Today’s hearing affords us an opportunity to assess and discuss the 30 plus Iraq-related pieces of legislation introduced in the House and referred to our Committee.

Turning to the bills we are reviewing today:

• 11 of the 30 plus bills focus on withdrawal regardless of what happens on the ground;
• 14 seek to micromanage foreign and military policy in Iraq;
• 5 call for more oversight of spending and reconstruction—including H.R. 1062 introduced by Minority Leader John Boehner and H.R. 714, introduced by Representative Mike Thompson [D-CA]; 
• 3 focus on supporting our troops and ensuring victory in Iraq—including H.Res. 147, introduced by Congressman Steve King of Iowa, and H.Res.150 introduced by Congressman John Shadegg of Arizona.

I am concerned that majority of the bills fail to address the consequences that withdrawal from Iraq—regardless of success or failure—will have on U.S. national security interests.

The war in Iraq is part of a far larger struggle against Islamist militants.

These bills and the Supplemental seek to micromanage the war effort in order to compel the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.

All of us want our troops to come home, but it matters how that happens.

My daughter-in-law Lindsay, a Marine pilot, just received orders to return for a second tour of duty in Iraq, where she will be stationed until February.

She will spend another Christmas and New Year celebration away from her family.

Like her husband Doug, also a Marine pilot, Lindsay is devoted to her country and does not complain in any way about returning to Iraq.

That’s what she is trained to do.

While Lindsay is in Iraq, too many of my colleagues are second-guessing her mission; second-guessing our commanders on the ground; and seeking to dictate from here what needs to be done on the battlefront.

It is my hope that we don’t give up on confronting the threat; that we don’t give up on the Iraqi people or the ability of our armed forces to get the job done.