[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 200 (Wednesday, December 19, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7827-S7828]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
GOVERNMENT FUNDING
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, we have a short time left before
appropriations expire on Friday. Yesterday, we made some progress.
Thankfully, President Trump appears to have backed down from his
position for billions in direct appropriations for a border wall. For
the past several weeks, the President's insistence on $5 billion for a
wall has been the biggest obstacle to keeping the government open past
Friday.
The President's spokesperson has claimed that the administration can
build the full wall from reprogrammed funds given to other areas of the
government. Let me be very clear. Without our assent, the
administration cannot reprogram funds proposed by Congress for the full
wall. To do so would violate Congress's article I powers. They cannot
do it on their own, and the House and Senate will not approve a wall
from reprogrammed funds or anything else. It will not happen.
We Democrats have opposed massive appropriations for a border wall
for five reasons. It is not effective compared to other border security
measures. Expert after expert has said that. There is no plan to build
it. The President asked for $5 billion, but there are no plans of where
the wall would be, how much it would cost, what each part would be made
of. There is no plan to deal with eminent domain. There are lots of
people on the Texas border and on other borders who don't want to give
up their land. They have said they will fight it in court. It will take
years. We have not heard a peep out of the administration on how to
deal with that. Above all, the President promised that Mexico would pay
for it, not the American taxpayer. Was it a campaign issue? Yes. Yet,
throughout, the President said Mexico would pay for it. He never
campaigned on having Americans pay for a massive border wall,
ineffective as it would be.
The Democrats have been perfectly clear. We want smart, effective
border security, but that is not a wall. The President and, just this
morning, the Republican leader have suggested repeatedly that Democrats
are against all border security. Of course, we are not. Every expert
has looked at that and said it is a total lie. Frankly, the reason our
colleagues, the President, Leader McConnell, and others do it is that
they have no defense of the wall. Instead of defending the wall, they
say the Democrats are not for border security. Nothing could be further
from the truth, as shown by what we have supported in the past and
today.
This morning, the President also tweeted that Mexico could somehow
pay for the wall through a new trade deal. This is a huge turnaround
for a President who once insisted: Mark my words. Mexico will pay for
the wall 100 percent. Of course, there have been multiple fact checks
to show a new NAFTA could not possibly fund the wall directly or
indirectly. There is nothing in the new agreement that stipulates
Mexico must devote any resources to the United States, and any savings
from a trade deal, if there are any savings, don't go to the Treasury;
they go to American businesses and American taxpayers. Ultimately, the
President would have to tax the American people to fund his wall.
Mexico ain't footing the bill.
All that said, it is good news that the President has retreated from
his demand that Congress fund the wall. Now, we Democrats in the Senate
and in the House have made two reasonable
[[Page S7828]]
offers that, I believe, would glide through the House and Senate: No.
1, pass the six bipartisan appropriations bills and a 1-year CR for DHS
or, No. 2, pass a 1-year CR for all seven remaining appropriations
bills.
Leader McConnell proposed a short-term CR just a few minutes ago. We
would have preferred one of our two options, but I am glad the leader
thinks the government should not shut down over the President's demand
for a wall, and the Democrats will support this CR. The President and
the House should follow that lead because shutting down the government
over Christmas is a terrible idea--one of the worst to come down the
pike in a very long time.
____________________