didn't wait. we didn't wait to be defeated by this evil philosophy and this eff i will enemy. brave americans stood up that day and said no more. the question we have is do we hear their voices. do we still hear their voices? s there bravery among us today to heed their call? cause you see, the islamic jihaddists haven't changed and haven't deficient yated in their ntent or haven't gone across their goal which is to spread their caliphate across the entire world, not just in iraq and syria but across the entire world, including the united states of america. we saw what they did in benghazi

two years ago. almost to the day, again on september 11 when islamic jihaddists targeted the american consulate. not only burned it down, but also took the life for the first time in 30 years, we lost an american ambassador, chris stevens. what is so shameful is that two ars later, libya is in absolute chaos today. just in the last month, we saw islamic jihaddists take over the r field in tripoli and i visited the american embassy earlier this year and i went outside and observed a moment of silence in front of the memorial recognizing our ambassador chris stevens. it's right outside between the embassy and the swimming pool at

the embassy. and shamefuly, about a week, two islamic , we saw jihaddists had so pressurized our embassy that the people in our embassy wisely abandoned the fortunees took off yeah and the terrorists came into the united states embassy and took over and had a party in our embassy. and made a video that they posted they made a video they posted on youtube that had them standing on the second floor balcony, jumping joyfully into the swimming pool, splashing in the swimming pool, mere yards from the memorial to our killed ambassador chris stevens. you see, we're not winning the war against islamic jihad.

our president infamously told us in the run-up to his re-election in 2012 that al qaeda was defeated. core al qaeda was nearly gone. it was defeat. al qaeda was on the run, our president assured usism only wish our president would have been right. sitting on the intelligence committee, i knew without a shadow of a doubt what our president was saying in 2012 was absolutely wrong. it wasn't true. i knew al qaeda wasn't defeated. i knew that al qaeda across the world was continuing to gain traction. we knew that. and yet we were told that with the death of lane all had been solved. thank you very much. tragically, nothing could be further from the truth. tragically, james foley, the united states photo journalist who was beheaded by isis, knows

that that was no longer true. or knew that wasn't true. as well as the other united states journalist who also was beheaded by the islamic state. you see, actions have consequences. ideas have consequences. and when the decision was made y pothba ma of releasing bagdadi from the united states detention center for whatever eason, that has had profound consequences. ask the thousands of iraqis who are now dead. who are ousands of dead and displaced. ask the hundreds, maybe thousands, of women who have been raped and violated and young girls. those in syria who had to deal with the same. the tragic consequences are being felt even here in the

united states. then we watched with startling speed the bank robberies that occurred when bagdadi had to find a source of income and revenue to run the islamic state. he did that by robbing banks. some report says he stole over $400 million. some say over $100 million. other says various amounts. the fact is now we had an islamic jihaddist who could support himself through bank robbery, but he didn't stop there he knew that wouldn't be enough to accomplish the dream he had to establish a global islamic state and so besides robbing banks, besides reconstituting an orme he, decided that he would also take over oil fields in the kurdistan area of northern iraq. he took over the oil fields, some reports say that he dealt on the black market oil that

comes in at potentially $1 million a day. other open source documents say other amounts. but the fact is, we have the islamic state supporting itself by selling oil on the black market and that oil goes to fund terrorism. he also didn't stop there. bagdadi was also strategic tesm he took over an oil refinery. the oil refinery which supplies the energy that the islamic -- for the islamic states to run their vehicles, their airplanes, whatever it is that they need for energy. they also took over electric grids so they could have electricity. they didn't take over every village they didn't need. to they could cause them to fall through intimidation, just as they did in mosul and that's what was stunning. imagine, you've got an army, estimated to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 10,000 to 12,000 and you can take over a city of

