Party. We were put in power because people expected a new direction in Iraq. It goes without saying that they expect greater transparency and oversight, but they also expect us to do something to bring the troops home. Now, if Congress goes ahead under Democratic leadership and votes to approve what some are now estimating as an additional $160 billion for the war in Iraq, bringing the total for the fiscal year to $230 billion, the Democratic Congress will have bought George Bush’s war. Now, who would buy a used war from this administration?
Truthdig: Weren’t the Democrats elected because of the war in Iraq?
Kucinich: The Democrats came to power because of a strong desire on the part of the voters to get out of Iraq. That’s why people voted Democratic. So now, with the Democratic leadership taking a position saying they’re going to approve the supplemental budget in the spring, this could be seen by many as a breach of faith.
Truthdig: What can people do?
Kucinich: People first of all need to know about this. People need to know that there is an attempt by our leadership to support the supplemental, and what the consequences are…. The most difficult part of the challenge is to get members of Congress to understand that they themselves voted for a bill which went into effect on Oct. 1 that appropriated $70 billion, which could be used to bring the troops home. Unfortunately, our leadership is saying they’re supporting the supplemental as a way of supporting the troops. So if we continue to ignore the money that’s there right now to bring the troops home, we’re losing an opportunity to bring the troops home now. People are now saying that they oppose the war, but they’re continuing to fund it in the name of supporting the troops.
They say they’re not going to abandon the troops in the field. We’re professing a strange love for these troops by keeping them there, because the money’s there to bring them home. So this is going to shape up as a major discussion across this country. People are going to want to know why Democrats would not bring the troops home now, when the money is there now.
Truthdig: For me this is really disheartening, because I feel like I have been lied to, and the American people have been lied to, because the [Democratic] Party was so against extra funds for the war. It’s almost like the party has done a bait-and-switch.
Kucinich: I think there’s going to be a concern around the country that this does represent a bait-and-switch. I’m hopeful that this position will be reconsidered and that the Democrats will not vote to keep the war going. But at this point, if the Democrats go forward and support a supplemental which by some accounts is now rising to $160 billion, they’ll be providing enough money to keep the war going through the end of George Bush’s term.
Now, this is a serious moment. I believe the public is largely unaware that this is happening, and I think a lot of people are going to be very surprised to learn that less than one month since this great realignment, that Democrats leaders, who came to power because of widespread opposition to the war in Iraq, are now saying that they will vote to continue funding the war.
Truthdig: Is there any hope to end the war now, and not go for this extra $160 billion in supplemental funds? Was there anything that happened in the room that gave you hope?
Kucinich: There’s a type of thinking which equates staying in Iraq as demonstrating strength. There’s a type of thinking which equates support for the supplemental with supporting the troops. This type of thinking is inherently flawed. It is circular in its nature. It will keep us in war. It will damn our troops to the horror of getting shot at from all sides.
This is the time for Democrats to be uniting to exit from Iraq. And the exit door is already well lit with a sign that says $70 billion. If we support the troops, why in the world would we not use the money to bring them home, instead of spending more money to keep them in? Why would we, when we have money to bring them home right now, appropriate another $160 billion which would keep them there, possibly through the end of George Bush’s term?
The Iraq Study Group recognized the perilous nature of this war, and there is no indication that the administration is going to bring the troops home. Every statement that the president has made has been very clear with respect to his intent to continue the U.S. presence. He has basically said, “No timetables,” and he hasn’t set any call for troop reductions. Now, we have men and women who are dying there, and for what? That’s why it’s more than disappointing that the Democratic Party is not standing up.
Truthdig: So, again, what can people do?
Kucinich: I think it’s important for people to contact their member of Congress, and to let the member of Congress know how they feel. The people are also going to have to work their e-mail lists to pass the word, because not a lot of people know about this. It’s going to be important for people to organize. It’s going to take a mass movement to change this situation. It’s going to take a mass movement to really create such an uproar that approval of the supplemental will be stopped.
Truthdig: Thank you.
*Truthdig interviewer Joshua Scheer worked as an entry-level staffer on Kucinich’s state Senate campaign and was later a summer associate in his congressional office. In this weekly interview series, Rep. Kucinich gives his take on the goings-on in Congress in the wake of the Democrats’ victory.
