[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 155 (Wednesday, December 1, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H7763-H7767]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 101, FURTHER
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 2011
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 1741 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 1741
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it
shall be in order to consider in the House the joint
resolution (H.J. Res. 101) making further continuing
appropriations for fiscal year 2011, and for other purposes.
All points of order against consideration of the joint
resolution are waived except those arising under clause 9 or
10 of rule XXI. The joint resolution shall be considered as
read. All points of order against provisions in the joint
resolution are waived. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the joint resolution to final
passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of
debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and
ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations;
and (2) one motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized
for 1 hour.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). All
time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.
I yield myself such time as I consume.
[[Page H7764]]
General Leave
Mr. POLIS. I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5
legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R.
1741.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Colorado?
There was no objection.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1741 provides a closed rule for
consideration of H.J. Res. 101, making further continuing
appropriations for fiscal year 2011, and for other purposes. The rule
provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair
and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.
The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the
joint resolution except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI.
The rule provides that the joint resolution shall be considered as
read. The rule waives all points of order against provisions of the
joint resolution. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit the
joint resolution with or without instructions.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of approving a continuing
resolution to maintain a level and consistent funding stream for our
Federal Government. It is one of our primary constitutional
responsibilities as Members of Congress to keep the Federal Government
running through the passage of appropriations legislation. This
continuing resolution will ensure that all necessary and vital
functions of government will continue uninterrupted until both Chambers
of our legislature have completed their work.
If we do not act now, Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government will
effectively shut down this Friday, December 3. This continuing
resolution is a short term, straightforward measure to keep the
government running and get us through the next 2 weeks, until December
18, while bipartisan negotiations continue in the House and the Senate.
It is my hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will work
with us to move this important bill forward and to pass a clean
continuing resolution contained under this rule.
This continuing resolution will fund the Federal Government at levels
already approved by the House in the fiscal year 2010 appropriations
bills and the fiscal year 2009 supplementals. This includes extending
the authority for the Department of Defense to execute the Commanders
Emergency Response Program, an essential tool for military commanders
in Iraq and Afghanistan.
{time} 1040
It would also continue the application period for retroactive stop
loss benefits through the duration of the continuing resolution.
The Retroactive Stop Loss Pay Program provides $500 for each month
served in stop loss status with an average benefit of $3,700 to the
brave servicemen and -women, veterans and beneficiaries of those whose
service was involuntarily extended under stop loss.
This continuing resolution would also continue to fund VA hospitals
already under construction, including one in my home State of Colorado,
the Denver VA Hospital, which serves 58,000 veterans living in
Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, and Wyoming. Millions of veterans and their
families across this Nation depend on the VA for medical care and
support, and we must pass this CR so we continue to build these much-
needed facilities. Absent this CR, construction on these VA facilities
will grind to a halt, leaving our veterans in the lurch. Our veterans
took an oath to defend our country, and they deserve to come home to
better care and a quality hospital that meets their needs.
This CR would also allow the Federal air marshals to maintain the
existing fiscal year 2010 fourth quarter coverage levels for
international and domestic flights. This funding will allow for
continued training, including investigative techniques, criminal
terrorist behavior recognition, firearms proficiency, aircraft specific
tactics, and self-defense measures that are necessary to protect the
flying public.
This funding allows the Federal air marshals to fulfill their mission
of protecting air passengers and crew. Protecting our Nation and
combating terrorism is a top priority for this Congress, and without
the passage of this CR, those efforts with regard to our air marshals
will grind to a halt, leaving the traveling public at greater risk.
This continuing resolution would also allow the commissioner of U.S.
Customs and Border Protection to maintain the level of Customs and
Border Protection personnel in place for the final quarter and the
final few weeks of fiscal year 2010. This provides proper funding to
keep terrorists and their weapons out of the United States, secure and
facilitate trade and travel and enforce hundreds of U.S. regulations,
including immigration and drug laws.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection law enforcement professionals
serve as America's front-line defense on our Nation's borders at ports
of entry, field stations and check points across the United States.
It's important that we maintain a consistent level of personnel at our
Nation's borders. By interrupting these funds, we would be jeopardizing
Customs and Border Protection's ability to do their job and protect
America. This funding enables these officers to inspect our borders,
process trade, combat terrorism and smuggling.
A vote against this continuing resolution is a vote to gut our border
security when we need it the most.
In addition to extending the existing authority for the Department of
Homeland Security to regulate chemical facilities to prevent high
levels of risk, this continuing resolution would also extend the
existing Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA authority, to
provide technical and financial assistance to States and localities for
pre-disaster hazard mitigation activity.