1.7 million. you see, that's what terrorism does. it's so interim -- it so intimidates people that live in the community that they decide, we can't win. we aren't even going to try. and that's why the united states can't stay silent. that is why we must stand and act and reck nice, we're at war. we're at war. because the islamic state has declared war against the united states, western europe, they declared war on anyone who isn't them. but they've been very clear about declaring war against the united states. the islamic state also made another strategic capture. they captured air bases. iraqi air bases. when they did that, they captured united states equipment. so the islamic jihad is fighting with the latest united states

equipment. they reportedly have united states helicopters. united states planes. they reportedly have united states weaponry. and united states ammunition. they also have uniforms that they captured from the iraqi forces. they captured humvees. armaments. the oil fields. they also captured natural gas fields in central syria. this spring, as i was watching this occur, i am from the state of minnesota, and unfortunately, minnesota has a very long connection to terrorism, and i went to the f.b.i. earlier this summer and asked the f.b.i. for a private classified meeting. and i asked the f.b.i. if there were any minnesotans that had joined the is lap -- islamic state and traveled to the mideast to fight on their behalf. and they told me at that time the information is classified, it no longer is, the f.b.i. told me there were two minnesotans that had traveled and joined the

islamic state soism asked the obvious question, which was, if they are not killed in that battle, if they choose to come back to the united states, we know who they are. we know what they have done. will they be allowed to come back into the united states? and i was told yes, they will. they're american citizens. they have passports. we can't stop them from coming into the united states. and i was floored. here we are trying to track down and murder terrorists in afghanistan. we have american citizens who have left the united states and who have joined with the islamic state, and by the way, the creed of the islamic state says, when you join the islamic state, you have renounced every other form of government and you are now submitting to the government of the islamic state. how is it that that individual then would be able to come? the f.b.i. said, well, we put those individuals on a watch

list. and we give them further screening at the airport. and i asked what do you mean further screening? he said, we ask them questions. then they're allowed to get on a plane and come into the united states and travel free freehly? yes, they are. that floored me. i thought that couldn't possibly be. and then we saw the events transpire this summer. and tragically, we saw the very first american who was killed fighting for the islamists, the islamic state, was a minnesotan. from the twin cities suburban area. he was an african-american youth from chicago. he'd come from -- with his family to minnesota where he'd been converted to islam and radicalized in the twin cities and became a fighter for the islamic state. he was the first american. very shortly thereafter, a second american was reported to

have been killed fighting for the islamic state, in the same battle. that was also a minnesotan. another young man who is a somaly american. minnesota has the -- somali american. minnesota as the largest somalian population in the world outside of somalia. that young man traveled over as well. these two individuals, had they been in the war with the islamic state and rather than getting killed decided to come back, they would not have been impeded by the united states from coming back. here you have individuals who have given their allegiance to the united states and by the way, one of their friends from high school was killed in 2009. he also was fighting in the mideast in islamic jihad. his name was troy. roy was featured in a video, a

recruitment video, inviting more americans to come and join islamic jihad. roy said that he was glad, i'm paraphrase, he was glad to be a traitor to america. nd yet, under our current law, troy can be a killer and fight against the interests of the united states and travel to the mideast be a terrorist, and then freely come back to the united states with battlefield experience, maybe a plan for terrorism in the united states, and he can roam freely in this country? there's something seriously wrong here, mr. speaker. something very seriously wrong. have we completely lost our minds? that we wouldn't even prevent a terrorist a known, avowed terrorist from returning to the united states where he could carry out terrorist activity here in the united states?

you see, we think that things have been fairly peaceful but at a minimum, there have been 53 different terrorist plots that our government has stopped. we have foiled 53 plots at minimum since 2001. since the terrorist activity. we didn't foil all of them. we department foil the islamic jihaddists in arkansas who killed a united states soldier. this individual also had been converted to islam and killed the soldier who was at a recruiting station, i believe an army recruiting station. e didn't stop the two refugees who were in boston, the sar ovember brothers at the -- the tsarnof brothers at the marathon bombing. despite the fact that the russias -- russian intelligence

service gave a cable to our f.b.i. that it appeared these brothers had -- there was a question of terrorist involvement and terrorist activity. the sar navy brothers weren't -- the sar november brothers weren't stop -- the tsarnov brothers weren't stop and people were tragically hurt in the boston marathon bombing. so we saw that and another attempt of the infamous christmas day underwear bomber who had left london, headed to minneapolis, minnesota. with the express intention of blowing himself up as a suicide bomber with a concoction that someone had put together for him. he attempted to blow up the plane, at this time it was northwest airline the precurseor to today's delta airlines he tried to blow himself up over the city of detroit. and thank god he was unsuccessful. but again, it was yet one more plot here in the united states.

