[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 5 (Thursday, January 10, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S113-S115]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 21

  Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 5, H.R. 21, 
making appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2019. I 
further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed 
and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table 
with no intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The majority leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, reserving the right to object, there 
is a lot of important business the Senate could be tackling. We have 
typically done that during these government shutdowns. The last thing 
we need to do right now is to trade pointless--absolutely pointless--
show votes back and forth across the aisle.
  Just a few days ago, very recently--not years ago--before the latest 
shifts in political winds, my good friend the Democratic leader 
completely agreed with me on this. In fact, he and I made an explicit 
commitment to several of our Members on this very point. We announced 
it here on the floor. We agreed that we wouldn't waste the Senate's 
time on show votes related to government funding until a global 
agreement was reached that could pass the House, pass the Senate, and 
which the President could sign.
  Here is how the Democratic leader himself stated his position, and 
remember, this was very recently: In order for an agreement to be 
reached, all four congressional leaders must sign off and the President 
must endorse it and say he will sign it. That is how you make a law. 
Most importantly, the President must publicly support and say he will 
sign our agreement before it gets a vote in either Chamber--before it 
gets a vote in either Chamber.
  That was my good friend the Democratic leader just recently. I intend 
to keep my word, and I intend to hold him to his.
  Yesterday, the White House made clear that the President opposes 
piecemeal appropriations that neglect border security and would veto 
them, so obviously that isn't going to become law. This proposal flunks 
the Democratic leader's own test of a few days ago.
  Look, the political stunts are not going to get us anywhere. Senate 
Democrats should stop blocking the Senate from taking up other urgent 
matters, like the pending bills concerning Israel and the Syrian civil 
war. In previous government shutdowns, the Senate has done business. 
The Senate hasn't been shut down. That is what we ought to be doing and 
actually at the same time negotiate with the President on border 
security because nothing else is going to get a solution. Therefore, I 
object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, if I could, very briefly.
  I am extremely disappointed. I can assure you, the majority leader, 
this is not a show vote issue with 800,000 Federal workers being denied 
their paychecks. The last time I checked the Constitution, we are a 
coequal branch of government, and we should act as a coequal branch of 
government and pass legislation that is overwhelmingly supported by 
this body.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, colleagues on the Democratic side of

[[Page S114]]

