mr. chairman , my amendment mirrors in most respects a bipartisan bill that has been filed by the gentleman from iowa ( mr. leach ) xz4002360 and me . 
it establishes a select committee of the house to investigate the awarding and carrying out of contracts to conduct activities in afghanistan and iraq and to fight terrorism . 
the select committee is to be composed of 15 members of the house , appointed by the speaker , with seven being made upon the recommendation of the minority leader . 
the select committee will make such recommendations to the house as it deems appropriate regarding the bidding , contracting , and auditing standards in the issuance of government contracts ; oversight procedures ; forms of payment and safeguards against money laundering ; accountability of contractors and government officials involved in procurement ; penalties for violations of law and abuses in the awarding and carrying out of government contracts ; subcontracting under large , comprehensive contracts ; inclusion and utilization of small businesses through subcontracts or otherwise ; and such other matters as the select committee deems appropriate . 
mr. chairman , according to the congressional research service , the $ 81.9 billion that is before us today in the supplemental appropriations bill is in addition to the approximately $ 200 billion that has been spent so far since the 9/11/2001 attacks on combat operations , on the occupation and on the support of military personnel deployed or supporting operations in iraq and afghanistan . 
congress has recognized that we must meet our operational , technical , and equipment needs of our troops ; and we should acknowledge that the funds for those purposes , particularly those for the safety of our troops , remains paramount . 
but when it comes to ensuring that the funds are properly managed and monitored , we have been largely silent . 
horror stories abound . 
we just heard some by the gentleman from wisconsin ( mr. obey ) xz4003000 as he was talking about yesterday 's news about halliburton , and there is ample cause to carefully scrutinize the procurement process . 
just in january , the special inspector general for the iraqi reconstruction reported that the coalition provisional authority , cpa , could not account for $ 8.8 billion . 
the report said : `` severe inefficiencies and poor management by the cpa have left auditors with no guarantees the money would be properly used. '' that same report indicated that auditors were unable to verify that the money for which they can account was spent for the intended purposes . 
the report raises the possibility of so-called `` ghost '' employees , citing 8 , 206 guards identified as on the payroll at one ministry , although only 602 could be verified . 
at another ministry , payroll listed 1 , 471 security guards when only 642 were working . 
a center for strategic and international studies analysis , which was cited in an october 6 washington post story , indicated that as little as 27 cents of every dollar spent in the iraqi reconstruction is actually filtered down to projects that benefit iraqis . 
according to the testimony of steve ellis of the taxpayers for common sense , who was citing a kpmg study , the commander 's emergency response program , which is in effect a program designed to allow united states military officers to quickly fund small reconstruction projects , maintained little documentation of how taxpayers ' dollars were spent . 
the study found that 42 cases were worth $ 13 million where there were no contracts on file and for 142 cases totaling $ 40 million where there was no proof that the work was even done . 
quoting former coalition provisional authority official frank willis , a february 14 story in the washington post told us of how the united states officials in post-war iraq paid a contractor by stuffing $ 2 million worth of crisp bills into his gunny sack and routinely making cash payments around baghdad from a pick-up truck . 
even if we accept one member 's argument that this was because there were no normal payment procedures , it certainly cries out for better monitoring and better oversight . 
we all may have substantive differences about the merits of the military policy , but there should be unanimous agreement about the congressional role in ensuring that our constituents ' tax dollars are being effectively and judiciously spent ; and that is what this amendment does , mr. chairman . 
it is modeled after the original truman committee that the gentleman from wisconsin ( mr. obey ) xz4003000 mentioned a minute ago . 
as members know , in february 1941 , concerned about possible waste and favoritism , then-senator harry truman introduced legislation creating a congressional committee to investigate how defense contracts were being awarded and managed . 
the special committee to investigate the national defense program , as it became known , exposed deficiencies in the bureaucratic procurement process , advocating for more effective coordination among the involved agencies , and raised important questions regarding production and cost of specific war-related materials . 
during its tenure from 1941 to 1948 , the truman committee convened 432 public hearings and heard 1 , 800 witnesses testify . 
it is estimated their work saved taxpayers over $ 15 billion . 
mr. chairman , by successfully identifying and ferreting out other defective weapons and other war supplies , they saved thousands of lives . 
the truman committee was unanimously respected for its focus on fact-finding and its refusal to succumb to partisanship ; and , in fact , the gentleman from iowa ( mr. leach ) xz4002360 and i share that view . 
the congress has oversight responsibility that can be done without succumbing to partisanship . 
it is our responsibility in this institution , and we have to maintain this body 's integrity by doing that job . 