there are more. there was attempts on one of our former president's life, george w. bush new york his home. there have been other plots as well. thank god we have foil sod many of them. but what that should speak to us, mr. speaker is that the problem isn't just in the middle east. the problem is here in the united states. and that's why we have to act now. we have to act forward thinking. so we don't allow them to reach their goals. . i went to the f.b.i. and i asked this question and again i was shocked at the answer, and earlier this week, mr. speaker, i introduced a bill in the united states congress that's gaining a fair amount of traction by both democrats and republicans, and it see lengthsy says this -- if you're an -- it essentially says this -- if you're an american citizen and you've gone to join isis or a foreign terrorist organization and you want to return to the united states, your passport will be taken

from you. and you'll begin the process of denaturalization. in other words, we will do everything within our power to prevent you from coming back into the united states. you can try to come in and unfortunately too many try to come in through our southern border, but we're going to try and make sure that you're not successful. my bill is called the denaturalization and passport recreation legislation to amend section 349-a of the united states code. well, not only that, from minnesota, we have the f.b.i. estimates at least 20 somali americans from minnesota that have left our state and have traveled to the middle east to join the islamic jihad. just last week a 19-year-old somali american woman left st. paul to join the islamic jihad. what i am told is that the three women that have gone to join from the united states, all three are from the state of minnesota. they're continuing to recruit.

our southern border remains, for all practical purposes, wide open. so foreign nationals can cross into the united states. again, it is not the fault of the border patrol. i actually naively thought on my visit about six weeks ago to our southern border that the border patrol actually stopped foreign nationals from coming in. i thought they did. i was shocked to find out that border patrol doesn't stop anyone. nearly 100% of foreign nationals who want to come into our -- the united states through our southern border come in. they come in. the border patrol is a people processing pipeline. so they come in, they may not all get to stay, but they certainly all do come in. and again, that's not the fault of the border patrol. that's the fault of politicians who haven't made the decision to actually secure america's southern border and to set up the law enforcement to make that happen. and also to instantaneously

deport foreign nationals back across the border. i was told, as a matter of fact, if i didn't mention it before, that over 100 foreign -- foreign nationals from over 140 countries have already made their way into the united states just so far this year. we have a lot on our plate right now, mr. speaker are mr. speaker. a lot that -- mr. speaker. a lot that we have to pay attention to. the united states could have been stopped in the cradle and they weren't. they could have been stopped before they were reconstituted. the president could have baghdaddy in the united states detention -- baghdadi in the united states detention center. hundreds of thousands of innocent people wouldn't be dead today had the president made that decision. but he didn't. it's also important for us to realize, iraq pled with the united states to do drone strikes against the islamic state dating back to august of

2013. wouldn't it have been important to listen to iraq? they were the ones dealing with the islamic state in 2013. they begged us to do drone strikes and take out the leadership in iraq. what was the answer of president obama? no. he took a pass. he didn't listen to the calls of iraq and we didn't take out the leadership when we had the chance. the iraq foreign minister came to the united states and he begged for the united states to help against the islamic state. he also went home emptyhanded. there were multiple knocks on the president's door to do something about the islamic state, even back in 2013, by our partners that we were trying to be successful in iraq -- trying to help be successful

in iraq. unfortunately our president did not answer that call. on may 11, the president of iraq, al maliki, asked sentcomto strike the islamic state with -- sentcom to strike the lace lambic state with drones -- the islamic state with drones. we were all seeing the uptempo of the islamic state and the rise of islamic jihad. again, the president of iraq asked our sentcom to do drone strikes and take out thes i lack im-- islamic state. al maliki said, i will approve the air strikes. i will get behind you. he was told no. the problem you see wasn't al maliki in the spring. how -- the problem is the president and his team decided not to help when we had ample opportunities. a meeting was held very early on on how to defeat al qaeda, both in pakistan and afghanistan. it was written about by a

