[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 185 (Tuesday, November 19, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6643-S6644]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                    Prevent Government Shutdowns Act

  Mr. LANKFORD. Madam President, in the last 40 years, we have had 21 
government shutdowns--21. Twenty-one times, Congress and the President 
have not been able to agree or the Senate and the House have not been 
able to agree. As a result of that, Federal workers around the country 
have faced the consequences of Members of Congress not finding 
agreement.
  Help me understand this. Twenty-one times in 40 years, Federal 
workers who get up every single day and serve the American people and 
serve their neighbors have faced the consequences of furloughs because 
Members of Congress could not come to a resolution. It is not that it 
has gone unnoticed. For a decade or more, there have been solutions 
that have been proposed.
  Ten years ago, I had a proposal in the House--actually, Rob Portman 
had a great proposal in the Senate at the same time to deal with 
government shutdowns. Let's say when we get to the end of the fiscal 
year, we will just have a continuing resolution, but then we will cut 
spending every few months to press Congress to get to their work. The 
problem was, hardly anyone on the other side agreed with that. We 
couldn't get any bipartisan support for it. So my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle proposed that if we get to the end of the 
fiscal year, we would have a continuing resolution, and every couple of 
months, the spending would go up, and it would just continue to go up 
and up and up until it was resolved. Well, they didn't have anyone on 
my side of the aisle saying ``We are going to put in a mechanism that 
just increases spending over and over again without congressional 
involvement,'' so they got no bipartisan support.
  An idea was floated to just cut the pay of the Members of Congress. 
But it really wasn't cutting their pay; it was taking their pay and 
putting it in an escrow account and just kind of holding it for them, 
and then when everything was resolved, they would get their money back. 
So it really wasn't a reduction in pay; it was kind a shell game--push 
those dollars off to another side and get them all back later just to 
make it look like you got a cut in pay. But that hasn't had wide 
support either. A lot of people have real concerns about that because, 
quite frankly, some Members of Congress are very wealthy; some Members 
are not. Some Members don't notice their congressional pay; some do. It 
is kind of a disproportionate piece of leverage to resolve this.
  What is interesting is that all those proposals acknowledged one 
simple thing: This is a problem. It needs to be resolved. Federal 
workers are facing the consequences; Members of Congress are not.
  About 5 months ago, Maggie Hassan and I--this Chamber knows well the 
Senator from New Hampshire. She and I started working together on a 
nonpartisan--not just a bipartisan but a nonpartisan--way to stop 
government shutdowns. We have two very simple proposals.
  There are two problems here. We need to stop Federal workers from 
getting hurt when there is a shutdown and

[[Page S6644]]

make sure those families are not hurt. The second thing is, we want to 
actually get to appropriations, not continuing resolutions.
  When do you a continuing resolution for any length of time, like what 
we are in right now--we are in our eighth week of a continuing 
resolution right now. When you do one that long, it hurts temporary 
workers who are Federal workers. They are laid off in the process. 
Other folks are not. Many of these agencies need those temporary 
workers, and those temporary workers are counting on that salary. It 
hurts contracting because everything can't start in a continuing 
resolution. You have to wait until there are real appropriations before 
new programs can start. You can't stop old programs. You can't do 
purchasing. It creates a tremendous inefficiency in government.
  Our simple idea was this: Let's find a way to protect Federal workers 
and get to appropriations. The solution we came up with is pretty 
straightforward. When we get to the end of the fiscal year, which right 
now is October 1, if appropriations are not done, there will be a 
continuing resolution that kicks into effect to protect Federal 
workers, but Members of Congress and our staff and the White House 
Office of Management and Budget--none of us can travel. Members of 
Congress will be in continuous session 7 days a week until we get 
appropriations done. And one more thing: We can't move to any issues 
other than appropriations. We are locked into that box.
  Basically, if our work is not done, we all will have to stay until 
the work is done. I have had folks say that is not really a big 
consequence. A lot of folks do that all over the country all the time. 
If at the end of their workday their work is not done, they have to 
stay until they get it done. Small business owners know that full well. 
It is not like you can punch a clock. If the work is not done in a 
small business, you stay until it actually gets done.
  Here is the thing. Go back to last December. When the shutdown 
started last December and we got to an impasse here between the House, 
the Senate, and the White House, Members of Congress and our staff all 
left and went home. Federal workers across the country all took a big, 
deep breath as they walked into the holidays because they were on 
furlough, but Members of this body walked out. That should never 
happen--never.
  What Senator Hassan and I are proposing is very simple. The pressure 
shouldn't be on Federal workers. They can't vote to solve this. The 
pressure should be on us.
  For everyone in this body who says, ``I don't like that kind of 
artificial pressure,'' why don't you feel what it is like to be a 
Federal worker for a while and those Federal employees? They don't like 
that pressure on them. So let's flip it. Let's put the pressure on us, 
where it should be, and get it off the folks, where it should not be, 
and let's stay until we get our work done.
  This idea is overly simplistic, but what is interesting is, for the 
first time in a decade, there is an idea that has bipartisan support. 
We have multiple Members of this body who are looking at it, 
contemplating it, and then nodding their heads, saying: I would rather 
the pressure be on us than on the Federal workers and their families.
  Let's solve this. We shouldn't have government shutdowns. We should 
have arguments over debt and deficit. We should have arguments over the 
budget. That is why people sent us here--to solve how their money is 
going to be spent most efficiently and argue about issues on debt and 
deficit.
  In the meantime, why in the world would we want to hurt the very 
people who serve their neighbors, those people being the Federal 
employees around the country? Let's keep them out of it. Let's keep 
them still serving their neighbors, and let's keep the fight right here 
where it needs to be. Let's argue this out until we get it resolved, 
and let's not quit until we resolve it. It is a simple idea that 
Senator Hassan and I actually believe will work.
  In the decades to come, people will look back at the time when we 
used to have government shutdowns and will shake their heads and say: I 
can't believe there was a period of time during which the Federal 
government used to shut down when they argued. Now we stay until we get 
the issue settled.
  It is a pretty straightforward idea, and I hope that more of my 
colleagues will join us in this absolute commitment to solving this for 
future generations.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BENNET. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.