[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 10 (Thursday, January 17, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H683-H687]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 28, FURTHER ADDITIONAL
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2019, AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF
MOTIONS TO SUSPEND THE RULES
Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 52 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 52
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J.
Res. 28) making further continuing appropriations for fiscal
year 2019, and for other purposes. All points of order
against consideration of the joint resolution are waived. 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 and on any amendment thereto 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 or
their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 2. It shall be in order at any time through the
legislative day of January 25, 2019, for the Speaker to
entertain motions that the House suspend the rules as though
under clause 1 of rule XV. The Speaker or her designee shall
consult with the Minority Leader or his designee on the
designation of any matter for consideration pursuant to this
section.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania is
recognized for 1 hour.
Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield
the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko),
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose
of debate only.
General Leave
Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, on Wednesday, the Rules Committee met and
reported a rule, House Resolution 52, providing for consideration of
H.J. Res. 28, the Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act of
2019 to fund the government until February 28.
The rule provides for consideration of the legislation under a closed
rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled
by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations.
Additionally, the rule provides suspension authority through the
legislative day of January 25, 2019.
Madam Speaker, we are in day 27 of this government shutdown, the
longest government shutdown in our Nation's history.
Nearly 800,000 Federal employees have now missed a paycheck since the
shutdown began. Some estimates say those employees have lost an average
of $5,000 each so far.
These hardworking Americans are law enforcement officers and National
Park Service, EPA, FDA, and IRS employees, and so many others in
dedicated Federal service whose families are needlessly suffering.
These employees are either furloughed or being forced to work without
pay. This is not an acceptable way to govern.
I may not have been a Member of this body as long as some people
here, but I don't think there is a single Member, Democrat or
Republican, who doesn't care about securing our border, but it is
foolish to think that keeping our government shut down will in any way
help secure the border.
You know what Border Patrol and Coast Guard members want more than a
wall? They want their paychecks to come on time.
Democrats have made it clear, we are more than willing to come to the
table to talk about sensible border security, but the first step has to
be to reopen the government and get our government back to functioning.
This majority has already voted to open the government seven times,
with support from across the aisle. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch
McConnell has yet to act on any of these bipartisan pieces of
legislation, the same legislation, I might add, that has already passed
the Senate.
There are more than 100 freshmen Members of this body, comprising
over 20 percent of the House, who have never worked in a functioning
Federal Government due to the Senate's inaction. All of our
constituents, both Republican and Democrat, are suffering because of
that failure to act.
Let me share with you the traumatic impact of the shutdown on my
constituents and Americans across the country.
Jennifer, the wife of a Coast Guard gunner's mate, wrote to my office
to detail the hardships her family is facing. Her husband has served in
the Coast Guard for 19 years. They are used to stressful deployments,
and her children are proud of their father's service. But now Jennifer
has new hardships to face: how to feed her family on only her income,
how she could make the holidays special while not knowing when her
husband's next paycheck would come, and how to shield her kids from her
constant worry over the absence of that income.
This is an embarrassment. Too many Federal workers were already
living paycheck to paycheck before those paychecks stopped. Having to
put a mortgage payment on a credit card, deal with an eviction notice,
or plead with a bank to delay a student loan payment should not be the
reality forced upon hardworking Federal employees.
The debts these workers incur during the shutdown will follow them
long after the government is reopened. The hits to their savings
accounts and marks on their credit scores will serve as painful
reminders that they are represented by a government that will put them
in harm's way over a policy dispute.
Fran, a newlywed with a premature baby who spent more than 3 weeks in
the NICU, has been without an income since her husband's paychecks
stopped coming. Their child requires an expensive special formula due
to his premature birth, and her husband is now being asked to work
overtime without pay.
The fear and anguish in these messages from our neighbors is
palpable. It should resonate with every Member of this body. These
stories should keep all of us up at night. If we didn't come to
Washington to serve these dedicated and hardworking Americans, then
just who are we here to serve?
[[Page H684]]
When the government does eventually reopen, fortunately, many of
these Federal employees will receive backpay, but the plight of Federal
contractors is worse. The term ``Federal contractors'' can conjure up
an image of highly paid executives or CEOs of private detention
facilities, but they are not the real ones harmed by the shutdown.