weekly news magazine author who had the ability to be in that meeting and in that early meeting of the obama administration, meeting both with pakistan and afghanistan on how to defeat al qaeda, they didn't discuss in that meeting. it was very telling, they didn't discuss a tragedy to actually defeat al qaeda. what they did is take along our agriculture secretary, tom vilsack, and the conversation, rather than being about actually defeating al qaeda, was about planting seeds in pakistan and planting seeds for the agriculture community and growing the agriculture community in both countries. now, i'm not saying that that's not a worthwhile meeting, but if your point in having the meeting is to defeat al qaeda, that's the subject that you should be covering and you should come up with a plan. that was, again, at this point over four years ago and we are here tomorrow night about to hear from the president, does

he finally have a plan? once the crisis got to the point of american citizens being beheaded on tv before our eyes in the most cruel, barbaric way possible, now we're only starting to re-engage. the islamic state crisis unfortunately is one that will be very difficult because we have seen united states forces prematurely moved out of that region. so we're -- were we forewarned? we absolutely were forewarned. and it isn't just the administration. we also knew during george w. bush's tenure as president of the united states, the foreign policy establishment, the military establishment, also knew. there is a clip that's gone on youtube recently of president george w. bush in 2007 and i read exactly verbatim what the president said july 12, 2007.

george w. bush warned the nation then, it would mean surrendering the future of iraq to al qaeda if the united states completely removed ourselves from iraq. it would mean that we'd be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. it would mean we'd allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in iraq, to replace the one they lost in afghanistan. it would mean increasing the probability that american troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous. it is beyond belief the statement that was made by george w. bush back in july 12 of 2007. it is as though the president had most accurately described exactly what president obama will address tomorrow night. by his ill-made decision in 2011 not to leave american residual forces to maintain the peace. i want to give credit tonight,

mr. speaker, to the american heroes, the american soldiers who won the peace and defeated the enemy in iraq, yes, they did. and in afghanistan. in order to maintain the peace, we needed to maintain a strong american president. just like today we have in south korea. i was in south korea in august. we maintain an american presence. why? because there is an aggressor in north korea. we have our force on location so that we can let the aggressor know, if you try something, we're here and you won't succeed. and that has worked very well in south korea. that's worked very well in western europe. and unfortunately president obama didn't learn the lessons of history and he made the ill-timed decision to pull american residual forces out of iraq. that decision has led to the consequences that we have today

and it is why again i would plead with the president of the united states to not pull american forces out of afghanistan either. because i heard over and over and over when i was in kabul, afghanistan, over the memorial weekend, may 30, that if the united states leaves afghanistan, everyone on the ground knows the taliban will be back and it will be bloody and it won't be pretty and it will be back to square one, after a trillion dollars worth of treasure, but more importantly, after the sacrifice of thousands of brave american lives. that is not how we should honor their memory nor their sacrifice. and the same with the american -- brave american men and women in our armed forces and contractors, etc., who lost their lives also to win the peace in iraq. again, president george bush had it right in july of 2007. we needed those residual

forces. yes, it's a continuation of islamic jihad. yes this is a rnls war. not america saying it -- religious war. not america saying it, that's the terrorists themselves telling us that they are at war with us because they intend to force conversions to their religion of islam. what is very unusual about the islamic state is this, they have a land and they have a territory. we've had a philosophy we've been fighting, now we have a land and a territory. a new caliphate. it is at least half of syria and at least half of iraq. and it has a head. baghdadi. he has a committed army of 12,000 terrorist soldiers, many of whom he released from terrorist prisons. they have a form of government. islamic shari'a law. and they follow that to the t. they have money from banks that they've robbed from, oil fields, from the rev -- robbed

