Iraq Debate and the Endangered Species Act - April 2007
Dear Friend,
Three months into the 110th Congress, my colleagues and I are engaged in a historic debate over our military’s future in Iraq. This debate follows months of legislative action on critical domestic issues. So far this year, Congress has passed bills to raise the national minimum wage, cut student loan interest rates in half, roll back taxpayer subsidies for “Big Oil,” expand research of promising stem cell therapies, and lower Medicare prescription drug prices.
I wanted to take a moment now to share with you my thoughts on the Iraq debate and to update you about an issue I have been paying especially close attention to as the Chairman of the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee – a recent attempt to weaken the Endangered Species Act.
Iraq Debate Continues in Congress
In January the President announced his latest strategy for the war in Iraq, calling for an increase in the number of American military personnel deployed to Iraq. It is my judgment that the President’s decision to escalate the level of U.S. troop deployment sends the wrong message to the Iraqi people at precisely the time when our government should be communicating the message that Iraqis must assume greater control for their governance and their security.
I also believe that with more than 3,200 U.S. military personnel killed and thousands more wounded, Congress has a constitutional responsibility to question our continued involvement in Iraq, especially since the President has ignored the advice we know he received from many senior military advisors in deciding to increase the number of military troops deployed there. Day after day, U.S. service people are being killed and injured by bullets and bombs traded by Shiite and Sunni zealots for reasons that predated our involvement and which will likely endure long beyond the time we finally leave Iraq. But for the past four years, the leadership of Congress has abdicated much of its oversight responsibility for the Iraq war and its funding.
Under its new leadership, Congress has finally begun to act on this responsibility. Last month, I joined with a majority of Members of the House and Senate to approve a supplemental defense department spending bill that, for the first time, establishes clear benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet and includes targets for the eventual re-deployment of American military forces. What this means is that, regardless of their ultimate success, Iraqis must begin to "own Iraq." Therefore under the terms of the supplemental appropriations bill, our troops can remain in Iraq beyond August 2008 only to be used for diplomatic protection, counterterrorism operations, and training of Iraqi Security Forces.
The supplemental bill states clearly that the U.S. Congress believes the Maliki government in Iraq will be more apt to accomplish their goals if we do not send more American troops into Baghdad and if we signal to Iraqis that we are planning for a phased withdrawal from their country. We must indicate that it is time to change the policy that keeps our forces acting as the local police officers on the streets of Baghdad, and we must give the Iraqi people greater incentive for taking charge so that our troops can begin to come home.
All Americans want the Iraqi government to succeed and to become the stable democracy we had hoped to achieve at the outset of our involvement. None of us wants Iraq to fall into chaos and to become a haven for terrorists, including al Qaeda. But the current U.S. policy and the proposed increase in the number of American troops offers little promise, I am convinced, of accomplishing those goals, and thus I firmly believe that a change in the direction of our policy is immediately required. The President has expressed his opposing view and has threatened to veto the benchmark language that has now been adopted by both houses of Congress. In issuing such a veto, I believe he would be acting counter to the will of the American people, counter to the expressed desire of Congress and against the essential change in direction that has the best chance of finally leading to a successful conclusion of our involvement in Iraq.
My colleagues and I will continue to debate U.S. policy in Iraq in the coming months and I want you to know that I appreciate all of the calls and letters you have sent me with your own views on this most serious matter.
Another Attack on the Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is one of our nation’s most important and comprehensive environmental laws and I have worked for years to ensure that the Act remains viable. Since its creation nearly 35 years ago, the ESA has provided protection for many threatened and endangered species of plants and animals – including several salmon runs – in the Pacific Northwest and across the nation. While there are certain complications in the application of the law, it is a powerful tool for the environment and I believe the U.S. Congress has a responsibility to ensure that it remains strong and viable.
For these reasons, I was concerned recently to learn of a confidential Interior Department plan to significantly alter the way it protects threatened and endangered species and their habitat. Under the proposal, fewer species would qualify for federal protection, thereby narrowing the scope and effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act. Of particular concern is a plan to change the definition of the “range” of a species to refer primarily to the area where a species currently exists, rather than to the entire range that has been inhabited by that species. It is my fear that this policy could substantially alter the number of species protected and the level of protection they receive.
As the Chairman of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, I am fighting against these changes. During a hearing on March 28th, I expressed my concerns to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dale Hall, and insisted that any major changes to the Endangered Species Act must be approved by Congress.
Director Hall has assured me that the proposal is merely a draft and that no decisions have been made. You can be sure, however, that I will continue to closely monitor this situation and will work with my colleagues on the Interior Subcommittee against any proposal that would dismantle or substantially weaken the Endangered Species Act.
As always, I appreciate your interest in my work here in Congress and welcome your feedback.
Sincerely,
NORM DICKS
Home >> Newsroom >> Top of the Page
|