Federal contractors are generally small businesses, cleaners,
builders, food service workers, and tech support workers. They are our
neighbors who rely on these contracts to make their rent or pay their
employees or contribute to our local economies.
The callousness with which these Federal contractors are being
treated is repulsive. They and their families deserve so much better.
The American people deserve so much better.
The longer the Senate Republicans keep our government shut down, the
worse things will get.
The Small Business Administration has already stopped approving loan
assistance and guarantee applications from commercial banks and small
businesses, programs that are critical to the health of local
economies.
Security lines at the airports are long, and they will get longer.
TSA has already been forced to close security lanes at major airports
across the country. This is not because the hardworking men and women
of the TSA do not want to keep our skies and our passengers safe, but
because they have been forced to take second jobs to pay the rent or
look after their children at home because they cannot afford childcare.
Without a paycheck, some cannot afford gas or carfare to get to work at
all.
Just a few days ago, I met with the air traffic controllers from my
district. They shared that not only is the shutdown impacting their
current workforce, but it is drastically impacting their recruiting
efforts to hire and train new employees for this workforce. Can we
blame people for being fearful of taking a job that hinges on the
Federal Government's functionality, given what we have seen during this
shutdown?
A National Air Traffic Controllers Association official warned
recently that if the shutdown continues to drag on, there may not be
any air traffic controllers left working.
Let me pause to make those statements abundantly clear. This shutdown
is making us less safe. If it continues much longer, there will not be
enough employees on duty to make sure passengers are safe to board a
plane, not enough employees left to make sure planes are safe to land,
and not enough employees to direct air traffic in our skies.
If you think you are insulated from the effects of a government
shutdown because you are not a Federal employee, you are wrong.
What I fear this administration and Republican leadership in the
Senate have forgotten is that this is the people's House. We have an
obligation to work for them. Refusing to uphold that commitment, that
promise, is a slap in the face to the American people.
Before I conclude, let me share with you one final story of how the
shutdown is harming American families.
Jessica from my district is a mother of six with a special needs
child. Her husband is Active Duty Coast Guard. She has been forced to
tell her children they can't have seconds at dinner, because she
doesn't know if she will have enough food to last the week. Her
daughter has an ultrasound coming up, and she is unsure if she can
afford the specialist copay.
She writes that she and her husband supported President Trump, but
that after this, she does not see ``how we could support someone so out
of touch and willing to damage so many people in order to save his own
face.''
Jessica ended her message by saying that they are prepared to stand
strong, but she is also prepared to stand at the corner of an
intersection with a cardboard sign if that is what she has to do to
feed her children.
This is not the America I was raised in.
Let's end the shutdown today and get our country back on track.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Scanlon from
Pennsylvania for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield
myself as much time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I agree with Representative Scanlon. I want to open
the government. Republicans want to open the government. Democrats want
to open the government. So I respectfully ask House and Senate
Democrats to stop holding our Federal workers hostage.
You know, on December 20, I voted for and Republicans voted for in
the House a bill right here, standing right here on December 20, that
would have kept the government open, and then we would not have had any
of these discussions or need for these bills, because the government
would still be open. Unfortunately, not one Democrat Member of the
House voted for it.
I, too, have Federal workers in my district who are hurting, these
great men and women who work hard each and every day of their life,
single mothers who are waiting for their paycheck. So I call on my
colleagues across the aisle to please come to the negotiating table.
I believe the number one rule in Negotiations 101 is you have to show
up. Repeatedly, we have seen the Republicans and the President request
the Democrat leadership to come and negotiate, give a counteroffer.
They refuse to show up.
I say, if the House Republicans already passed a bill that would have
kept the government open and now we are at this impasse, but the
Democrat leadership refuses to come to even a negotiating table or a
counteroffer, I just don't know what to say.
Well, Madam Speaker, once again, we have returned to the House floor
to consider yet another short-term spending bill that once again is
most likely going nowhere. For what is now the fourth time in 3 weeks,
we have returned to the House floor on a rule to consider an
appropriations bill as part of the majority's efforts to fund the
government without working with President Trump.