from oil fields, from the revenue of gas fields. they also have self-sustaining infrastructure with their energy production. they're seeking to obtain weapons of mass destruction. they obtained 90 pounds of low enriched uranium. there's now a fear that materials that could be used to form a nuclear bomb are items on the wish list and the shopping list of the islamic state. we need to do everything that we can to prevent them from achieving their goal of putting together the elements for a nuclear weapon. we also need to be aware that pakistan is also in all have nerble position -- in a vulnerable position. there are reports that pakistan may have upwards of 200 nuclear weapons. pakistan is a sunni state. the islamic state, led by baghdadi, is also a sunni islamic jihadist enterprise. if they choose to make a deal with pakistan for nuclear material or a nuclear weapon

that would change the dynamic overnight. and that's why it is imperative that another islamic state, iran, a shi'a islamic state, never, ever, ever obtain a nuclear weapon. because if iran obtains a nuclear weapon, they have stated unequivocally they will use that nuclear weapon to wipe israel off the map. they will also use that weapon, they have stated, against the united states, to defeat the united states of america. you see, nuclear weapons matter, mr. speaker. and they must never, ever go into the hands in any way of committed islamic jihadist terrorists. iran is a terror state. it is a united states designated terror state. there are only four in the world. iran is one of them. now we have the islamic state. the islamic state, headed by baghdaddy, also seeks destruction and they mean it --

baghdadi, also seeks destruction and they mean it. we must engage them and not allow them to succeed. because the islamic state now has weapons from the united states equal to weapons that we have in our army. they have weapons from the russian government and they also have iranian weapons as well. sophisticated weapons. and individuals with the knowledge and ability to be able to use those weapons. they also control borders that weren't in control of jihadists before. just recently they gained control of a border at the golan heights on israel's border. this is approximately 200 yards from israel, in a demilitarization area. nonetheless, they were able to -- they took united nations workers hostage, just as the islamic state took 49 turks hostage, out of the turkish

embassy in northern iraq. they have taken check points on the jordan border with iraq. the islam its state has taken over -- islamic state has taken over -- they virtually erased the border with syria. they've taken over check points in lebanon, also in turkey and also in the curd stan region. so they control -- kurd stan region. so they control -- kurdistan region. so they control territory if a way they never have before. they have some of the most sophisticated recruitment materials in the world today, through facebook, through twitter. they know exactly what the message is and who they need to target to join them in the islamic jihad and unfortunately in my home state of minnesota we know all too well how successful the islamic state has been in drawing in literally thousands from western europe to join them in jihad, but also americans as well. they'rele -- they're the cool kid on the block, if you will. that's who young people are

attracted to. as i said earlier, the leader of the islamic state is a man amed baghdad i --i -- baghdadi, who went on to reconstitute this horrific islamic jihad called the islamic state. he's in his early 40's', he's in the prime of life. he believes this is his moment. he has declared himself the head, the kay live of the new state -- caliph of the new state, the caliphate. he was involved in al qaeda leadership for decades. he was literally the number three in al qaeda of iraq, the first franchise. he has a doctorate degree. he was born in iraq, he understands iraq. he understands that it is his destiny from his opinion, to fulfill the re-establishment of the caliphate and he has no interest in waiting. he's on the march. he made a statement in january of this year that i read

previously but it's one that bears repeating. he said this to the united states. he said, soon we'll be in direct confrontation with you, united states, so watch out for us. for we are with you. watching. and that's why we need to understand that we very likely have islamic jihaddist terrorists here in the united states today. we know that there are those who went to join isis, who have returned to the united states, they are terrorists. we need to call them for who they are. they aren't engaged in workplace violence, as our former head of homeland security erroneously said. they're terrorists. they're murderers. they live to kill innocent human beings. they do it because they believe that they are pleasing their god when they do. and according to their belief, not mine, not what i'm saying, what they say, they believe that

if they are a martyr, if they die in the way of jihad, that is their only one sure way to go to heaven. that's what they say in their belief. you see, we need to understand who the enemy is. we need to understand the enemy's motivation. not what we wish the enemy thinks. not what we hope the enemy thinks. we need to understand what the enemy, the terrorists, actually say about themselves and say about their beliefs and say about what their goals are. wrote you see, sun soo in his book, the art of war, there are two rules to win in a conflict. one is you need to know yourself you need to know who you are, you need to know what your attributes are, what your strengths, what your weaknesses are, as an army, as a nation, as an individual. but you also need to know who your enemy is and that's why i

