[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.

                          ____________________