Transcript of Today's Pelosi, Obey, Skelton and Murtha Press Conference

Washington, D.C. - Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Congressman David Obey, Congressman Ike Skelton and Congressman John Murtha held a news conference this morning in the Capitol to discuss the military funding bill, the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health and Iraq Accountability Act. Below is a transcript of their remarks:

On Need for Iraqis to Meet Benchmarks

Ms. Pelosi If those benchmarks are not met, or even if they are at some point -our bill calls for the redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq so that we can focus more fully on the real war on terror, which is in Afghanistan. This bill takes giant steps toward putting the resources into that war, again, a war that is unfinished and nearly forgotten by the Administration.

On Additional Funding for Health Care for Soldiers and Veterans

Mr. Obey. It will attack the neglect of our returning troops and veterans who are badly in need of health care. That neglect has been symbolized by what we have heard about that has been happening in Walter Reed over the past few days...It will provide some $3.5 billion in additional funding above the President's request to deal with the problems faced by returning servicemen and returning veterans by way of health care.

Thursday, March 8, 2007

10:20 a.m.

Ms. Pelosi Our national security leaders are here to talk to us about the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health and Iraq Accountability Act. This is the product of the work among the Members of the House Democratic Caucus who have concerns about our security and the readiness of our troops, who are appalled by the conditions facing our veterans when they return home, and who want to have some benchmarks of accountability for the Iraqi Government to lead to the redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq safely, responsibly and soon.

The main principles of the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health, and Iraq Accountability Act are on this. First of all, it addresses the needs, honors the promises made to our veterans by expanding funding for veterans health care and hospitals.

It asks the Bush Administration and the Defense Department to live up to their own standards by meeting military standards for troop readiness. They should not be sending our troops into battle without the proper training, without the proper equipment, and in the proper time frame.

It holds the Iraqi government accountable to meet President Bush's own benchmarks for reform, political, economic and diplomatic, in the region. It calls for the strategic redeployment of U.S. combat troops by the end of 2007 or sometime in 2008.

Only then can we refocus our military efforts on Afghanistan to the extent that we must. We must direct our attention there now. We must do it more intensely after we have redeployed the troops. So refocusing our military efforts on Afghanistan and fighting the war on terrorism where it began, where it is a challenge, and where, because we left, it is an unfinished and nearly forgotten war, the terrorists have had an opportunity to reemerge.

To talk to us more about what is in the bill, I am pleased to yield the floor to the distinguished Chair of the Appropriations Committee, who has worked very brilliantly and very hard on all of this to bring together the thinking of the members of our caucus to reflect the call for change of the American people, Congressman David Obey of Wisconsin.

Mr. Obey Thank you, Madam Speaker.

The proposal that we're talking about today essentially will redirect more of our resources to the war against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, fighting the right war in the right place against the people who attacked us and who are giving al Qaeda sanctuary.

Secondly, it will attack the neglect of our returning troops and veterans who are badly in need of health care. That neglect has been symbolized by what we have heard about that has been happening in Walter Reed over the past few days.

And thirdly, it will set a timeline for bringing the United States participation in Iraq's civil war to an orderly and responsible close.

In addition, it will do a number of other things, or I should say in detail it will do a number of other things. It will provide some $3.5 billion in additional funding above the President's request to deal with the problems faced by returning servicemen and returning veterans by way of health care.

It will, in addition, provide $1.4 billion to fully cover the shortfall in funds for base housing allowances. It will provide $3.1 billion to fully fund the BRAC, Base Realignment and Closure program that we promised we would provide when we passed the continuing resolution several weeks ago. And, as the Speaker has indicated, it will pressure Iraqi leaders to make the compromises necessary to end the chaos that has resulted from their lack of performance to date. This proposal establishes a meaningful time line for ending U.S. participation in the Iraqi war.

We will also provide $2.5 billion in additional emergency funds for port security, border security, and other homeland security areas. And we meet our need to deal with the Gulf Coast carnage that happened in the wake of Katrina. We will be trying to accelerate the construction of levees down there to a standard that will protect the area, and we will be doing some other things as well to meet our domestic responsibilities.

The President has also asked for $3.5 billion in additional domestic funding. We add some additional items such as the funding necessary to see to it that children are not tossed off the health care rolls in 14 states around the country. We will be supplying other details about the package later today.