Unfortunately, we think this effort is just as shortsighted as the
previous bills over the last couple of weeks, and today's rule is again
destined to ignore the fundamental realities at issue.
But first, as I said before, let's take a quick look at how we got to
this point.
On December 20, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would
have funded the government and prevented the shutdown. It included a
continuing resolution through February 8. It included disaster relief
and funding for border security that the Democrats say they want, but
are not listening to our own law enforcement on the border on their
recommendations. That was a bill the majority of the Senate supported
and the President said he would sign.
{time} 0930
Unfortunately, as we all know, the Senate refused to take up the
House measure, mostly because of their 60-vote rule, where they need
Democrats to get on board, and parts of the government shut down when
appropriations lapsed. Again, not one single Democrat in the House
voted for this bill, which would have avoided this whole, entire
partial government shutdown.
On January 3, when the new Congress was sworn in, the House took up a
continuing resolution through February 8, only this time swept clean of
essential disaster relief funding or funding for border security. To
date, the Senate, as we know, has refused to take up this measure, and
the President has said he would not sign it because it doesn't have
additional money for border security.
Last week, then again, the House took up four more spending bills,
that covered four of the outstanding seven appropriations titles.
Unfortunately, like the week prior, these bills also did not include
funding for border security. Even more unfortunately, these bills were
ones that were produced by the Senate alone during the last Congress,
and that did not even reflect any work by, or input from, the House of
Representatives. Just as publicly stated the Senate has not taken up
any of these bills during this Congress and has no plans to take this
one up either.
On Tuesday, the majority put up yet another continuing resolution.
This one a suspension bill, to fund the government through February 1,
but, yet
[[Page H685]]
again, omitting any funding for border security, which is the key
ingredient to get negotiations done. That bill failed to reach the two-
thirds threshold to pass under suspension of the rules.
And then, yes, yesterday, the House took up a supplemental disaster
appropriations bill that was intended only to provide just over $12
billion in necessary disaster relief for affected communities. This was
a bipartisan bill. We could have passed it out of here.
But instead of bringing up this bipartisan disaster relief bill to
the floor, the majority chose to play politics once again and decided
at the last minute to attach yet another continuing resolution to this
bill, again, without any border security funding, and, again, to fund
the government through February 8. That bill passed the House
yesterday, yet there is no sign that the Senate ever has any intention
of taking that bill up. In any event, the President has made it clear,
and I believe the American public has made it clear, that we want
border security.
And that brings us to today. I have to tell you, I am running out of
ways to describe what the majority is doing, but I imagine the Speaker
knows where I am going with this. Once again, the majority is bringing
up yet another continuing resolution--this one goes to February 28--
and, again, with no funding for border security. And yet again, it is
clear that if we pass this bill, the Senate will not consider it and
the President will not sign it because it does not include funding for
border security.
We now see the common thread in all the majority is doing: bringing
up bills again and again and again, to fund the government, without
dealing with the fundamental problem. All of these repeated continuing
resolutions are the same. Only the date has changed. All of them fail
to fund border security, which Americans have told us again and again
they want and need. And all of them are continued avoidance of what
needs to happen in order to end this shutdown: real, sincere
negotiations with the Senate and the President over border security.
I feel that this is an exercise in futility. The majority is failing
to acknowledge the crisis happening at our southern border. As you
know, I am a Member from Arizona, a border State. When will the
Democrats get serious about ending this government shutdown and come to
the negotiating table to work out a deal that has a real chance of
being signed into law?
Listen, I know that border security is a crisis. The other night on
TV, when Speaker Pelosi and Chuck Schumer said it is a manufactured
crisis, I can tell you firsthand, that is not accurate. We do have a
crisis on the border, and we need to fix it. I have been to the border.
I have been to the border several times. I recently visited the United
States-Mexico border in Nogales, Arizona, where I met with Customs and
Border Protection agents. The crisis we are dealing with at the border
is not just illegal immigration, they said. There is illicit drugs
flowing through our borders, which are killing our children and adults,
human trafficking, and they told us that dangerous cartels are using
our loose immigration laws to exploit the women and children, having
them travel thousands of miles.
Do you know that Doctors Without Borders say that, I believe one in
three of these women have been sexually abused? This is unconscionable.