As an example, in my home State of Colorado, this continuing
resolution would mean keeping in place vital programs like the 2008
Colorado Springs Wildfire Mitigation Project that removes vegetation
around critical facilities and communities; to the 2008 Denver Regional
Hazard Mitigation Plan, which assists 37 communities, townships, and
counties in the Denver metro area in analyzing and assessing their
hazard risks; the 2007 Coal Creek Crossing affecting the town of Erie
in Boulder County, Colorado, flood reduction project that helps the
town of Erie modify infrastructure around the Coal Creek Crossing to
eliminate future damages.
My district, Mr. Speaker, recently suffered one of the worst forest
fires in the history of Colorado, which completely destroyed over 100
residences. These emergencies can strike anywhere, anytime; and if we
fail to pass this continuing resolution, we will cripple the ability of
the Federal Government to help with emergencies wherever they occur and
whatever their nature is.
This continuing resolution would also maintain the additional $23
million in funding for the Department of the Interior's new Bureau of
Ocean Energy Management for increased inspections for offshore oil
rigs. In light of the recent disaster we all witnessed unfold this
summer in the Gulf of Mexico, these funds should be the last thing that
we want to allow to expire or to cut. These funds are critical to
ensure that tragedies like the Deepwater Horizon spill are not repeated
and that our oil rigs are inspected.
These funds allow existing rigs to continue operating in a manner
that protects the workers on the rigs in the sensitive environmental
areas in which these rigs operate, as well as protect our economy from
future job loss. Interrupting these funds will put offshore oil rig
workers' lives in danger, the environment in danger, and our economy in
danger as well.
The continuing resolution before us also maintains the current rate
of the Foreign Military Financing, FMF, program, to include the $965
million that was advanced for Israel, Egypt, and Jordan in the fiscal
year 2009 supplemental. By providing assistance and aid to our allies
in the Middle East, we strengthen our position and make a vital
investment in global and national security.
A vote against this continuing resolution is a vote to cut off aid to
our allies like Israel and the Middle East at a time when they are
critical for the global fight against terrorism and to prevent the
proliferation of nuclear weapons to Iran.
Through this continuing resolution, we also continue the rate of
operations
[[Page H7765]]
for the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund at $700 million.
This section also continues the terms and conditions included in the
fiscal year 2009 and 2010 supplementals which will help build and
maintain the counterinsurgency capability of Pakistan under the same
terms and conditions.
Mr. Speaker, I have not been a supporter of the escalation of efforts
in Afghanistan or in Iraq, but I think there is a strong bipartisan
consensus in this body that assisting the Government of Pakistan in
counterinsurgency efforts is one of the most critical fronts to protect
Americans from terrorism, from a resurgence of the Taliban and from
allowing al Qaeda a foothold in that area.
There are vital programs that we must continue to fund without
interruption. There may be some who question the need for a CR. Let me
remind everyone that with the exception of fiscal years 1989, 1995 and
1997, at least one continuing resolution has been enacted for each
fiscal year since 1955.
I encourage my colleagues to support the necessary rule for this CR
as well as the underlying CR to prevent the Federal Government from
shutting down, jeopardizing our allies and friends across the world, as
well as the safety and security of Americans.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. DREIER. I want to begin by expressing my appreciation to my good
friend from Boulder, a hard-working member of the Rules Committee, and
I want to associate myself with much of what he said.
We obviously have very important priorities that need to be
addressed, whether it's dealing with environmental issues, border
security, FMF, the Pakistani anti-insurgency effort, all of those
things are very, very high priorities which need to be addressed; and
so I think he is right on target in pointing to those.
The unfortunate thing, Mr. Speaker, is what is it that got us to the
point where we are at this moment.
We all know that the American people are hurting. We know that
unemployment benefits have expired. We know that we have looked at the
election that took place on November 2 and that, in and of itself, was
evidence of a high level of anger and frustration that has been shown
by the American people, I mean, the largest turnover in this
institution in nearly three-quarters of a century. And by virtue of
that, it seems to me that we need to realize that there is a message
that has been received, and that message is a clear one.
This business-as-usual pattern cannot continue. And when I say
``business as usual,'' it's a very tragic and sad commentary as to what
business as usual has become. Because in this 111th Congress, we have
for the first time since passage of the 1974 Budget and Impoundment Act
not passed a budget. We have not even dealt with the budget issue, and
that has played a role in getting us to where we are at this moment.
The importance of keeping the government running is one which
Democrats and Republicans alike acknowledge, but we also know that we
have what my friend described as constitutional responsibilities; and
those constitutional responsibilities, under article 1, section 9, are
for us to do everything that we can to make sure that we responsibly
expend those taxpayer dollars. We basically abrogated our
responsibility.
So for the first time in history, we have not passed a budget. And
then, Mr. Speaker, if you look at what has happened in the last 2
years, we have for the first time ever not allowed Democrats or
Republicans an opportunity to participate in a free-flowing open debate
on appropriations bills, which had always been the case on virtually
every appropriations bill up until this Congress.
