[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 131 (Friday, September 11, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H5969-H5971]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
McCarthy) to inquire of the majority leader the schedule for the week 
to come.
  Mr. McCARTHY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, on Monday and Tuesday, no votes are expected in the 
House. On Wednesday, the House will meet at noon for morning hour and 2 
p.m. for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 p.m.
  On Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning hour and noon 
for legislative business.
  On Friday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business. 
Last votes of the week are expected no later than 3 p.m.
  Members are advised that, given the shortness of the week due to the 
Jewish holiday, Members should be prepared for a full legislative day 
on Friday.
  Mr. Speaker, the House will consider a number of suspensions next 
week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business 
today.
  In addition, the House will consider H.R. 758, the Lawsuit Abuse 
Reduction Act of 2015, sponsored by Representative Lamar Smith. This 
bill will ensure that innocent Americans are protected against 
frivolous lawsuits.
  Mr. Speaker, the House will also consider two measures that respond 
to the horrific videos released throughout the summer on Planned 
Parenthood practices. The first is H.R. 3134, sponsored by 
Representative Diane Black, which places a 1-year moratorium on funding 
to Planned Parenthood while Congress investigates these videos.
  Three committees in the House are currently looking into Planned 
Parenthood activities, funding, and adherence to the law.
  The second will be a bill sponsored by Representative Trent Franks, 
which adds criminal penalties to people who violate the Born Alive Act, 
for medical providers who fail to provide medical care to a baby who 
survives the abortion procedure.
  Americans are rightfully outraged by what was depicted in these 
videos, and Congress and the American people have a right to know 
exactly what is happening.
  These two critical bills will ensure that we get all the facts and 
protect those who cannot protect themselves.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for the information.
  I would just observe that we share the view of the--you used the term 
``horrific'' videos. As I understand it, these videos are heavily 
edited. I don't want to get into debate about them; we will have that 
debate next week, but we are certainly concerned about, as the 
gentleman knows, 97 percent of the health care delivered by Planned 
Parenthood has nothing to do with the issues raised in the video, 
edited or not.
  We would hope that we could come to an agreement on making sure that 
those healthcare services that are provided to literally thousands and 
thousands of women are not interrupted, but I understand that we will 
have that debate next week.
  Mr. Leader, you do not include in your schedule a continuing 
resolution for the funding of government. As the gentleman knows, we 
have essentially, as I count it, 5 full legislative days left. We have 
8 or 9 days left, but there are many partial days.
  We have 5 full legislative days left before the government runs out 
of authority and funds to continue. As the gentleman knows, I have been 
urging the majority leader and your side of the aisle to enter into 
discussions on levels of funding and funding itself.
  We suspended the appropriations process approximately in the middle 
of July when the Interior bill was pulled from the floor. Presumably, 
it was pulled because there was a possibility of amendments being 
offered regarding the Confederate battle flag, but notwithstanding 
that, half the appropriation bills have not been brought to the floor. 
No appropriation bills have passed the Senate.
  I have been urging, for at least 2 months now, that we have 
discussions. I discussed with Mr. Van Hollen today there have been no 
discussions between Mr. Van Hollen and Mr. Price with reference to a 
resolution of the funding levels for a CR or the length of term of the 
CR.
  I had an opportunity to talk to Ranking Member Nita Lowey today of 
the Appropriations Committee. She informs me that there have been no 
substantive discussions between herself and Mr. Rogers and that Mr. 
Rogers, in fact, has no indication of what funding levels will be going 
forward or what a CR would look like or the length of period of time it 
would be for.
  In addition to that, I have discussed with the leader's office, 
Leader Pelosi's office--and I know that neither my office nor Leader 
Pelosi's office have been in discussion either with

[[Page H5970]]

the Speaker's office or your office in a substantive way with how we 
might be moving forward on a CR.
  I, frankly, thought that this coming week would be the week for us to 
consider a continuing resolution so that given the very, very short 
number of days available in September for us to meet, that there would 
be time for the Senate to receive a continuing resolution for us to 
consider that and pass it so that we would not, again, confront a 
crisis of confidence, a crisis in terms of ongoing government 
operations, but also a crisis of confidence not only in our country, 
but around the world that the United States of America could manage its 
finances in a responsible way.
  With that said, Mr. Majority Leader, can you share with us some 
insight? Again, I know that it is not on the schedule, and this is 
about scheduling, but we have 5 full days and 3 partial days and a 
ninth day which the Pope is going to be here, and I know we will be 
having votes on that day, but we have such a minimal time before the 
government runs out of authority and funding for its operations that it 
seems to me that it is critical that today or tomorrow or Monday, we 
decide how we are going to proceed.

