[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 74 (Tuesday, June 3, 1997)]
[House]
[Page H3250]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                CONTINUING RESOLUTION BEING HELD HOSTAGE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Florida [(Mr. Stearns]) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the supplemental 
appropriations bill; specifically, the provision of the bill known as 
the automatic continuing resolution, or CR.
  Two weeks ago we left Washington without passing the supplemental 
appropriations measure. This was unfortunate. Unfortunately for all 
Americans, and in particular for the victims of the recent Midwestern 
floods, this important and well-meaning legislation has become a 
hostage because of the President and some Democrats who do not like 
this CR which was attached to this bill.
  During the floor debate on the bill, the House voted overwhelmingly 
to amend the bill to include an automatic continuing resolution, a 
failsafe provision that would automatically and fully fund the 13 
appropriation measures, should any or all fail to be passed into law. 
In other words, we added a commonsense provision to an already fair 
measure.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to call it an insurance policy for the 
American people. The provision we are talking about that the President 
and some Democrats object to is quite simple and generous. Should any 
of the bills fail to become law by the end of the fiscal year, they 
would be fully funded at 100 percent of this year's funding level. In 
other words, there are no cuts, no elimination of any programs as a 
result of passage of the CR.
  The President objects to this. Does the President want the 
opportunity to spend more money? Does he want an increased level? 
Furthermore, the passage of this simple CR would balance the budget 
within 5 years set forth in the budget agreement.

                              {time}  1915

  It is incredible that we have the claims that supporting a balanced 
budget could actually impose a problem. But simply, if the President 
was truly serious about balancing the budget he would support the CR 
provision and Congress could at long last pass a much-needed disaster 
relief act.
  Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, the President has promised to veto this 
important legislation. It is a very unfortunate situation we have 
because the people in the flood-ravaged Midwest need this money. We 
have set aside money for them but they need this bill. But again, we 
have a CR attached to it and the President seems more concerned with 
making sure we do not pass this CR.
  The troubling thing about the President's proclaimed opposition to 
this supplemental is that he claims to support the Republicans' efforts 
to preclude a Government shutdown. He has often stated publicly his 
desire to initiate a failsafe mechanism, but when push comes to shove 
and we present him with an opportunity, he refuses it.
  He claims that America needs a solution. The CR is such a solution. I 
urge the President to support it. It is a simple and reasonable effort 
to protect the American people from the kind of partisan political 
battles that shut down the Government and suspended essential 
Government services 2 years ago, the kind of political battle the 
President claims he opposes.
  Does the President want to shut down the Government? Does he want 
hardship and inconvenience? I do not think he does.
  In other words, as if it were not bad enough to say, I am against a 
CR, he is also against a simple supplemental to help the flood victims. 
The proclaimed opposition to the CR has really nothing to do with the 
supplemental. Rather, the President's opposition is that he wants a 
fail-safe mechanism itself, and he does not think the CR does it, so he 
is going to veto it. But, Mr. Speaker, the majority of people on the 
House floor overwhelmingly supported this CR. It was a very large vote.
  Let me conclude by saying to my colleagues, the Republican Party did 
not shut down the Federal Government in 1995, and we will not be 
responsible for a shutdown if it happens again. Back then the Congress 
sent to the President more than adequate appropriations bills, and he 
simply vetoed them. To preclude this from happening again we have 
included a simple insurance policy in the supplemental, and yet, Mr. 
Speaker, he is opposed to it.
  In other words, we have included within this bill a provision to 
ensure the uninterrupted continuation of vital services like Social 
Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and veterans benefits. We have attempted 
to remove politics from the appropriations process, and yet the 
President unfortunately objects.
  For the good of our country and the peace of mind of her citizens, we 
should pass into law this commonsense insurance mechanism, a CR that 
will keep the Government operational when partisan conflicts arise. I 
am an original cosponsor of this legislation and a longtime supporter 
of the ideals behind the CR. I urge the President to reconsider his 
position, not just for the immediate needs of the flood victims, but 
for the long-term good of the entire country.

                          ____________________