Ms. Pelosi Though the supplemental is an appropriations bill, it is about our national security, and the Armed Services Committee weighed in considerably on the bill. The value of their experience and judgment is important to us as we go forward in Afghanistan and in Iraq, and I am pleased that the Chairman of the committee, Mr. Ike Skelton, is with us this morning.

Mr. Skelton My chief concern has been addressed in this bill. My chief concern is that of our current readiness of our troops and future readiness of our military. This is no small thing.

I have been blessed to be in Congress for 30 years. During that time, there have been 12 military contingencies involving our forces. Some were small; some were major. I hope nothing happens in the future. Deterrent also works. But if you don't have troops that are ready to face the current situation like Afghanistan or what may be around the corner which we don't know, we may very well be at risk as a country.

Readiness is the hub of this entire effort, and I applaud it for that. In addition thereto, we do several other things: establish standards, hold the Malaki government to what they committed to. You will recall the so called surge or troop increase was also a coming back to commitments made by Prime Minister Malaki and holding them accountable for that.

What the Speaker says is absolutely correct: Afghanistan is the correct war. That's the one that will require readiness today, tomorrow, and the days and months ahead. So I fully endorse this, and I certainly hope it will pass overwhelmingly.

Ms. Pelosi Thank you, Mr. Skelton. The Chair of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee is well known to you, Mr. Jack Murtha of Pennsylvania. Again, a large part of the supplemental will be in his subcommittee, and he will elaborate further on what Mr. Obey has presented.

Mr. Murtha When I spoke out a year and a half ago, I spoke about two things: redeployment, and I also talked about the concern about Strategic Reserve, which Ike Skelton just talked about; the fact that when this war started, almost every Reserve unit and all our Active Duty Strategic Reserves were at the highest level of readiness. Now they're at the lowest state of readiness. We cannot deploy as quickly as we would like to deter or to enforce the things overseas because of the lack of readiness. So we have tried to address that. The President asked for $95 billion. We put $99.5 billion in, $4 billion more than the President requested.

We put $1.4 billion to cover the full cost of housing allowances; $2.3 billion to cover the cost of fielding the additional 36,000 troops, 30,000 troops not in the base bill, but they asked for 30,000, then 6,000 more. This is fully funded in the supplemental. Nine thousand for the Marine Corps, that will also be funded. Years ago, all of us realized that we couldn't live up to the deployment schedule if we didn't have more troops. Operation and maintenance we put $2.2 billion over the President's request.

In addition, we fully funded the request for military operations. The committee proposal had $2.5 billion to address training and equipment shortfalls, forces not deployed to theaters of operation. In other words, we set up a reserve readiness fund to fund those troops.

We fully fund Afghanistan. When we were over in Afghanistan with the Speaker about a month ago, they asked for an amount of equipment. I had the Army come over and justify it, and we agreed that they need $5.9 billion to continue their training and operations in Afghanistan.

When I was in Iraq, I said to the Prime Minister, you are not making any progress. You don't make progress, I am sure not going to put money in our budget to equip your people. You are not putting in any money yourself. After we left there and the Speaker reinforced what I said, they put $7.3 billion in equipping their troops, so we put the $3.8 billion that the President requested for that money. We put a little pressure on them, and they stepped up to the plate. That is what we have been asking. They have to step up to the plate themselves.

The new vehicles, called the MRAP, or the Mine Resistant Ambush Protection vehicle, we put $1.4 billion. This is a vehicle that has a V shape, and it resists IEDs. We put $313 million more into that; $2.1 billion actually is made available for that particular program.

Now, let me talk about health care. We had a hearing yesterday. We have responsibility for health care. Our committee appropriates the money for health care and has the responsibility. Yesterday, we heard the Republicans talk about the dismal state not only of the health care in Building 18, but the health care in the Walter Reed itself. They had graphic illustrations of how bad it was for a long time inside Walter Reed, and we talked about what needs to be done in order to take care of that.

I kept hearing we had a lot of brain damage, a lot of PTSD. What did we do? We put $450 million in for brain injury and counseling and $450 million for traumatic brain injury.

I talked to Bob Woodruff the other day. I asked him to come in and talk about his interest. When I saw him at Bethesda early on, I never thought he would live. I thought he would die from the effects of his wounds. I saw his brother, and he said he is getting by day to day. He has had a remarkable recovery.