{time} 1050
And it's unfortunate that we have gotten to this point, because if we
had had that free-flowing debate, Mr. Speaker, I'm convinced that we
wouldn't be here today with this continuing resolution. Of course, I
acknowledge that continuing resolutions have taken place in the past,
but I wrote down the remarks that my friend just offered when he said
that this continuing resolution will continue the funding levels that
we have had already in existence. That's the funding level for the
massive trillion-dollar so-called stimulus bill, the appropriations
bills which have seen a 91 percent increase in the past 4 years in
nondefense--nondefense discretionary spending. That's what is being
maintained with this continuing resolution, and that is why we are
very, very concerned, Mr. Speaker, about continuing to move in that
direction.
Now, I believe that there are a number of things that have to be
done. And the reason that I'm concerned and opposed to the continuing
resolution that we have before us is that it does perpetuate this
``business as usual.'' So I mentioned the message that came from the
November 2 election. We all know that. Democrats and Republicans alike
recognize that the American people are angry, they are hurting, and
they want change.
Well, Mr. Speaker, we know how important this issue is that we are
trying to address. We have the Debt Commission, which was scheduled to
have a vote today. It's now been postponed until Friday. They are
looking at attacking this issue. We have a month before the 112th
Congress convenes. And it seems to me that at this moment, certainly
following the outcome of the November 2 election, the responsible thing
for us to do would be to take on these issues right here and now.
We are looking at the challenge of getting the economy growing, as I
said in my 1-minute presentation. And I bring this up because I know my
friend from Boulder shares the commitment I have to prying open new
markets around the world so that we can create good American jobs for
people.
In fact, I met yesterday with the new Ambassador, Gabriel Silva, from
Colombia, who has just taken over from Carolina Barco, who did a
spectacular job, as we all know, working diligently to try and pass
that U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement which has been languishing for
3 years. And again, for the first time in history, having passed the
Trade Act in 1974, we saw that measure thrown aside by Speaker Pelosi
nearly 3 years ago after the deal had been signed and was sent up by
then-President Bush.
The numbers that we got yesterday from this meeting that I'm going to
be releasing in a ``Dear Colleague,'' that I know my friend will look
at, interestingly enough is in the area of agricultural products. We
have seen the level of exports of U.S. agricultural goods drop from 46
percent to 22 percent in the last 2 years from the U.S. to Colombia.
And at the same time, Colombia is dramatically expanding its trade
relationship with Mercosur, the four countries in South America:
Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, and Brazil. They developed a greater
linkage with Western Europe. And here in the United States of America,
we could create good jobs, get our economy growing and generate
revenues to deal with many of these priority items that my friend
mentioned in his remarks that need to be addressed. We'd have the
revenues to deal with border security, foreign policy issues, and
environmental issues if we could create good American jobs by opening
up these markets.
And so that is why, Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that, as we look at
the notion of a 17-day continuing resolution to keep the government
going and the expiration of unemployment benefits, what we should be
doing is we should have a laser-like effort focused on our need to
create good American manufacturing jobs.
My California colleague was critical of me for talking about the
importance of creating union jobs. He said that I couldn't have it both
ways because I didn't vote for the nearly trillion-dollar stimulus bill
and somehow want to create good union jobs by expanding market-opening
opportunities for U.S. workers. Well, I believe that union and nonunion
workers will benefit.
Workers from companies, as I mentioned in my 1-minute speech, like
Caterpillar, like John Deere, like Whirlpool and others, companies in
my State of California, would have a chance to have union members,
union and nonunion workers, have opportunities that
[[Page H7766]]
don't exist today because we haven't opened up these markets.
And so, Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that as we look at the challenges
that are lying ahead, the notion of saying we are going to continue
funding at the levels that created a 91 percent increase in nondefense
discretionary spending, that we're going to continue the funding levels
that have created that obviously failed $787 billion, if you add
interest and all, it's a trillion-dollar stimulus bill which has been
decried as having failed by people all across the political spectrum,
and if you look at the notion of our denying the American people a
chance to have their proposals heard through their elected
representatives with the kind of free-flowing debate when it comes to
the notion of trying to bring about reductions in spending is just
plain wrong.
That is why I'm going to urge my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, to oppose
this measure. I believe that we can do better.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I agree with my colleague from California that to the extent we can
grow American markets we need to work together in a bipartisan way to
do that. I joined my colleague on letters to the President as
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to encourage the further
development of trade relationships, certainly starting with trade
agreements that are very near completion with Colombia, Panama, and
South Korea.
And also, I had the opportunity to host the honorable ambassador from
Panama, Jaime Aleman, in my district of Colorado not too long ago, and
I was able to introduce him to a number of Colorado businesses which
stand to benefit from these.
