[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 193 (Thursday, December 6, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Page S7328]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]





                         FUNDING THE GOVERNMENT

  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, later today, the House is poised to 
send us a 2-week continuing resolution, which will give us time to hash 
out the remainder of the appropriations process this year. I expect it 
will pass this Chamber later this afternoon. President Trump and my 
Republican colleagues now have to decide what they want to do after 
those 2 weeks are up and, hopefully, even sooner.
  As everybody knows, Democrats have offered to pass the bipartisan DHS 
appropriations bill agreed to 6 months ago, which includes $1.6 billion 
for border security. There has been some confusion about that figure.
  Let me be clear. The $1.6 billion cannot be used to construct any 
part of President Trump's 30-foot-tall, concrete border wall. It can be 
used only for fencing, using technology currently deployed at the 
border, only where the experts say fencing is appropriate and makes 
sense as a security feature.
  This is something Democrats have always been for: smart, effective, 
appropriate border security. This is so good that every Republican 
appropriator signed off on that bill a few months ago, including 
Senator McConnell, Senator Shelby, Senator Rubio, and Senator Graham. 
They were all for it.
  This is a bipartisan compromise proposal. If they can't go for the 
proposal that they signed off on and negotiated because President Trump 
is pounding the table in an irrational way, there is a second option. 
Democrats have also offered to pass the six bipartisan appropriations 
bills and a continuing resolution for the Department of Homeland 
Security. This continuing resolution doesn't resolve this issue but 
continues to fund the Homeland Security Department. We think that 
continuing resolution should be for a year.
  Both options would receive 60 votes in the Senate, would pass in the 
House, and would get us home in time for the Christmas holiday, which I 
know many people want to do. I have heard that from many of my 
Republican friends.
  As I said, either option would keep the government funded over 
Christmas. We don't want to see the government shut down over 
Christmas, even though President Trump seems to brag that he wants one. 
The one and only way we approach a shutdown is if President Trump 
refuses both of our proposals and demands $5 billion or more for a 
border wall.
  The wall request is a nonstarter for many reasons. Here are three:
  First, when President Trump proposed this as a candidate, he said: 
``I will have Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words.'' The idea that 
the American taxpayer now has to foot the bill doesn't make sense.
  Second, there is no plan for the wall. They haven't said where they 
want to build it or how high it is. Let me make clear that I don't like 
any wall, but how can you spend $5 billion when there is no plan? It 
shows that this is sort of political fodder for President Trump. It 
appeals to his base, but he doesn't even care that much that his whole 
government, his whole administration has not submitted any specific 
plans.
  Third, last year we put $1.345 billion into Homeland Security for 
border security. Not a nickel of that has been spent on a wall. It 
couldn't be. The language didn't allow it. But virtually none of it has 
been spent at all. They still have that $1.34 billion they haven't even 
spent the vast majority of, and already they are demanding $5 billion 
more.
  Some would say demanding $1.6 billion more is too much, but the idea 
that they haven't spent last year's money and they are demanding such a 
huge amount this year makes no sense at all. To ask the American 
taxpayer to foot the bill for an unplanned, unnecessary, ineffective 
border wall is just preposterous.
  We know why President Trump is doing this, as he does so many things. 
It is a throwaway idea to fire up his base. I am ashamed that my 
Republican colleagues, who know better, are going along.
  If President Trump wants to throw a temper tantrum and shut down the 
government over Christmas over the wall, that is his decision, but 
there are two sensible options on the table to avoid one. We do not 
want to let a Trump temper tantrum govern our policies or cause the 
shutdown of the government, which everyone on both sides of the aisle 
knows is the wrong idea.
  One final point: By letting the President's demands get in the way, 
my Republican colleagues are, in effect, ceding Congress's authority 
over the appropriations process to the President. Leader McConnell has 
repeatedly said that he wants regular order on appropriations in the 
Senate. In fact, that has been one of the few bipartisan high moments 
that this Senate has had.

  Last year, we passed a good appropriations process and came together 
on an omnibus. This year, we have funded close to three-quarters of the 
government already--bipartisan, passed by a large majority. That is how 
it should work. It should work the same way for the Department of 
Homeland Security. Regular order would dictate that the Senate consider 
the bipartisan DHS appropriations bill that has been passed out of 
committee and been agreed to by both parties here on the floor. In the 
meantime, the six other bipartisan appropriations bills that have also 
been agreed to by both parties are being held hostage over this 
unnecessarily, to any objective observer.
  If my friend Leader McConnell is so concerned about regular order, he 
would bring up the remaining appropriations bills, as agreed to, for a 
vote. He would tell President Trump that the bipartisan conference 
bill, the bipartisan compromise--or a CR--is the way to go to avoid a 
shutdown.


                    NOMINATION OF BERNARD L. MCNAMEE

  Madam President, on another matter, yesterday, all 49 Democrats voted 
against considering the nomination of Bernard McNamee to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, and that was for good reason. McNamee has 
spent the bulk of his career boosting fossil fuels and slandering 
renewable energy. His views are so anachronistic, regressive, and 
counterfactual that I am sure most of my Republican colleagues would 
not agree with him. He has lied about how renewable energies impact the 
electric grid. He has called support for clean energy ``organized 
propaganda'' and has pitched the debate between fossil fuels and 
renewables, in his words, as a ``clash between liberty and tyranny.'' 
My Republican friends, these words sound absurd. You would think I was 
making them up because it would so vilify Mr. McNamee, but my 
Republican friends can see on video every one of these statements that 
he made.
  At a time when our country is plagued by wildfires and flooding, at a 
time when more powerful storms and hurricanes buffet our coasts, at a 
time when average Americans are feeling the devastating effects of 
climate change right now, we should not elevate someone so biased in 
favor of the fossil fuels that caused these problems in the first 
place.
  We have a final vote today. Every Democrat has voted no. We need one 
Republican to switch to defeat this awful nomination. I hope my 
colleagues will think about it.
  Please, look up the record. Don't just listen to my speech. Just look 
at what this man has said, and I think a good number of you might want 
to vote no.
  On the front page of the New York Times this morning, there was a 
report about how the emission of greenhouse gases has actually 
accelerated in the past few years. Climate change is going to be a 
defining issue of our generation and a defining issue in future 
elections.
  The vote on McNamee clearly shows the difference between the two 
parties on the issue of climate change right now. The Democrats believe 
we need to address climate change with bold and substantial action. We 
cannot wait until a later day. We cannot keep approving folks like 
McNamee to influence energy policy. We need to act. Meanwhile, too many 
of our Republican colleagues pretend the issue doesn't even exist, and 
that is sad.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________