Our troops should have that same opportunity, and that is what we are trying to do in this legislation: make sure these troops are taken care of not only in the battle and that, but also when they come home. $62 million for the amputee care, and $12 million for the caregivers. I asked every time, how are the caregivers doing? One guy said, "I get drunk every night." I don't believe that, but the point is it gets to me when I go to the hospital. These caregivers are under tremendous strain.

We put $12 million; we are recommending $12 million for caregiver costs. I visited the burn center in Texas, and the burns are about as bad an injury as you can have. And so we thought we needed to add some money to make sure they had the care that they need. We put $259 million for counter-drug activities. We put "no permanent bases." We put "no torture" in the bill.

I didn't have time to have hearings on Guantanamo, and I intend to do that before the base bill comes out, and hopefully we will have a plan to close down Guantanamo then.

When I was in Iraq with the Speaker, the contractors were falling all over themselves. I asked the GAO, how many contractors do you have? And I asked the Under Secretary of Defense, and he said, "I will let you know tomorrow." We have never gotten an answer back. The GAO and the inspector general in Iraq said, help us get a handle on contractors. So we took 5 percent of their money out, $800 million. We fenced 10 percent of the money. We want answers. How much is it costing us, how many we have, and how the contracts are being given to these various organizations?

So this is a bill that protects the troops. This is a bill that helps with readiness. We make sure in this bill we say: "Your troops have to be trained; they have to have the equipment they need before you go over. You can't extend them past 13 months, and you can't send them back before they have a year at home." This is all about readiness and protecting the troops and the families, the small percentage of people in this country who are bearing the sacrifice and going back to war over and over again.

Ms. Pelosi Again, as you can see, the level of expertise, the standing, the authority that our leaders on this issue have, it is something that serves the American people well in terms of their security, and certainly serves our troops and our veterans well in terms of their needs.

Chairman Obey, Chairman Skelton, and Chairman Murtha, I thank them for their leadership and the excellent work they did in putting this together.

Again, we are talking about supporting the troops with the funding they need, honoring our promises to our veterans, holding the Defense Department to the standard that they have about readiness before we send our troops in, holding the Iraqi Government accountable for the benchmarks established by President Bush. If those benchmarks are not met, or even if they are at some point, our bill calls for the redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq so that we can focus more fully on the real war on terror, which is in Afghanistan. This bill takes giant steps toward putting the resources into that war, again, a war that is unfinished and nearly forgotten by the Administration.

QHow long will the President have before he has to certify or not certify that the Iraqi Government has met the benchmarks?

Ms. Pelosi You are talking about the benchmarks. I thought you were talking about the Department of Defense. The formula. David, do you want to speak to that?

Mr. Obey We have a certification requirement that the President has to meet, and if he cannot meet it, then the redeployment of troops must begin at that point and must be completed within six months.

If everything goes as well as possible, and the President is able to certify that the Iraqis have met not only the military requirements, benchmarks that the Administration is talking about and Mr. Malaki has been talking about, and if they do meet the political benchmarks that are required by actually having in law a new oil revenue sharing law, for instance, amended the Constitution so that you have a better relationship between the Sunnis and Shi'ia and Kurds, if they meet those political benchmarks, then even in that case our troops must be out of a combat role by August of 2008.

Ms. Pelosi If they meet all the benchmarks.

Q And if they don't? When is the deadline for the President's certification?

Mr. Obey July.

Ms. Pelosi July.

QMadam Speaker, will there be a Presidential waiver included in this, in your language? And if not, then how do you plan to attract conservatives that do not want to leave the impression that by voting for this supplemental, they will be cutting off funding for troops?

Ms. Pelosi There is a Presidential waiver on the criteria, the first part of the bill, which includes the troops. Mr. Murtha, did you want to speak to that? The three areas that relate to readiness, there is a waiver there.

Mr. Murtha Actually, we are talking about certification. The President has to certify that the troops have been trained, and we think there are two units that won't be going to the National Training Center, and we think that is unacceptable. As a matter of fact, I understand the spokesman for the President said they can be trained in the desert, meaning in Iraq. That is unacceptable. This is the most important part of their training.