was so -- it was so concerning when the f.b.i. decided not only -- decided -- not only the f.b.i. but other agencies of our government, the c.i.a. included, but in particular i'm familiar with the f.b.i., when the f.b.i. agreed that they would purge the training manuals of f.b.i. agents. and they purged the manuals of materials on islam. and the materials that they purged were quotes from the koran. why did they do that? why in the world would our f.b.i. not want its agents to understand the motivation of terrorists? this isn't about being mean to muslims. this isn't about being mean to anybody's religion or being insensitive to anyone's religion. because in the united states, you have freedom of religion. you can believe what you want to believe. but you can't take as your basis and your justification religious belief to go and kill other

people. or hurt other people. that you can't do. but it's important, again, that our f.b.i., our law enforcement mechanism, understands the motivation of who the enemies are and why they're doing what they're doing. that's why it's so dangerous for the f.b.i. not to train our agents in what the motivation is of islamic jihad. where you see it is -- we witnessed the islamic jihad, we witnessed them also taking hostages. i mentioned 49 turkish hostages have been taken. they have taken hostages of britain's -- of british, the french, the german the united states hosstanls including the two journal i.r.s.s that we had mentioned, that they tragically took. this is age old. this has been a part of what has happened in islamic jihad through themy lena, with ransoms

and piracy and taking hostages for money. the demand was made of the united states that we would pay $132 million for the release of james foley. and it's curious that that demand was made almost immediately after president obama illegally and unfortunately negotiated with terrorists to release the alleged deserter bergdahl in exchange for five taliban. the five top leaders of the taliban. the five top strategists, five top leads of the tall lan. the -- taliban. the enemy we are fighting in afghanistan. the president of the united states negotiated with terrorists so that we would release from detention in guantanamo bay the five top strategists of the terrorists that we're fighting in afghanistan. he released those five top terrorists in exchange for the alleged deserter, bergdahl.

that was a first. the united states hadn't done that before. we've had a policy of, we don't negotiate for hostages. and that served us very well. the world understood and the thugs and the animals and the savages and barbarians of the world understood, you're not going to get anywhere with the united states. they're not going to pay for hostages. they're not going to give up prisoners in exchange. not going to happen. it's a way of life with other countries. not with the united states of america. not until may. of 2014. when president obama, in my opinion, tragically, made the decision that he would negotiate with terrorists in order to regain the alleged deserter, bo bergdahl. almost immediately we saw the demand by the terrorists for money or james foley.

we did not comply. and he was beheaded. then the demand came for the united states to release lady al qaeda in exchange for steve sotlof. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mrs. bachmann: that's why we're looking forward to what the president of the united states has to say tomorrow. we have to defeat this enemy, e islamic state. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. garamendi: thank you, mr. speaker. i think we just heard a one-hour edition of fox news -- audition for fox news but we did not hear

, we did not hear a solution to what is a very real problem. we didn't hear a call for a vote. which we're going to have to take if we are to carry out our constitutional obligations. and that's going to be before us. i don't want to carry on the discussion about the very serious problem of isil, or isis, we've heard a lot about already. and we'll have to come to grips with that by october 6 or 7 when the 60-day clock on the war powers act runs out and our constitutional obligation takes place. there are many, many problems facing this nation and certainly the international scene is one of them. but there's also a problem in our communities. i represent a large portion of california, the national forests on the sierra side and the national forest on the coastal side of the sacramento valley.

and a lot of that is in the u.s. forest service as well as in the bureau of land management. over the last several years, those two agencies have been struggling to put out the fires that have raged in the western united states and indeed in the southeast of the united states. the way in which we have set up the budgeting and the appropriations for fighting res has created an ongoing cycle of increasing the likelihood of new fires. we need to change that. we need to get ahead of the century of fire repression and put in place policies and programs that will reduce the risks of fires. we need to management our forests. in such a way that the fire risk

is reduced. the forests are thinned, trees appropriately harvested, the undergrowth reduced and eliminated, fire breaks put in place, and protect our communities by the proper management of the forest. reducing the fuel, reducing the load of fuel that these forests have. we've been unable to do that. principally because we have seen an enormous increase in the number of fires and the federal budget to fight these fires is a 10-year rolling average that's not been able to keep up with the increase each year in the mega fires, california most recently facing the rim fire in the yosemite area. that fire gobbled up not only the forest but gobbled up the money that was set aside to prevent fires.

