[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 160 (Saturday, September 30, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H4927-H4933]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2024 AND OTHER EXTENSIONS ACT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind Members of the House
that at the time the motion to adjourn was demanded, we were debating
H.R. 5860.
The gentlewoman from Texas has 6 minutes remaining. The gentlewoman
from Connecticut has 5 minutes remaining.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. GRANGER. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Just so I can reiterate what I had said earlier, we now have really
the language in both the Senate bill and in the House bill, and it is
really not so clean a continuing resolution as it has been portrayed.
This strikes the Member pay prohibition, in effect, giving Members a
pay raise.
Let me just explain. If you have a copy of the bill, on page 7--in
the Senate bill, there is language that the Legislative Branch
appropriations bill, what division it is, et cetera. Section 6, really
what it does is the Senate bill prohibits the movement toward a Member
pay raise.
Now, what the House Republicans have done is, page 7, line 13, what
they do, they just drop that part of the language that comes from the
Senate bill. In essence, what they have done is to provide themselves
with a pay raise.
I think that you haven't given us time to read the 71 pages. I am
hopeful that all of you have had the opportunity to read the 71 pages.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman will suspend.
Once again, the Chair would like to remind Members that in keeping
with the proper decorum on the floor, please direct your comments to
the Chair.
The gentlewoman will resume.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Jeffries), the distinguished Democratic leader.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) for her leadership and all of my colleagues
in government.
I rise today to have a conversation with the American people, so
strap in because this may take a little while.
I want to talk about why we are here at this moment on the brink of a
shutdown that was entirely avoidable and has been brought to us by the
extreme MAGA Republicans, who have decided that rather than pursue the
normal legislative process of trying to find common ground; not as
Democrats or Independents or Republicans but as Americans.
Rather than try to pursue policy achievements through the normal
legislative process, they want to threaten the American people with a
shutdown to try to drive their extreme agenda down the throats of the
American people.
Why are we here at this moment on the brink of a catastrophic
shutdown that will hurt everyday Americans, hurt children, hurt
families, hurt older Americans, hurt veterans, and hurt the economy?
{time} 1315
Why are we here at this moment when from the very beginning we have
said that there is an opportunity to come together in a bipartisan way
consistent with the spending agreement that House Republicans
themselves negotiated?
From the beginning of this process, we have said nothing more,
nothing less--simply keep your word with respect to the agreement that
you negotiated.
Just so that the American people understand what we are talking about
when we say simply that an agreement was negotiated, how did we get to
this point?
Well, heading into the 118th Congress, heading into this Congress, we
said that we are willing to find common ground with our colleagues on
the other side of the aisle whenever and wherever possible in the best
interests of the American people and govern in a bipartisan way in the
same way that we governed in the previous Congress where we passed bill
after bill after bill to make life better for the American people.
Many of those legislative efforts, whether it was the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act where we created millions of good-paying jobs
for hardworking, everyday Americans to fix our crumbling bridges,
roads, tunnels, our airports, our sewer and water systems, our mass
transportation systems, it was bipartisan; largely Democratic in the
House but bipartisan.
We passed gun safety legislation for the first time in 30 years. Why?
Because we believe that we should do something about the gun violence
epidemic in the United States of America with the fierce urgency of now
and not as some of my colleagues want to do--unleash weapons of war
that are not used to hunt deer. They are used to hunt human beings and
shred children. We worked in a bipartisan way to pass the Bipartisan
Safer Communities Act, to make progress for the American people.
Then we worked on the Chips and Science Act that will bring domestic
manufacturing jobs back home to the United States of America as opposed
to our jobs moving in the other direction and to invest in science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics to ensure that our young
people have the skills to succeed in the 21st century economy and are
competitive to continue to elevate American exceptionalism. That was
done in a bipartisan way.
Now, there were some areas where our Republican colleagues refused to
do what was right, in our view, for the American people, and that is
why in some instances, we needed to just act, to put people over
politics. That is what we did with the American Rescue Plan and the
Inflation Reduction Act.
Our bipartisan track record continues. We stood up for the men and
women who have served this country and who were exposed to burn pits or
toxic substances or Agent Orange.
Through the PACT Act under the leadership of Speaker Pelosi and
Chairman Mark Takano, we stood up for our veterans to ensure that
millions of them would get the healthcare that they deserve. We got the
PACT Act over the finish line. Once again, it was bipartisan in nature.
We understood that there were grave threats to our democracy because
of what occurred with the former President of the United States of
America who incited a violent insurrection and tried to potentially use
some loopholes within the Electoral Count Act to effectively steal the
election, undermine the principle of free and fair elections, halt the
peaceful transfer of power.
We formed a committee under the leadership of Chairman Bennie
Thompson who did an incredible job of presenting the stakes to the
American people.
The January 6th Committee explored the consequences of what happens
when one individual and people who blindly follow them could undermine
the very fabric of our democracy.
It is important to note that the January 6th Committee was also
bipartisan in nature. It was bipartisan, and every single witness that
was presented worked with the former President.
