volkswagens, there's no comparison. we can have a debate about iraq but that should be on a separate day. we can talk about whether there were any weapons of mass destruction. today we are here talking about afghanistan. and i think this is important and it's an important discussion because this congress would the exception of a few amendments got very little time has not had a debate or discussion in this chamber on afghanistan since after september 11, 2001. . and our policy has changed in a number of different ways over those years and we still have not had a debate or a discussion on afghanistan. so today hopefully we will and my hope is that in this chamber, where lots of members talk all the time and very few members listen, that this may be a day for members to lisp. it is important that we get -- listen. it is important that we get this right, especially for the men and women who we have deployed over there and at this time, mr. speaker, i'd like to yield 2 1/2

minutes to the gentlewoman from maine, a member of the rules committee, ms. pingree. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. pingree: thank you, mr. speaker, and thank you very much, my good friend from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, for yielding me the time, for his excellent opening statement and for his response to our colleague from the rules committee as well. and i thank him for being here today. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of this rule and the underlying concurrent resolution. it is a rare occurrence that members of this body have the opportunity to devote three hours of debate to such an important issue and it is even more unusual that members are given a chance forp or down vote on ending the war in afghanistan. each time an emergency war supplemental or defense appropriations bill or a defense authorization bill has come to the floor continued funding for the war in afghanistan is hidden behind spending to create jobs, to provide humanitarian relief or to increase medical benefits to our troops, all of which i support. and privileged resolutions like

this which exercise a constitutional right of the united states congress to decide whether or not to continue the use of the military force, rarely see the light of day. this country has spent over $250 billion, mr. speaker, on the war in afghanistan. the sheer of my home state of maine is almost $700 million. and in the next few months the administration will likely ask this congress to spend another $30 billion to fund a surge of troops in afghanistan. at a time when we cannot find $30 billion to create jobs, continue unemployment benefits or help small businesses we need to ask ourselves, is the cost of this war worth it? is it right to spend more money and lose more lives on a strategy that isn't working? can we afford to turn our backs on the challenges we face at home and to pursue failed policies abroad? i am an original co-sponsor of this concurrent resolution because i firmly believe this war needs to end. we have asked our men and women

in uniform to return to combat again and again. they have fought with bravery and helped the people of afghanistan with compassion. they have risen to meet every challenge and paid every price to defend this country. but the cost of this war is too high. the economic situation in the country is too dire and the rise of our brave -- lives of our brave mened a women in uniform are too precious for this war to go on and for this issue to be muddled and tucked away in large spending bills. it is time to end the war in afghanistan and bring our troops home, it is time for this congress to demand an open debate on afghanistan and a clean vote on any future bills that fund this war. i ask my colleagues to join he in -- me in supporting this rule and the underlying concurrent resolution and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. >> i reserve. i would ask mr. mcgovern if he has any additional speakers. mr. mcgovern: yes we have a

number. mr. diaz-balart: i would reserve at this point. mr. mcgovern: at this point, mr. speaker, i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. polis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for two minutes. mr. polis: i thank my colleague from massachusetts. mr. speaker, this nation does face a very real and immediate terrorist threat. the terrorist threat stems from al qaeda which is statelessness, a menace that is not rooted in any one location or has any dominion in one particular area. in fact, the two countries that this -- our nation continues to occupy, namely iraq and afghanistan, are not significant bases of operations for al qaeda. it was recently reported that there are in fact only around 50 al qaeda operatives in the entire nation of afghanistan and there could be 10 times that number in nations like yemen and pakistan. yes, there is a very real threat, but the answer is not to continue to indefinitely occupy

countries where we only breed more sympathy with those who would do us harm. the correct and more important way to leverage american military life to combat this menace is to have targeted and aggressive intelligence gathering and targeted special operations against the terrorists no matter where they are. some have expressed concerns that if we leave afghanistan al qaeda could reassert itself there. the answer to that is to go after al qaeda in a targeted way in afghanistan if the need arises again. it is not to engage in indefinite occupation of one or two particular countries. how many more countries would we need to occupy? if they're in yemen, do we occupy yemen? if they're in pakistan, do we occupy pakistan? if we weren't already in and occupying afghanistan would we choose to go in there today? i would submit that the answer is no. we need to continue our effort to battle terrorists wherever they err -- they are and focus