We need border security. And it is the law enforcement, the Customs and
Border Protection, that have said repeatedly, have told me personally,
yes; part of the solution is a border fence.
In 2006, Democrats supported a border fence. Chuck Schumer and then-
Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton funded $52 billion for 700
miles of fencing. Now the President is asking for $5.7 billion. That is
only 1/10th of 1 percent of the Federal budget. And, unfortunately,
because of their refusal to add this to any bills, it has shut down the
government.
This rule before us today is just another ploy. Democrats are
refusing to negotiate and refusing to deal with this national security
issue. Please, let's stop these games and pass a real bill that funds
border security, that opens the government, that funds disaster relief,
send it to the Senate, and have it signed into law.
Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I understand the frustration of the gentlewoman from
Arizona with the lack of progress in ending this shutdown, but I would
suggest that her frustration is misdirected.
The House has sent seven bills to end the shutdown to the Senate, and
the Senate leadership has refused to entertain any of them or bring
them to a vote: #whereismitch.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr.
Golden).
Mr. GOLDEN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me
the time.
Madam Speaker, this shutdown has been brutal on working people across
the country. Many of them are my constituents, and I came down here to
let their voices be heard.
Back home, a Border Patrol agent from my district said about all of
us here in the House, in the White House, in the Senate: ``I blame all
of you for the financial and emotional damage you are causing to the
very people tasked with protecting your Nation and your homeland, but
ultimately, this falls on the White House.''
Suzette from my district, her husband is an essential Federal
employee working without pay. She asked me, ``to bring sensibility to
this senseless power struggle that is currently going on. The
Democrats,'' she says--and she is a Democrat, by the way--``need to
back down from their `must punish Trump and deny him everything' stance
and the Republicans need to get some control over the ill-equipped man
who is running our country.''
Another Federal employee from Milford, Maine, tells me: ``I am very
concerned with the furlough, lack of negotiations, and lack of pay. I
do not know who is right or wrong. I just want to get back to work,
complete my job, and receive my pay.''
We owe these people a solution that gets them back to work and gets
them paid. I can only imagine that, back home, people are amazed to
hear the ways in which both sides are right now talking past each
other. I think it is wonderful that we expressed, on both sides of the
aisle this morning, a desire to reopen the government and to secure our
borders.
I would like to point out that the CR that will be voted on today
does have border security funding: over $1 billion in new funding for
new border security. I know that the Republicans say that they want to
reopen government and secure our borders, I also know that my party has
said the same, so let's do it.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule, support the
CR today, let's reopen government, let's put people back to work, let
them work. They are public servants. They want to serve the people.
Let's start securing our border. And with those extra billion dollars
we can also move on to a more robust debate about border security that
I look forward to.
Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Biggs), my good friend.
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me
time to speak on this important issue.
Madam Speaker, I oppose this rule. I think we are talking past each
other, as the previous gentleman from Maine just indicated. We want the
government to reopen, but we want something called border security. I
am told that this bill has $1 billion in it for border security, but we
are not going to build a wall.
Now, here is the thing that happens. Down in Arizona, where we live--
we don't live 2,000 miles away from that southern border where the
immigration problem is that the illegal border crossings are
monumental--we actually see the humanitarian crisis. That crisis exists
when people, who are coming to America, they don't go through the ports
of entry, they are going between the ports of entry, in some of the
most rugged land and terrain in the world, coming down from the Sierra
Madres in northern Mexico in the summertime, blazing heat of 120
degrees or more; in the winter time, the evenings cool down to the 20s.
[[Page H686]]
I saw people, just yesterday, being shown on the news, who are
getting ready to try to make this trek. They are carrying plastic
grocery bags with their supplies. They are dressed casually. They have
no comprehension of the danger that they are bringing to themselves
when they are coming across. It is a humanitarian crisis. Do you know
what a border wall would do? It would provide a deterrent.
In the San Diego-San Ysidro port of entry, when that border wall was
created, crossings declined almost 90 percent. It forced people to a
different place. They began crossing away from the ports of entry at
San Diego over to Arizona and Texas. So we built a wall around the Yuma
port of entry. Do you know what happened? Those crossings decreased 75
to 80 percent. They moved on to more dangerous places in the desert,
down towards Nogales, between Nogales and South Bisbee, between Naco
and the Douglas port of entry. More than 100 individual's bodies were
found last year trying to enter. It is a humanitarian crisis.