  I will be pleased to yield to my friend, the majority leader.
  Mr. McCARTHY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  As the gentleman knows, the fiscal year does end on September 30. As 
the gentleman knows, we have had this discussion often because our 
intention was always to solve this problem very early. As history 
shows, this is the earliest we have ever started the appropriation 
process for Congress.
  I had grave concern during the summer, reading many of the headlines 
from some on your side of the aisle and over on your side of the aisle 
in the Senate, that it was a strategy to make sure the appropriation 
process would not work.
  When votes came to the floor, very strongly, you were able to hold 
many of your Members. Counterpart with the number two on the Senate 
side, Senator Schumer, his whole strategy for the summer, he was much 
more effective where none of them came up.
  We know the number of days we have left. We are continuing 
conversations on government funding, and we will inform Members when 
action is scheduled in the House.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Leader, there are 5 days--full days--left to go. You 
are right; we have been discussing this for some period of time, but 
with all due respect to any strategy that we have, you only brought six 
bills to the floor and passed six bills through this House, and that is 
only half of the appropriation bills.
  The MilCon bill got 255 votes; the Energy and Water, 240; the 
Legislative Branch, 357; the Commerce, Justice, Science, 242; T-HUD, 
which we didn't like and, apparently, a lot of your Members didn't like 
either, 216 votes; and the Defense bill, 278 votes.
  There was nothing on our side that stopped the appropriations process 
from going forward. You chose not to bring six of those bills to the 
floor. I don't take any blame on our side of the aisle, whatever our 
strategy might be.
  Our strategy has been consistent with, very frankly, the chairman of 
the Appropriations Committee strategy, and that is to have funding 
levels on both the defense and nondefense side of the ledger which were 
rational and reasonable.
  I repeat ad nauseam, as you know--and you are tired of hearing me 
repeat it, I am sure--Mr. Rogers' comments that the sequester levels 
given to the Appropriations Committee to meet their responsibilities 
were ill-conceived and unrealistic. That is Mr. Rogers' quote, not 
mine, not our strategy.
  That was what the chairman of the Appropriations Committee on your 
side of the aisle characterizes the funding levels that you have 
provided the committee for--I don't mean you individually--the House 
has provided the chairman with to write his bills up.
  As a result of being unable to do that, every time you brought a bill 
to the floor, it has gotten a majority of the votes. Forget about us. 
We can't control. We have 188 Members. You can pass anything you want.
  The appropriations bill process came to a dead halt for two reasons. 
Number one, it is because there are no negotiations for a well-
conceived and realistic alternative to sequester. That is what Hal 
Rogers says--not me--your chairman.
  I continue to be extraordinarily disappointed that we have not 
undertaken any discussions--I mentioned Mrs. Lowey on the 
Appropriations Committee, Mr. Van Hollen on the Budget Committee, 
Leader Pelosi's office, my office--any discussions which have allowed 
us to come to some agreement so that we might in a bipartisan way move 
forward.
  Now, I understand there are a lot of members on your side of the 
aisle who won't vote for anything if it funds Planned Parenthood. I get 
that. They don't come close to making the majority of this House.

