Waxman Gives Preview of His Oversight Goals

January 31, 2007

Bill Bruns , Managing Editor

'We've got to end this war, we've got to get our troops home, and we have to try to restore our reputation as a country that wants peace,' Democratic Congressman Henry Waxman told a standing-room-only audience in the Palisades Woman's Club Sunday afternoon.

Just two days before his powerful Oversight and Government Reform Committee began holding various hearings on actions by the Bush Administration, Waxman outlined his legislative agenda and his priorities as committee chairman. He has ambitious goals, from 'getting legislation passed to help stop global warming' to having the Food and Drug Administration take over tobacco regulation, 'because cigarettes are a delivery system for the drug nicotine.'

But as he glumly admitted, 'The great issue of the moment is the great tragedy in Iraq. The tragedy is enormous and it's getting worse as President Bush proposes not getting out, but in escalating the fight with a surge of troops. Some people argue that a surge three or four years ago could have provided some security, but we came in as occupiers and we came in with incompetent management, with an administration that didn't even think through what would happen after the military victory. They made the worst-case projections as to how dangerous Sadam Hussein had become and the reasons for going to war, and the best-case projections for after we won the war'we would be greeted as liberators, they would be allies of the United States, and all the other Middle East countries would fall in line'the dominoes of democracy.'

Waxman said that when he's challenged to suggest an alternative plan to what the president is promoting, he begins by reminding Republican critics that 'This administration has left us with no good options. If we withdraw immediately, Iraq goes into a civil war with a tremendous amount of fatalities, while drawing in other countries from the Middle East. If we stay there and try to stabilize the situation, we continue the bloodletting of Iraqis and Americans.'

The congressman said he already supports upcoming House and Senate resolutions that will oppose increasing the number of troops going to Iraq. 'But people who know how this sort of thing works know that this isn't going to stop President Bush. He's already increasing the number of troops in Bagdad. So we're going to have to vote on whether or not we're going to fund this effort.'

Several audience members interrupted Waxman and urged him to publicly support cutting off funding for the new troops, but he refused to commit himself.

'I want to see what we're going to vote on,' he said. 'I know that the person who's in charge of the resolution that will be presented on the House floor is Congressman Jack Murtha, and he has called very publicly for a redeployment out of Iraq. So I want to see what his position is. I know a lot of you say, 'Commit to vote against any money.' I may end up there, but I don't want to make any promise until I see what the proposal will be.'

Waxman continued, 'Ultimately, it's a civil war in Iraq, and whose side are we on in a civil war? Are we out there to defend the Shiite government that kills Sunnis? If that's what we're doing, let's leave right away. I'm convinced more and more that's what the Al-Maliki government thinks we're there to do. And we cannot put ourselves in that position. It's a whole nasty business we've unleashed, and we've done so without ever realizing that this was a possibility by those who made the decision to take us to war.'

During the question-and-answer period, Waxman was asked how he would work to forestall a U.S. bombing or invasion of Iran.

'If you want to lose sleep, think about a nuclear-armed Iran. It is a very frightening prospect,' Waxman said. 'But what can we do about it? It seems to me the rational thing to do is not to act unilaterally and not to act militarily, but to do other things first, within the international community,' such as through sanctions imposed by the United Nations. 'They are weak sanctions but sanctions do often work, [as we saw] in South Africa. I've read in the newspaper that the sanctions are having an impact on Iran because the economy is in deep trouble and the majority of the population is under 18 years old. These young people are angry; they don't want the mullahs to tell them what to do with their lives, they don't want to be unemployed. They want what everybody wants'a good life for their families. And if they get angry enough, they can do something right there, we hope, to stop Iran's moving inexorably in the direction of nuclear weapons. So let's keep the squeeze on and maybe we can solve the problem diplomatically. Maybe the leaders of Iran will decide that it's more important to have some contact with the international community, some trade, some better life for their people. We've got to convince them of that fact''without taking military action, Waxman emphasized.

Focusing on another imperiled region of the world, two teenagers from the local Human Rights Watch Student Task Force, Nina Serbedzija of Wildwood School and Chelsea Scharf of Palisades High, thanked Waxman for his 'past votes to protect civilians and save lives in Darfur, but the crimes against humanity continue and are spreading into Chad, and we need stronger leadership to end the atrocities in Darfur. Our Student Task Force has been working to protect the people of Darfur for two years but conditions just get worse. There seems to be more talk than action. Please, what more can you do to help protect the people of Darfur? And how can we help you?'

Waxman answered, 'I'm so heartened when I see high school students care about issues like this,' adding that the U.S. 'needs to provide more funds for the African troops who are trying to keep the peace in Darfur.' He even advocated 'going in there [with military assistance]'not to occupy or kill people, but to save lives. We showed leadership by going into Bosnia and we've got to show leadership again.'

He told the students, 'Keep writing letters and getting those petitions to President Bush, [urging him] not just to 'talk a good talk,' but to actually get us to take action. Congress is ready to do whatever he needs. The president has the power to act and I want him to act now.'