The second is we don't extend them past 165 days, and the other is we don't send them until they have at least a year home. They need that time to rehabilitate and retrain. If you send them in prematurely, that is unacceptable. The President needs to certify that they have that.

Ms. Pelosi And then he can have a waiver on those criteria that the Chairman mentioned: readiness in terms of their training, as well as time at home, and not to exceed a certain time in combat.

On the thresholds that Mr. Skelton was very instrumental both in the discussions in Iraq and since we have come home, the benchmarks that we have in here for the Iraqi Government to meet. These are President Bush's benchmarks. So we are saying unless there is progress made, progress made in meeting these benchmarks which Mr. Obey has spelled out: economic, political, etc., then by July of 2007, if progress is not demonstrated, if the President cannot certify the progress is made, we begin the redeployment of our troops out of the combat role in Iraq.

If by October, say, some progress is made in July. If by October, progress has not been complete, we begin the redeployment of our troops out of Iraq. And then the following year, if all the benchmarks are met, our troops are out no later than August 2008.

Q I am confused. I know you have been going back and forth. Is October still the crucial date? In other words, if they have not achieved the benchmarks by October, you begin the 180 days? Or does it begin in July?

Ms. Pelosi If they haven't made any progress by July, we begin the 180 days.

QIn July?

Ms. Pelosi If the President cannot demonstrate progress by July, we begin the 180 days.

And then if the President demonstrates that some progress has been made, but the progress is not sufficient by October, say some progress has been made, nothing happens, by October if the President cannot certify that these goals have been made, then the 180 days begin then.

The days that are fraught with meaning are July 1st, 2007, and then the next date is October 1st, 2007. And then the next date is March the end of March 2008.

Q But you are saying that if the President. I am confused about what is happening.

Ms. Pelosi Let's try again. If the President cannot demonstrate that the progress has been made in reaching the benchmarks which he, President Bush, has established by July 1st of 2007, we begin the 180-day period of redeployment begins, to be finished in 180 days.

Q What happens between July 1st and October 1st?

Ms. Pelosi If the President shows that progress is being made on July 1st, say he can certify that.

Q All he has to do is say progress is being made?

Ms. Pelosi He has to certify and demonstrate that it has been. If he cannot, if he does that, that takes us to October 1st, where we want to see the completion of those benchmarks. If that is not achieved, the 180 days begins. No matter what, by March 2008, the redeployment begins.

Mr. Obey The first certification has to attest to the progress being made. By October you actually have to have full performance.

Q Speaker Pelosi, as you know, the House Out of Iraq Caucus wants the troops out by the end of 2007. Do you have the votes to get this passed if you have 70 or so odd Members who say this doesn't go far enough, quick enough?

Ms. Pelosi We're a caucus, and we will come together and find our common ground, and I believe in the end we will be unified on it. Many members of the Out of Iraq Caucus have committed to this. They understand the wisdom of it. They see there are dates certain for the first time in the Congress for the redeployment of our troops out of Iraq.

QThe caucus said that they were pleased not with this bill, but you had indicated that there would be additional language that you were going to add. Can you talk about that or expand on that?

Ms. Pelosi Well, this is what we are presenting. Now, they may want some clarification of the language and the rest, and we are happy to talk to them about that, and that conversation is ongoing, but it is not to change the provisions which are that we have the Defense Department has to meet its own standard for readiness, that the Iraqis' own government has to meet the benchmarks put by President Bush; if not, we begin redeployment sooner than we want if they meet them. And, of course, everyone supports what we're doing, I believe, for the troops and the veterans' health.

Q Will you have a vote on the amendment calling for the withdrawal by Christmas?

Ms. Pelosi This is the bill that we're presenting now. I believe this is what we will have.

Q Are you going to allow their amendment?

Ms. Pelosi We haven't made any decisions about that, but I don't know what purpose it would serve, because in here we talk about the redeployment of troops. And in this bill, if the President does demonstrate progress by July 1st, there will be the redeployment of troops by December.

Q By July 1st the benchmarks the Malaki government has to meet?

Ms. Pelosi They are spelled out in the legislation.

Q But by October 1, these things have to be in law.

Ms. Pelosi That's right.

QMadam Speaker, have you had any conversations with anyone in the Senate on this? And for this to become law, it has to get through the Senate. What is the assessment of chances there?