There is still more that needs to be done in that regard, but one of
the legislative results of the January 6th Committee's wonderful
presentation and exploration was that we passed reform to the Electoral
Count Act to strengthen the institution of our democracy as part of the
principle that we will never again allow a single individual sitting at
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to try to undermine American democracy. We
won't do it. That bill was bipartisan in nature.
We also passed the American Rescue Plan at a moment of great crisis:
The very beginning of the previous Congress, in the midst of a once-in-
a-century pandemic that cost so many lives, so much pain, so much
suffering, so much death.
We moved decisively under the leadership of President Biden to pass
the
[[Page H4928]]
American Rescue Plan which put shots in arms, money in pockets, and
kids back in school.
We passed the Child Tax Credit as part of that that reduced child
poverty in America by half. Not a single Republican would join us as
part of the effort to make sure that the American Dream is alive and
well in every single ZIP Code. We reduced poverty.
These were things that were done for everyone, every single American,
regardless of ZIP Code: Urban America, rural America, exurban America,
suburban America, small-town America, the Heartland of America,
Appalachia.
We are committed to putting people over politics. That is what we
were able to do with the American Rescue Plan and allowed the United
States of America to emerge as the strongest economy of any advanced
economy in the world.
That wasn't a guarantee. We know we have more work to do. We know we
have more work to do, and we want to get to work.
Instead of getting to work on behalf of the American people, solving
problems, joining and partnering with us in a manner that is designed
to find common ground, extreme MAGA Republicans have been marching us
to a dangerous government shutdown, which we will get to in a moment.
We ended the previous Congress by passing the Inflation Reduction
Act, striking a dramatic blow against the climate crisis, setting our
planet on a sustainable trajectory forward, the largest investment in
combating the climate crisis in the history of the world because we
recognize that these extreme weather events will not go away on their
own.
America is leading, thanks to our Speaker Emerita and House Democrats
and Senate Democrats and President Joe Biden.
In that legislation, we also addressed the issue of healthcare
affordability because we understand that the American people are
dealing with grave challenges as it relates to their cost of living.
In the Inflation Reduction Act, we began to address that in a serious
way; strengthening the Affordable Care Act, lowering healthcare costs,
and driving down the high price of lifesaving prescription drugs for
millions of Americans. This included taking the price of insulin, which
prior to the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, would cost the
average American family about $4,000 a year, and we drove that down to
$35 a month, and we are just getting started.
That is the track record coming into this Congress as the American
people are suffering from what has been characterized as a Republican
civil war. Apparently, it is because a handful of the more extreme
Members on the other side of the aisle have concluded that what is
necessary is to try to hijack the institution, to jam their rightwing
ideological views down the throats of the American people because they
understand that otherwise, these extreme policies cannot be achieved
throughout the normal legislative process.
We are supposed to believe that the chaos, the dysfunction, the
extremism is largely a result of the narrowness of the Republican
majority.
We had the same exact majority, extremely narrow on the other side of
the aisle. Instead of chaos, dysfunction, and extremism, we got things
done for the American people--the same exact majority under the
leadership of Speaker Pelosi and Jim Clyburn and Steny Hoyer.
That is the context coming into the moment that we are in right now;
historic dysfunction that we have seen. We are on the brink of a
government shutdown and at the eleventh hour, legislation is dropped on
the American people.
We are told that you have 5 or 10 minutes to evaluate legislation
that is more than 70 pages long and expected simply to trust the word
of our extreme MAGA Republican colleagues. The American people deserve
better. They deserve better.
We are working through evaluating that legislation on behalf of the
American people. We have not had time to evaluate the bill that was
dropped on the American people at the eleventh hour, immediately after
what took place yesterday on the floor of the House where extreme MAGA
Republicans put on the floor a continuing resolution that imposed 30
percent or more draconian cuts on the American people, including
cutting the Social Security Administration by 30 percent, devastating
Social Security and the ability of the administration to administer it
on behalf of older Americans in this country.
We need time to evaluate whether in this bill that was just dropped
upon the American people at the eleventh hour, does it try to cut
Social Security because that is what you tried to do yesterday.
We need a little time to evaluate whether you are trying to slash
public school funding. Why are we concerned about whether the
Republican majority is trying to slash public school funding? Because
you put forth a bill that did just that yesterday.
It would devastate the ability of American children all across the
country to be able to learn in a manner that gives them the best
opportunity to succeed and pursue the American Dream.
Some versions of the Republican spending bills would slash Title 1
funding, which goes to the most vulnerable children amongst us, by 80
percent; effectively shut down public education in many parts of this
country.
I think it is a reasonable thing for House Democrats on behalf of the
American people to have time to evaluate what you are trying to do with
public education in a bill that House Republicans dropped on the
American people at the eleventh hour.
{time} 1330
We also are very concerned that from the very beginning of this
Congress, Republicans had an objective to criminalize abortion care and
to impose or march us toward a nationwide ban. We want the American
people to understand that on this side of the aisle we don't believe
that our colleagues on the Republican side should threaten a government
shutdown as part of their effort to criminalize abortion care. That
shouldn't happen. That should not happen.