on this stateless menace through targeted special operations and a refocused emphasis on homeland security, all of which are very costly and expensive operation in afghanistan continues to reduce our ability to do by soaking up our national time and resources as well as costing the lives of american soldiers. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from florida. reserves his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. doggett: thank you. today, so very late, represents the first real house debate on afghanistan since president obama announced that the path to peace could only be found through wider war. i continueally challenge that policy. but because our security, i believe, will not be found in either of the false choice of more troops in or all out now, i cannot support the resolution as

i do not support our current strategy in afghanistan. this deast escalation announcement -- december escalation announcement by the president was counterproductive and somewhat misleading. he tried to have it both ways. he pledged to begin withdrawing troops in july, 2011, but his plan continues sinding troops through near the end of this year. defense secretary gates was more candid. he says any withdrawal next year will, quote, be a handful, that there is no real afghanistan exit strategy and that a larger military presence is planned there for, quote, a very long time. with our unceasing commitment to american blood and treasure poured into afghanistan there's no meaningful pressure on president karzai and his drug dealer and war lard cohorts. they -- warlord cohorts. they've been much less

interested in undertaking the steps necessary to secure peace than to clinging to power and wealth such as by stealing 1/3 of the votes in the last election. i believe, mr. president -- mr. speaker, that the calls for reform have been greeted since that time by mr. karzai only by taking over the independent election commission that questioned that election and by the appointment of multiple drug warlord types to the cabinet who are part of the problem. in afghanistan reform is a slogan, it is not a reality. we have minimum leverage over mr. karzai -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentleman an additional one minute. mr. doggett: our presence there for an invitation to steal all they can get when they can get it. the better exit strategy is to have fewer troops who need to exit. i agree with general ikerberry, our former commander and now

ambassador who last november questioned an escalation that would only bring vastly increased cost and a military role. he wisely concluded that further increases would dig us in more deeply. in 2001 i voted for the use of force against the enemies that attacked us and i continue to support that effort. but unless we pursue a different approach with a more narrow military footprint and pragmatic exit strategy, we will remain embroiled in a land that is entrapped -- that has entrapped so many foreign powers throughout the century. afghanistan can consume as many lives and as many dollars as we are willing to expend there. as in iraq, we are on a course for a $1 trillion war waged on borrowed money that must be changed to save american lives. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from florida. reserves his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, at this time i'd like to yield three minutes to the gentleman

from ohio, the author of the resolution, mr. kucinich. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for three minutes. mr. kucinich: we're in or out. unless this congress acts to claim its constitutional responsibility, we will stay in afghanistan for a very, very long time at great cost to our troops and to our national priorities. or we can set a date, december 31, 2010, by which we must leave. and this is exactly what the resolution seeks to do. congress has to be mindful of our responsibilities under this constitution, article 1 section 8, to claim responsibility for the casualties -- troop casualties which are now close to 1,000, to claim responsibility for the cost which is approaching $250 billion and together with the iraq war, close to $1 trillion.

and this at a great cost to our priorities here at home. for housing, for job creation, for health care, for education. to claim responsibility for the casualties, to innocent civilians, the human cost of the war. congress must claim responsibility one way or another for challenging the corruption that my colleagues have talked about that has engulfed the afghanistan administration. we must claim responsibility and understand exactly the role between afghanistan, pakistan, india pipeline has in all of this. we must claim responsibility for debating the wisdom of the countersuth strategies which apparently have failed -- counteru.s. is strategies which apparently have fail and claim responsibility for the logistics of withdrawal. i brought this resolution to the floor of the house with the help

of the rules committee and the support of leadership which believes the debate is merited because after 8 1/2 years it is time that this congress be heard from, it is time that we claim our constitutional responsibility under article 1 section 8, the war powers resolution of 1973 was enacted to ensure that congress has a role in decisions to send the united states armed forces in hostilities or to continue to use such -- such forces in hostilities -- and hostilities. my resolution would require the president to bring the armed forces out of afghanistan by december 31, 2010. and the u.s. armed forces and allies begin the first in a series of large military operations in afghanistan, it is up to us to have our voice and vote felt at this important moment, regardless of your

support or opposition to the war, this resolution is about assuring meaningful and open debate and in the three hours ahead, i'm confident that this house will have the opportunity to do that so that people no matter what their position is can finally be heard from with respect to our constitutional responsibilities. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: mr. speaker, i'd ask mr. mcgovern if he has any additional speakers. mr. mcgovern: i have one additional speaker and then i'm closing. mr. diaz-balart: i'll reserve. mr. mcgovern: i'd like to yield three minutes to mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for three minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you. i appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this. i continue to have profound reservations about our troop commitments first in iraq and more recently with president obama's decision to escalate our presence in afghanistan. history suggests we will not be