to manage the forests. instead of having that fund available to do that kind of work, the money was transferred from those programs into the fire fighting. now this is an ongoing problem. my colleague from california, scott peters, has addressed this problem with a motion to bring to the floor legislation that would set up a new mechanism for appropriating funds for fighting fires. i'll let him discuss that and why he has this before us. mr. peters if you would join us. mr. peters: thank you very much, congressman garamendi, for helping to raise awareness of the pressing need to change the way the federal government deals --h funding wildfire ver vis service and prevention. you know the devastating effects

of the wildfires in 2003 and 2007. we had massive, massive loss of property. right now, as i'm speaking, you mentioned this as well, fire fighters in yosemite national park continue to battle a wild fare -- wildfire that's burned more than 2,600 acres and required more than 2,200 firefighters and 11 aircraft to combat. it's no secret that california is facing a prolonged drought that places us at increased risk for wildfires. we're in the midst of what is expected to be one of the longest and hardest wildfire season in recent memory. wildfires are extremely expensive to fight and there's an urgent need for congress to pass a solution that funds fire fighting without stealing from prevention which is a crazy thing to do, i think we all acknowledge that. earlier i led a discharge petition be 196 signers to

tchand a vote on the wildfire disaster funding act of 2014. that bill has real bipartisan support in both the house and senate. 71 democrats and 60 republicans have co-sponsored in the house. that's very unusual around here. and was included -- it was also included by the president in his budget request. you have both parties in the house and the president of the united states all on the same page on this issue. it seems like an area where we ought to be able to make some progress and ought to have a vote. the bill allows fire fighting agencies to access funds from the natural disaster contingency fund while fighting catastrophic fires, not take money from prevention. what that does is makes the following year's fires even more severe and costly and dangerous. so it's fiscally response to believe treat wildfires like the natural disasters that they are. like an earthquake or a flood or a hurricane. instead of taling zsh stealing funds from prevention efforts to

pay for immediate response we should be adequately funding both. so i join my colleagues here tonight to call on the speaker to bring this truly bipartisan bill to a vote immediately so that fire-prone regions like the two we're dealing with in california don't suffer from ashington's dysfunction. ladies and gentlemen, we started this fire season this year in may. we're used to having fire seasons. it's natural to have fire seasons in september or october. but the fact that we started in may just underscore what is we're up against. e do not want to leave for our october election activities without having dealt with this and exposing these communities to risk. so i thank my colleague, mr. garamendi, for helping raise awareness about this. i thank you for your continued commitment and leadership on the issue and look forward to bringing it home. mr. garamendi: i thank you, mr.

peters, for your leadership in bringing to the attention of this entire nation and certainly to the 535 members -- 435 members of this house, there's a way to manage our forests and to deal with the fires that have plagued us so extensively over these many years. i think all of us have seen this before. smoky the bear, only you can prevent forest fires. we need to add to it, but congress can help. so smoky turns to us and said, how can you help? well, we can help by changing the way in which we budget for the fighting of fires. instead of a rolling 10-year average and putting that money up every year, and in nine of the last 12 years blowing through that budget and then reaching back and taking the prevention funds, the forest management funds, those funds that would allow us to reduce the risk of fires in our forests and in our public lands, instead of doing that

we'd have a different system, as mr. peters just described. and it's h.r. 3992, a bipartisan bill, democrats and republicans, democrat, mr. schrader from oregon, and republican, mr. simpson from idaho, the authors of the bill. say, hey, there's a better way of doing it. set aside a special reserve. st like we do for tornadoes, earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, a special reserve that could be tapped when we exceed the average. when we blow through that 10-year average with a megafire or a series of fires. more than 38,000 fires this year in the united states. we're going to blow through that budget, just this last month, at the end of the month in august, the chief forester of the u.s. forest service sent a letter out to every part of the u.s. forest service saying,