Ms. PelosiWell, they are at the same time putting together their legislation, and we will go to conference on it. We are talking about what we are doing in the House of Representatives. We are in constant touch with our colleagues in the Senate, and we respect their process, and they respect ours.

Q Madam Speaker, how many Republicans do you think you will have join you on this?

Ms. Pelosi I am the last person to ask about Republican votes.

Q Have you talked to them about it?

Ms. Pelosi We are hopeful they would be supportive of a supplemental that provides for the equipping and preparation of our troops in Iraq.

Q If you can't speak to Republican votes, how many Democrats do you think you will lose on this?

Ms. Pelosi I don't know. We just put it forth. Everybody is seeing it for the first time. We discussed several elements of it over the past couple of weeks, seems like years, since we passed overwhelmingly the resolution to support the troops who have or are serving honorably and bravely in Iraq, and to disapprove of the President's escalation of sending 21,000 more combat troops in Iraq.

We're proud of our unity and vote that day. We have a great deal of respect for each other in our caucus. We listen. We learn from each other, and we go forward.

At some point, we have to freeze the design because the bill -- there is a timetable that the troops need the assistance, the veterans need the health care. And other elements in the bill must be addressed in a timely fashion. So this is where we are today. I am very proud of this product.

Q Is there any mechanism for Congress to actually determine whether or not the President's presentation on benchmarks being met is actually true?

Ms. Pelosi Well, I am certain that the President will give a factual report to Congress on the progress being made in Iraq. It is, in fact, a matter of public knowledge as to whether there is any movement toward passing these bills into legislation in Iraq. But it is a subjective call, but it is one that the American people will know.

In the election, the American people called for a new direction. No place were they clearer about this than the direction in Iraq. We have said that over and over. The American people said it over and over. They expect us to represent them with good judgment. They expect us to honor our first responsibility, which is to protect and defend the American people, and that depends on troop readiness. That depends on our having our Strategic Reserves being strong and ready to protect our interests wherever they are threatened. That is what this bill does.

I am very proud, and I congratulate Mr. Skelton. Mr. Obey, and Mr. Murtha for the work they did. I congratulate every single member of our caucus for the thought that they have brought to this debate and the passion they might have.

Q Is this going to committee or straight to the floor?

Mr. Obey The committee. We want, if we can, to mark up the bill next week in committee and see it on the floor the following week. We hope that happens. I think Members need a little more time to figure out the details, and I think things will smooth out after that.

Ms. Pelosi We have gotten a positive response, not universal, I will not say that. But we have gotten a positive response from our colleagues, understanding that our districts are very different one from the other, but they are all American districts who care about our troops, the benefits that we owe our veterans, and the fighting the war on terror in Afghanistan, and the call by the American people for us to end this war in Iraq.

Q Madam Speaker, have you determined the effect the cut in the contractor money will have on Iraq?

Mr. Murtha We expect them to be accountable to Congress. We do not know how these contracts were made. All of them were sole source. There was no oversight. There should have been. We expect them to tell us how many people they have. If they can justify the numbers that are there, that is what we will go back to. I am convinced they will not be able to justify it.

I have seen figures that are unacceptable. GAO and the Iraqi inspector general could not get the figures on contracting. Now, that is unacceptable. They asked us to help him get it under control. That is what we're doing. We are forcing them to be accountable across the board, whether it is health care, readiness or contracts.

Q Madam Speaker, if you are committed to funding the troops even does that mean that you are not committed to these constraints in the face of a Presidential veto?

Ms. Pelosi I'm sorry?

Q If the President should find the concerns unacceptable and veto the measure, are you going to fund the troops in that case and not insist on the constraints?

Ms. Pelosi Across our country in the most conservative districts in our country, 84 percent of the American people say we should not send our troops into combat unless they are trained and ready. So we would hope that the President would not certify the opposite, that it is okay to send our troops into battle if they are not ready. So we welcome that discussion with the President.

Q What if he does veto it?

Ms. Pelosi We're at stage one. We have to pass the bill in the committee, on the floor of the House, go to the Senate, and if we -- I say to my colleagues never confine your best work, your hopes, your dreams, the aspiration of the American people to what will be signed by George W. Bush because that is too limiting a factor. We have to pass it, show that it has support across the country, take the conversation to the American people, and hopefully he will hear them.

Thank you.