successful in stabilizing afghanistan with military force. no one has, i don't think anyone ever will. afghanistan today is perhaps the most corrupt country in the world, ranked next to last out of 180, according to transparency international. if you have a culture of corruption it's hard to plant seeds, it's hard to have allies remain loyal. global economic development through roads and watt railroad not he isow teric abstract issues. these are things that make a difference between people being thugs and in some cases feeding their family in any way they can, having little sympathy for infidels and drug problems. the magnitude of spending that we're involved with here needs to be put in perspective. each one of these additional troops that we are sending over costs $1 million a year to support. we are going to be spending as a nation $7,000 for each of the 14

1/2 million afghans in the work force. our military spending for -- per afghan worker is 20 times what that worker will earn in an entire year in afghanistan. at the same time there's a dire need for the most basic of service. in rural afghanistan 80% drink polluted water and only 10% have adequate sanitation. i have profound reservations about the course we're on, the ability to generate positive long-term fundamental changes that will persist over time. i absolutely essential we have this debate, and while i don't agree with the resolution that somehow we're going to be able to pull the plug and be able to end this in 30 days or 30 weeks, i do think it's important for congress to focus on what is here, what is possible, what we need to be doing is redirecting our effort. we need to start reversing the

course that is there. we need to narrow our focus. we need to make more efforts to involve the afghans themselves with water, with sanitation, with education. and we need to make sure that congress has a voice and is pushing back as the elements come to us. i don't agree that we are powerless on some of the defense appropriations, for instance. we can in fact push back. we can be heard and we can start reversing what i think is an appropriate course. i welcome the debate today. while i am not going to support the particular resolution, i appreciate my colleagues bringing it forward. i think it's important to engage and for us to imagine how we can do a better job in that troubled country and in that troubled region. the time to begin the discussion is long overdue. i look forward to continued progress. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the

balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask my colleague -- no other speakers. >> i'm the last speaker. mr. diaz-balart: i think this has been a good discussion today. i think it's appropriate to have it. i certainly hope that the result is clear and that this congress today strongly and in a bipartisan way reject the resolution that is being brought forth. it would be a grave mistake to -- for us to allow the taliban to regain power in afghanistan. sometimes the lessons of history may be a little bit more difficult to explain. in this case when the taliban was in power they opened the

country up to training camps for terrorists to attack the united states. and that was in 2001. it's not ancient history. so i hope we don't forget the lessons of history. in addition, as i said before, mr. speaker, we are in the midst. our armed forces, our coalition allies is in the first major offensive in president obama's new strategy so i think it would be a grave mistake if this congress does not emphatically reject the resolution today. and having said that i yield

back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, there is nothing nothing wrong demanding our troops come home, including forcing that debate by using the privileges of the war powers resolution. there is nothing unpatriotic and demanding that our troops and their families, their neighbors and their communities be told when they are coming home. and mr. speaker, there is every reason to debate how we go after al qaeda and how we create a flexible mobile strategy able to track, find, counter and strike al qaeda cells wherever they might be. and there's no reason to run away from debate over 100,000 boots on the ground in afghanistan is the best strategy to eliminating al qaeda once and for all. i do not doubt that our brave military men and women can and will achieve military successes in battle after battle after

battle. but our afghanistan -- are afghanistan's tribal disputes going to be tried on the battlefield? who is willing to stand at the front of this chamber and declare how many american lives that is worth? mr. speaker, president obama has said he will begin to bring our troops home next july. but he didn't say when the job will be complete. representative kucinich says, let's bring them home by new year's eve this year. we must continue to debate this issue, debate it today, debate it on the supplemental, debate it on defense bills. let's debate it when we're begging for resources so our kids can go to quality schools, when we're trying to find the money so that he have american has a decent job and affordable health care, so we can maintain

our roads and bridges and waterways, so we can guard our ports and borders, so we can keep our cops on the beat and our seniors safe in their homes. let's debate the war in afghanistan. how we will pay for it, how it will end, when it will end and when our sons and daughters, husband and wives, friends and neighbors will be able to come home. let us continue to ask the hard questions and demand straight answers until we get it right and all our troops are safely home. mr. speaker, i urge a yes vote on the rule and on the previous question and i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the resolution is -- the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: we request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays have been requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are

ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the 15-minute vote on adoption of the house resolution 1146 will be followed by five-minute votes on motions to suspend the rules on house resolution 1088 and house resolution 4621. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]