hold on, no more contracts, save the money, we're going to need to transfer all of your maintenance money or some of your maintenance money, your fire prevention money, the money that you are using to thin the forests, to reduce the load, the fuel load, the money that you're using to carry out logging practices, hold that, we're diagnose to need to hold that because -- we're going to need to hold that because we anticipate once again blowing through the fire budget and having to reach back for the prevention budget. so smoky's right. we can prevent forest fires. if congress acts on h.r. 3992. discharge petition that mr. peters has brought to the floor is before us. 196 members of congress have signed on. when we get to 218, that bill will automatically be brought to the floor for a vote.

democrats and republicans already support it. so bring it to the floor for a vote. et us put in place a sensible, commonsense way of appropriating money to fight fires and to manage our forests. let's get ahead of next year's fires. let's get to prevention. not just by not throwing out cigarettes, leaving campfires unattended, but by making sure that our forests are healthy. so that they are able to sustain small fires that burn slowly along the floor of the forest, which is the natural ecological way in which forests have formy kwlean been able to deal -- for millenniums been able to deal with fires. we've allowed the fuel in the forest to grow and to be in a position where a fire becomes huge, no longer along the floor, but gets up into the

crown of the trees, and destroys the forest. we can get back to where we were by properly managing the forest. but we can't do it without money. the forest service needs to have that money to build land management in the national parks, all need to have a different way of appropriating and budgeting. and that's what this bill does. and by the way, doesn't cost anymore. -- any more. it simply rearranges how that money's going to be spent. that reserve fund would only be available when you have the megafires and you blow through the 10-year rolling average of how much we spend on fighting fires. sensible, makes a lot of sense, the administration wants it and therefore i suppose my republican colleagues are opposed to it, simply because the administration has proposed a better way of dealing with these budgeting for fires. so our plea tonight, simple, just for a few moments, like maybe 12 1/2 minutes thus far,

to allow us to take up h.r. 3992. and help smoky prevent forest fires. we only need a few more members of this house to sign on. more than 15 members of the republican party are already co-authors. but none have yet signed the discharge petition. so let's do it. let's get on with it. thank you so very much, mr. speaker, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. garamendi: mr. speaker, i have a motion. to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the the house stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow for morning hour debate.

>> the president will address the country tomorrow about the issue, tomorrow night at 9:00 p.m. eastern. and we will have live coverage for you on the c-span networks. it's also been a topic on the floor in both the house and the senate. yesterday florida senator bill nelson announced a resolution authorizing military force against isis. mr. president, i have filed today and would like to insert in the record, if i may be granted, the senate joint

resolution that i have filed today. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. nelson: mr. president, this is a resolution that will express the authorization for the use of united states armed forces against the islamic state in iraq and the levant. mr. president, it is a resolution that has been necessitated by legal scholars since the president has used his existing authorization for the use of military force in iraq, most recently against isis -- isil, isis ... i.t it's the same thing. the levant is that area broadly

from about baghdad all the way to the mediterranean. that's i-s-i-l. isis, i-s-i-s, is the islamic state in iraq and syria. and, of course, we know that this organization that is calling itself an islamic caliphate, it knows no jurisdictional boundaries; it has taken large swaths of territory in syria as well as iraq; and when the president successfully employed the use of air power, both manned and unmanned, against isis targets

as they were marching toward irbil, the capital of kurdistan, and then likewise, as they were marching toward the mosul damn, the president used his -- the mosul darnlings the president used his norse iraqrand also hif to protect americans. there are americans in irbil, there are americans in bag dated, there are -- in baghdad, there are americans in other places in iraq, and protection of the dam in mosul was to protect those americans downriver, because if the dam were blown, that would have flooded all downriver, and it would have

>> thein coordination with kurds as well as the iraq he army. so that we can collect the intelligence that is necessary as you prepare to go after them in syria. but the president has done something more. he has started to put together a coalition realizing that the ameran