The opioids that come across the southern border: 141 tons of heroin
seized coming across the southern border last year; 140 tons of cocaine
seized coming across the southern border.
When I hear people say border security, they start talking about
drones and unmanned aerial vehicles and sensors and cameras. Guess
what? That does not deter anyone. We get to watch the videos of people
coming across. But do you know what a wall does? It channelizes people.
It forces them to go to places where we can interdict them. We provide
hundreds of millions of dollars of humanitarian aid to people who are
risking their lives trying to enter this country.
If it wasn't so serious, I would find it laughable to hear folks say,
``We are putting $1 billion into this as border security,'' because
they don't want a political victory for President Trump. It is not
about political victories. It is about national security, it is about
humanitarian concern, and you are not going to get a better bang for
your buck than to build a border wall.
Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 0945
Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry), my good friend.
Mr. PERRY. Madam Speaker, folks in the audience, and folks that are
watching this on TV, this is all theater. This is all just political
theater.
Everybody knows. I know. My good friends on the other side of the
aisle know that this isn't going to solve anything. This is not a
solution.
If we were serious about solving this, we wouldn't be voting on
another bill here that doesn't fix anything, that is never going to be
moved through the Senate, that is never going to be signed by the
President.
If we were interested in opening the Federal Government, we would be
negotiating. We would be talking about what our differences are about
border security.
Remember, this is a bill that includes the funding for border
security. That is why we have this partial shutdown, because we have a
disagreement about border security. And we are trying to work it out,
but we can't work it out just by running the same bills that don't do
anything and that are never going to move through the Senate and aren't
going to be signed by the President.
It is time to get serious.
Last year, this government was shut down for a few days over amnesty.
Now it is shut down because the other side doesn't want to talk about
border security. You put amnesty and the lack of border security
together, and that is open borders. That is completely open borders.
Just on the news, if you were watching the last couple days, more
caravans heading north out of Central America through Mexico to the
United States border. That is what is happening right now while our
Border Patrol agents are out there working but not being paid.
Here come these folks. We don't know what their circumstances are. I
am sure there are a lot of fine people in there. I am sure there are
children in there, and the horrors that they are going to suffer on
this trek north up through the desert in these points between the
points of entry.
Madam Speaker, the most recent numbers out of Homeland Security in
November, 51,000 people--that is the ones we caught--51,000 people came
across the border between the ports of entry.
If they were coming to the ports of entry, this wouldn't be half of a
problem, but the problem is they are coming between the ports of entry.
That is one month, 51,000. And those are the ones we caught. We don't
have any idea how many other ones made it through.
And yet some folks are saying: Well, we are going to give you an
extra billion dollars to fix this problem.
It is not an extra billion. It is the same billion, and it is to fix
problems at the ports of entry.
Madam Speaker, the problem is between the ports of entry and the
ports of entry. But we are not going to do anything about the ports of
entry. The billion dollars we are talking about is to muddle around and
maintain things at the ports of entry but do nothing between the ports
of entry, nothing at all. That is the status quo.
That is why we are in this argument, because we are saying we cannot
withstand, we cannot maintain the status quo of 51,000 people a month
coming illegally across our border and do nothing.
We are pleading with the other side: Please, let's do something.
Let's do something different than the status quo, because the status
quo gives us 51,000 people coming illegally across the border.
And they are saying: Well, we are just going to run the same bill to
open the government and do nothing.
We cannot abide that. The American people cannot abide that.
People are working, Madam Speaker, without being paid while people
pour across our border, and we are expecting them to stop them. They
don't have the resources because we are not providing them.
It is time to end this needless show of work. We are here working,
right? We are all here working. We are not doing anything to solve the
problem.
What it is going to take is somebody to sit down at the table and
say, ``Look. See here. This is what I think the issue is,'' and find
some solution somewhere in the middle. But you can't do that if you are
not willing to have a discussion.