Now, of course, as a matter of how this comes to pass, that these
efforts could not be initiated by this body, we could not have an
amendment to a CR if this was an open rule. We could not have an
amendment to an appropriations bill which contained a trade agreement.
It has to be negotiated and delivered to us by the administration.
And I know that President Obama has been committed to delivering and
working on these trade agreements. In fact, in this very body, in the
State of the Union address, President Obama very proudly talked about
the export agenda and what it meant for American job creation. Of
course, this means union jobs and it means nonunion jobs. It means job
creation overall. The President remains committed to continuing to grow
the market for American products and services across the world. That
includes enforcing intellectual property provisions and it includes
making sure that American products are available across the entire
world.
Now, again, one of the issues that would be threatened if this
continuing resolution is not passed is the flow of products across our
border. The funding will run out for the Border Patrol and the ports of
entry. Products coming into this country, for good reason, have to be
inspected. Some of that has to do with whether there are illegal,
illicit products, narcotics that are being smuggled, whether there are
illegal people that are being smuggled, or whether products that are
not allowed to be sold here or were not created in compliance with our
existing trade agreements are created. The border security efforts
would be gutted if this continuing resolution does not pass, leaving
trade in the lurch and leaving American job creation in the lurch. So
this bill has an important nexus in international trade.
The passage of this continuing resolution will facilitate the
continued funding of our ports of entry, the continued funding of our
border inspection services for both goods and people, which must
continue. What degree of confidence would our negotiating partners of
South Korea, Panama, and Colombia and many others have on our own
ability to deliver on our trade agreements if the funding runs out at
our ports of entry for goods and products? We must not allow that to
happen.
{time} 1100
I also certainly agree that the public, as demonstrated in the last
election, they want a change in the business as usual, and I think that
change has not yet fully manifested itself. Yesterday this body passed
the Pickford-Cobell bill, a long-overdue bill to pass, but it had one
earmark in it, a Republican earmark from the Senate, from Senator Jon
Kyl of Arizona, a very large earmark that apparently was the price of
support of getting it out of that body.
I am happy to say that this continuing resolution before us today is
a very clean CR, a very clean continuing resolution, that would allow
during this negotiating process--and where we wind up with regard to
these appropriation bills next year and the year after is a very
important issue for political discussion, a very important issue
between both parties to come to consensus around what we can do to pass
both bodies. But it is not what we are debating here today. We are
simply allowing the Federal Government to continue to operate its ports
of entries, its border security, counterinsurgency efforts in Pakistan,
continued aid to Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and the Middle East, continuing
to allow these programs to operate for a 2-week period while we seek
the bipartisan consensus that will emerge and is necessary to continue
to be able to pass the appropriations bills that are necessary to allow
government to continue funding.
So this CR is an important part of our democratic process, and at
least one continuing resolution has been enacted for every fiscal year
since 1955. Traditionally they have been in many of those cases clean
continuing resolutions, and simply allowed at the previously agreed
upon rates by these bodies the Federal Government to continue while the
negotiations are pending.
I also believe it would strike panic in global financial markets if
the Federal Government closes down and people don't have confidence
that this Congress can even allow the Federal Government to continue
its routine operations while the negotiating process for future
agreements is still underway. So I encourage my colleagues to support
this process through its conclusion over the next 2 weeks and support
this continuing resolution.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this
resolution.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, it is standard and bipartisan practice to
consider continuing resolutions under a closed rule. I would say this
has been the practice on both sides of the aisle. Republicans have
issued closed rules for every continuing resolution that they
considered in both the 108th and 109th Congresses. Our goal with this
continuing resolution is to do this in as clean a way as possible that
allow these vital functions of government to continue to function:
facilitation of international trade, our counterinsurgency efforts in
Pakistan, our border security, and our sky marshals.
In recent history, again since 1955, at least one continuing
resolution has been enacted in each fiscal year except for three. And,
in fact, during the entire 59-year period, from 1952 to 2010, there
were only four instances when all of the regular appropriation acts
were enacted on time.
Mr. Speaker, the democratic process is a time-consuming one, but it
is one that is worthwhile, and it is one that ultimately will reflect
the will of the American people with appropriations bills that emerge
from the Senate and from the House ultimately to be signed by the
President. This continuing resolution gives our democracy time to work
and makes sure that the world will not lose confidence in our country.
It makes sure that our vital security interests here and abroad are
maintained--our aid to our allies, our security, and our ports of entry
here at home. We must make sure that the safety of the American people
doesn't pay the price for the time it takes for our democracy to work.
I strongly encourage my colleagues to support the rule and the bill.
I would like to thank Chairman Obey for his leadership on this bill,
and his staff for their hard work and their dedication.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and the rule.
I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question
on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
[[Page H7767]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________