mr. chairman , this amendment is based upon two facts that i think we agree on on both sides of the aisle . 
one was very articulately expressed by the chairman of the defense appropriations committee earlier today when he asserted the fact that we are a coequal branch of government . 
we are equally responsible for what military activity we engage in . 
we will be held equally accountable . 
and the fact that we hold the purse strings makes it incumbent upon us that we have some expectation of how much a war is going to cost , how we can budget for it , and particularly what measurable criteria are we seeking to enable us to complete our mission . 
the second fact is one that has been expressed time and again , particularly by our senior military officers , that we ought not engage in military activity , that we ought not go to war without a plan to win the peace . 
that is what this amendment addresses . 
it would give nominal resources to the secretary of defense to be able to give us the kind of information that we need to work with the executive branch to evaluate how we are doing in terms of succeeding in our mission in iraq . 
for example , what level of physical infrastructure reconstruction does the administration feel is necessary for the iraqi economy to be viable . 
we have invested billions of dollars in reconstruction . 
how much more might be necessary ? 
in terms of political stability , are we waiting for ratification of the constitution and then a subsequent election ? 
and if that election goes well , will that mean that we can gradually begin completing our mission at least in terms of the proportion of the troops that are currently committed ? 
and , particularly , what level of iraqi security forces will be necessary ? 
we have been given wildly varying numbers , 40 , 000 to 160 , 000 to over 200 , 000 . 
what does it mean for iraqi security forces to be adequately trained and equipped ? 
does it mean a 6-week training course in human rights , which some have suggested meant that they could be considered security forces , or does it mean the kind of intensive training for many months that is comparable to what we give our troops so that they can engage in battle and can show leadership in the face of military confrontation ? 
those are things we need to discuss together . 
what we want are the measurable criteria . 
it is not an unreasonable expectation . 
and when we pass a supplemental that contains $ 600 million for a new embassy that maintains our substantial force in iraq , we want to make sure we do not give any credence to our enemies who , in secretary rumsfeld 's expression , seem to be able to recruit insurgents greater in number than we could ever possibly kill . 
they are able to do so by accusing us of being permanent occupiers , thereby denying iraqis of true sovereignty over their own country . 