                              {time}  1300

  Until such time as we start acting with the majority's will 
prevailing as opposed to a faction's prevailing, I think we are going 
to be in this gridlock that is undermining the confidence of our 
country, of our government, and of our international partners.
  I would hope that, in the next, perhaps, few days, Mr. Leader--and I 
am prepared to spend time today, this weekend, Monday, and Tuesday--I 
know we are not coming back until Wednesday--to try to work with you 
and with the relevant committees, with the Speaker, and with the leader 
of my party to try to get us to a point where we can do exactly what 
you want to do and what we want to do, and that is not have this 
government by crisis that we have now. This is the third time on an 
unrelated issue where there has been a problem with funding government 
as is our responsibility at whatever levels we agree upon. I would hope 
that we could pursue those discussions. I have been urging that for 
months now, and we haven't done that.
  You also did not mention something that I have discussed with you and 
discussed with the Speaker that I bring up all the time. As a result of 
our failure to fund the Export-Import Bank and to reauthorize the 
Export-Import Bank, we are losing jobs, and we have lost a substantial 
number of jobs already. Speaker Boehner indicated in a quote not too 
long ago that, in fact, there are thousands of jobs on the line that 
would disappear pretty quickly if the Ex-Im Bank were to disappear.
  Essentially, in terms of new loans and new products that could be 
sold abroad, the Ex-Im Bank has disappeared as of July. I have had 
discussions with the Speaker, and I think he has been quoted publicly 
as saying he thought the Ex-Im Bank was, in fact, in some form, going 
to be considered on the floor this month.
  I ask my friend, the majority leader, as it is not on the schedule, 
but, again, it is not as if we have months to go--we have 5 days to 
go--before the end of the fiscal year and that funding for the Ex-Im 
Bank expires. Can the gentleman tell me whether there is any 
possibility of that being considered within the next 5 or 8--if you 
want to count 8--legislative days we have left in this month?
  I yield to my friend.
  Mr. McCARTHY. I thank my friend for yielding.
  I would not feel these colloquies were complete if I did not get this 
question. I admire the gentleman's consistency in asking it, but my 
answer remains just as consistent. There is no action scheduled in the 
House on Ex-Im.
  Mr. HOYER. With that answer, the gentleman can be assured that I will 
keep asking the question, and I keep asking the question not to vex the 
majority leader. I keep asking the question because the Speaker and I 
agree that we are losing jobs. We are putting ourselves in a 
noncompetitive position with the rest of the world.
  By not bringing this up to the floor, Mr. Leader--I haven't counted 
specifically, but I will bet you, however, that there are over 275 
votes on this floor to pass a reauthorization and extension of the 
Export-Import Bank. The failure to bring it to the floor is not because 
it doesn't enjoy a majority of support--it does. When it last came to 
the floor--when Mr. Cantor and I worked on the legislation and brought 
it to this floor--it got well over 300 votes. Now, I understand there 
are some in your party who don't like it; but, very frankly, we have 
got to get over, because some in your party don't like

[[Page H5971]]

things, that we gridlock the Congress of the United States and make 
America uncompetitive and undermine confidence in this country.
  Yes, Mr. Leader, you are very tolerant, and I will keep asking the 
question because I think it is critical for our economy, and it is 
critical to get us off this gridlock where a small minority of the 
Congress of the United States is holding good policy hostage.
  Now, let me also ask you: On October 29, the highway bill will lose 
its authorization, which we have been extending in very short periods 
of time. The gentleman knows no Governor, no mayor, no county 
commissioner, no contractor can possibly plan infrastructure 
improvements--highways, bridges, sewer systems, whatever--on the basis 
of 90-day or 60-day extensions of authority and funding.
  The gentleman didn't mention it. It is not coming up next week. I 
understand that we have a longer time--but not a long time--between now 
and October 29 when the highway bill will expire. As the gentleman, I 
am sure, knows and agrees, the failure to do that will have a 
significant adverse effect on jobs for Americans and a significant 
adverse effect on the infrastructure of this country.
  Can the gentleman tell me whether or not he expects a highway bill to 
come to the floor anytime within the timeframe prior to October 29?
  I yield to my friend.
  Mr. McCARTHY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  As the gentleman did mention, the highway program is currently 
authorized through the end of October. The relevant committees are at 
work--I met with them today--developing the best path forward, and I 
will keep you apprised, as well as the Members, and I expect it to be 
done before the deadline.
  Mr. HOYER. That is good news that the highway bill, at least, will be 
done before the deadline.
  I will tell my friend, like the majority leader, I had a discussion 
today with Mr. DeFazio, who is the ranking Democrat on the relevant 
committee, Mr. Shuster being the chairman. I know they have had some 
discussions, but I also know that they are not very close to an 
agreement. I know that neither one of them likes the Senate bill that 
was sent to us. The majority leader and I had discussions on that. We 
didn't take that up. I thought that was probably the right thing for 
the majority leader to do, to not take it up.
  Again, the majority leader says he is engaged. I would hope he uses 
his good office to get us to a place where we can pass a bill in a 
bipartisan fashion as, during my 34 years, has normally been the case. 
That extends for a significant period of time--no less than 5 years--at 
levels that are necessary to meet the infrastructure needs of this 
country, both from an economic standpoint and a national security 
standpoint.
  I yield to my friend if he wants to say anything further. If not, Mr. 
Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________