the aisle apparently pledged to oppose proceeding to other important 
bills--we have experienced that at least to this point--during the 
government shutdown even though there is no precedent for that.
  All but four yesterday voted against the motion to proceed to S. 1, 
and I am assuming they will vote against it again this afternoon. S. 
1--the bill they are preventing us from going to--has wide bipartisan 
support and is a critical step in supporting our allies in the Middle 
East and securing peace in Syria.
  I have talked to many Americans who are intensely interested in the 
Israel issues. They don't understand why this important legislation 
would be stymied over a dispute over something entirely different.
  Through the Chair, I ask Senator Cardin if this blockade against 
business on the floor is absolute.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection.
  The Senator from Maryland may respond.
  Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I might return the question and ask the 
distinguished majority leader whether his objections to reopening the 
government with action we have already taken previously is absolute. I 
can assure the majority leader that it is my commitment to our Federal 
workers and to our country that the first order of business here should 
be the reopening of government. There are other important issues we 
need to do that I strongly support. I, quite frankly, do not understand 
the majority leader's position as to why he would deny us a vote on 
reopening government that passed this body unanimously in the past.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I say to my friend from Maryland--I 
will repeat the question in a minute, but the answer to his question to 
me is, because this will not produce a result. It has been perfectly 
clear that the only way to produce this result is for the President, 
the Speaker of the House, and the minority leader to agree, because we 
need votes from Democrats both in the Senate and the House in order to 
pass a measure that the President will sign.
  My question of the Senator from Maryland was, is this blockade 
against business on the floor absolute?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, of course I would repeat my request of 
the distinguished majority leader whether his objections are absolute.
  Let me just point this out. We passed the bill that I asked unanimous 
consent--basically that has been passed nearly unanimously by this 
body--92 to 6 for these appropriations to pass. The last time I checked 
the Constitution, that is enough even for a veto override. I don't 
think anything has changed. These bills have nothing to do--zero to do 
with the Homeland Security wall issue. Zero. So why doesn't our 
distinguish majority leader, as the leader of a coequal branch of 
government, allow us to speak on behalf of our responsibilities under 
article I of the Constitution? Let us take our action that we can take 
right now, today, at this very moment, and pass six appropriations 
bills where there is no controversy whatsoever in this body.
  Mr. McCONNELL. As I said, Madam President, repeatedly, it will not 
solve the problem because the President has made it clear he won't sign 
it.
  Let me try one more time. Does the Senator, through the Chair--
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will come to order.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Can we have order in the Senate?
  Does the Senator intend to vote against proceeding to other measures 
during the government shutdown?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. CARDIN. My first order of priority right now, since we can do 
this at this very moment, is to reopen the government. It is outrageous 
that the government is closed. People's lives are being affected every 
minute. I heard just yesterday of a layoff of another 180 jobs in my 
State because the Department of Agriculture is closed. We have an 
important economic development program in Baltimore, and HUD can't act 
on the papers right now. That is being delayed.
  To me, that is something we can get done right now. As a Senator from 
Maryland, I am going to use every opportunity I can to reopen 
government in a responsible manner. I am disappointed that the majority 
leader is not using the opportunity we have right now to pass six 
appropriations bills that are not in controversy.
  If the majority leader could answer for me, why are we holding up 
these six bills that have nothing to do with the central debate 
argument? We can put enough votes on the board to show the President of 
the United States that he doesn't have the support in the Senate, and 
we have the votes to override his veto. To me, that should be our first 
order of business.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I think since the Senator from 
Maryland is unwilling to answer my question, the assumption should be--
and I say this to the broad pro-Israel community in America that we all 
interact with on issues related to the U.S.-Israel relationship--the 
Senator is saying he might well vote to proceed to something else but 
not vote to proceed to these important Israel bills and this important 
Syria bill.
  I want to make sure everybody understands where we are. The Senator 
is refusing to answer the question as to whether or not this blockade 
against Senate business applies to everything or just to these pro-
Israel bills. So I think the refusal to answer provides the answer for 
our colleagues, and I assume we can anticipate the Democrats will try 
to get votes on other matters during the government shutdown but just 
not the Israel issue and the Syria issue.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I will express my views on issues. I 
don't need the majority leader trying to express how I will vote on 
future issues. I will answer to the people of Maryland on how I will 
act on issues that are up before the Senate.
  My top priority right now is to reopen the government, and I am very 
disappointed that the majority leader will not allow us to act as a 
coequal branch of government.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, would my colleague from Maryland yield?
  I will just say three words to my friend the majority leader: Open 
the government. It is in your hands.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, through the Chair, I have a question 
of Senator Van Hollen. He is going to propound a consent agreement, I 
assume.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam President, I think we all know the Constitution 
of the United States, under article I, says the Senate and the House of 
the United States are separate and coequal branches of government with 
the executive branch.
  We are now seeing more and more Americans hurt every day by the 
government shutdown, Americans losing access to services. We just saw 
that the Food and Drug Administration has stopped routine food safety 
inspections of seafood. We just saw that the EPA has halted one of the 
Federal Government's most important health activities--the inspection 
of Federal factories, powerplants, oil refineries, water treatment 
plants. Eight hundred thousand Federal employees are not getting paid. 
Hundreds of thousands of them are going to work every day, including at 
our border, protecting our border, not getting paid. Hundreds of 
thousands more have been locked out of work.
  There is a Maryland mom who just had to go on the internet to set up 
a GoFundMe account to help pay her son's college tuition because they 
are on a monthly installment plan. I talked to the head of a community 
college in Maryland just the other day. I went to see her, asked how 
things are. The first thing she told me, her phone had been ringing off 
the hook all morning because the parents of students of the community 
college weren't going to be able to make their monthly installment 
payments.
  Hundreds of thousands of Federal employees are one paycheck away from 
not being able to pay their mortgage or their rent, and tomorrow 
hundreds of thousands of them are not going to get a paycheck.

[[Page S115]]

  So to the majority leader, I will just say, we should not be 
contracting out our constitutional responsibilities to any President--
certainly not a President who said he is proud to shut down the 
Government of the United States. There is nothing to be proud of in 
denying important services and leaving 800,000 people without a 
paycheck. I don't think any of us should be proud of that, and we 
shouldn't be contracting out our responsibilities to the President of 
the United States.
  We should vote on these measures we have already voted for. Senator 
Cardin just asked us to vote on this at the Senate desk. It has been 
supported in various ways by a bipartisan majority right here in the 
U.S. Senate.
  I have in my hand H.J. Res. 1. This is also on the Senate calendar. 
It is identical, with respect to the Department of Homeland Security, 
to the measure this Senate passed just a few weeks ago.
  Let's reopen the Department of Homeland Security at current funding 
levels until February 8. In fact, if I recall, that was the majority 
leader's legislation. We passed it overwhelmingly on a bipartisan vote.
  The House, 1 week ago, as their first order of business, passed this 
bill and the bill Senator Cardin asked us to vote on.
  This bill to open the Department of Homeland Security, as we 
negotiate the issue of border security--and there is no dispute over 
whether we need border security. Of course we need secure borders. The 
issue is over the most effective and smart way to accomplish that.
  So now this bill is right back in our possession. It is on the 
calendar. The question is, Why are our colleagues on the Republican 
side refusing to allow a vote on the very bill they proposed in this 
body just a few weeks ago, and how can you justify to the American 
people that you are not going to vote on something you yourself 
proposed as the first order of business in the U.S. Senate, when people 
are losing those services, losing public safety protections, and 
800,000 Federal employees are not being paid?

                          ____________________