We are asking to have a discussion so we can get past this, so people
can get paid and the American people can be assured that their
government is securing their border, their property, their country, and
stopping all these illegal immigrants from coming in; and making sure
that, if they are going to come in--and we are a country of immigrants.
My grandmother, my great-grandmother came here from Colombia, South
America, with the shirts on their backs. They came through Ellis Island
because we had a process. We are all immigrants, and we welcome
immigrants more than any other country on the planet, but we want you
to come legally.
We have a process. We don't want you to just pour across the border
into our country with gang-related violence, with fentanyl, with
opioids that are killing people in our own communities, all these drugs
and crimes and violence. We are asking you to come to the ports of
entry and quit pouring in between the ports of entry. But our laws now
invite them to do that, which is why they are coming.
So I just beseech you, Madam Speaker--and I thank you for your
indulgence and for your time--let's quit this show. Let's quit this
charade. Let's quit this theater. Let's get serious for the people who
are working, for the American people who expect more, and get down to
negotiation, come to a solution, and move on with things, the important
things that plague our Nation.
Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I am surprised to hear my colleague talk
about political theater. We have a reality-show President in the White
House who is ignoring the real lives impacted by the shutdown, all to
try to make another made-for-TV moment to please his rightwing base and
radio pundits. Government isn't a game. Real lives are at stake, and we
need to reopen the government.
Madam Speaker, may I inquire if the gentlewoman has any remaining
speakers. If not, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of
my time.
[[Page H687]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from
engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close as well, and I
yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, in closing, this is the fourth time we have
deliberated on this floor, in the last 3 weeks, on the exact same type
of package.
The date keeps changing--sometimes it is February 1; sometimes it is
February 8; sometimes it is February 28--but it is all the same. None
of them include funding for border security. It is the fourth time that
the same result will ensue. The House of Representatives is in a
perpetual cycle of Groundhog Day that we cannot seem to escape.
Representative Scanlon and I serve, of course, on the Rules Committee
together, and it is Groundhog Day. We just say the same things each and
every day. Really, let's get to the negotiating table, and, really,
let's get something done.
The majority seems to be insistent on reviewing these same
appropriations packages again and again, fully knowing that the Senate
has made clear they will not take up these bills because there is no
border security in them.
Finally, Madam Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not mention that
this bill is again coming to the floor under a closed rule. Of the
eight bills the House has considered under a rule this Congress, seven
have been closed, with no opportunity for Members to present new ideas
and new amendments.
Now, I know that Chairman McGovern has assured us he wants a more
open process, and I believe he is sincere in his assurance. We saw a
more open process on the disaster supplemental bill we considered
earlier this week, which has so far been the outlier of this Congress,
with 15 amendments made in order on a structured rule. I look forward
to considering more rules that have a more open process than the one we
are considering today.
Madam Speaker, I urge ``no'' on the previous question, ``no'' on the
underlying measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I don't know when this shutdown will end, but I know
that Democrats and all the Republicans who are serious about getting
Federal employees back to work will vote in favor of this rule and the
underlying resolution.
I am heartened by my colleagues from across the aisle who have
already voted to reopen the government, and I am hopeful that even more
will join us this time around.
No serious person can claim that any Member of this House is against
border security. Not only have we sworn an oath to protect and defend
this country, but we have voted repeatedly to fund billions of dollars
in border security appropriations.
The discussion about the best methods for protecting our border is a
valid policy question that should be debated thoughtfully and
deliberately by both sides of the aisle, not used as a vehicle for the
President to fulfill a campaign promise at the expense of American
families.
It cannot be overstated: this is the longest government shutdown in
history. The House has done its job. We have passed bills to reopen the
government on bipartisan votes and will continue to do so for as long
as it takes.
We have committed to working on solutions to border security once the
government is opened back up. The votes are there in the Senate. They
have already shown that. And given the chance, I am sure they would
show it again.
Why won't Senator McConnell bring to the floor any one of the House-
passed bills to open the government?
I will end by saying this: Senator McConnell, do the right thing for
working families in your State, in my State, and across the country.
Hold a vote to open the government.
Let's end the pain American families and businesses are feeling from
the shutdown and get to work on making this country a better place for
all.
Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous
question.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the
previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on adoption of the
resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mrs. LESKO. Madam 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.
____________________