That is what Republicans are trying to do in a Defense bill that they
just passed this week. We need an opportunity to evaluate the four
corners of a bill that the Republican majority dropped on us at the
eleventh hour, and what it does to reproductive freedom. I think that
is what the American people would want us to do.
Let us be clear to the American people, House Democrats believe in a
woman's freedom to make her own reproductive healthcare decisions.
Period. Full stop. The Republican majority wants to undermine
reproductive freedom. We are trying to evaluate a bill, dropped on the
American people at the eleventh hour, whether anything in the four
corners of this bill would undermine reproductive freedom.
Earlier in the year, my Republican colleagues threatened to default
on America's debt, which connects to the moment that we are in right
now because it ultimately resulted in Republicans agreeing to top-line
spending numbers. That is part of what has brought us to this moment.
An agreement was reached in May to avoid any shutdown drama by
setting top-line spending numbers at the insistence of House
Republicans, who then went into the Oval Office with President Joe
Biden, who was negotiating in good faith, and arrived at top-line
spending numbers.
The bill was presented on the House floor and more than 300 Members
of Congress voted for it, including 149 Republicans, a majority in the
Senate that was bipartisan in nature, it was sent to President Biden's
desk and signed into law, setting top-line spending numbers as part of
an effort to avoid a reckless government shutdown.
It took less than a week for the Republican majority to break its
word in the agreement that House Republicans themselves negotiated,
which leads us to this moment right now.
The nerve of even threatening a catastrophic default in and of itself
highlights the extremism that has permeated this Chamber from the
beginning of this Congress on January 3. The full faith and credit of
the United States of America and protecting it is a constitutional
responsibility that we all have.
By the way, when Democrats were in the majority and someone was in
the White House from the other side of the political aisle--someone who
we strongly disagreed with, the former
[[Page H4929]]
President--we raised the debt ceiling three times. There was no
gamesmanship, no partisanship, and no showmanship. We raised it three
times. That is simply what should have occurred this time around.
As part of extracting policy changes that the American people don't
support, we were threatened with defaulting on our debt for the first
time in American history: it would have crashed the economy, sent the
stock market spiraling downward, and triggering a job-killing
recession.
Under the leadership of President Biden, we reached an agreement to
avoid a catastrophic default. In that agreement, we protected Social
Security, protected Medicare, protected Medicaid, protected veterans,
protected public education, protected public safety, protected our
efforts to combat the climate crisis, and protected the American
people.
As part of that we reached top-line spending numbers that Republicans
negotiated. Immediately, the Republicans then broke the agreement to
bring us to this point. That is very unfortunate. All of this could
have been avoided.
We have a bill in the Senate that shortly would have ended the
government shutdown. If in fact, as we have consistently asked for,
this bipartisan spending agreement emerges from the Senate and makes
its way over to the House, and if you put the bipartisan spending
agreement emerging from the Senate on the floor of the House of
Representatives and allow for an up or down vote, it will pass, and the
extreme MAGA Republican shutdown would end. That is the way to proceed.
Why can't my Republican colleagues commit to doing just that?
Is this really a serious effort to end a government shutdown--
threat--when it is in the DNA of many of my colleagues on the other
side of the aisle to shut down the government?
It is not hyperbole. Let's just check the historic record. In the
1990s, the Republicans shut the government down twice when Bill Clinton
was President. The ransom demand at the time was: We want to slash and
burn Medicaid and end Medicare as the American people know it. Unless
that were to happen, we were told by Republicans that they would shut
down the government. That is exactly what happened twice in the 1990s
in order to try to slash and burn Medicaid and adversely impact
Medicare. It is in the DNA of House Republicans.
How do we know that?
In 2013, the American people were forced to deal with another
reckless, dangerous government shutdown. For 14 days, House Republicans
shut down the government. Why was the government shut down in 2013?
Because the demand was made, inherently unreasonable, that President
Obama should repeal the Affordable Care Act, a signature legislative
accomplishment that has been a force for good in the United States of
America.
We declined politely to take away healthcare from millions of
Americans. We declined politely to allow House Republicans to impose a
situation in America where more than 100 million people would have lost
their protection for pre-existing conditions. We declined to allow
House Republicans to impose an age tax on older Americans, which would
have dramatically increased healthcare costs.
Because we have declined to do those things, House Republicans chose
to shut the government down in 2013 for 14 days. It is in the House
Republicans' DNA.
In 2018 and 2019, we faced the longest government shutdown in
American history, 35 days of devastation visited upon the American
people, unnecessarily so. What was the extreme ransom demand at that
particular point in time?
The demand was to waste billions of dollars of taxpayer money on the
former President's ineffective, medieval border wall, which, by the
way, he said Mexico would pay for. The House majority at the time
turned around and tried to stick the American taxpayer with a bill--an
ineffective solution to the issues around immigration that we should
necessarily confront.
Because we declined, respectfully, to pay that ransom note and stick
the American people with billions and billions of dollars for an
ineffective border wall that the previous President promised Mexico
would pay for, the Republicans shut the government down for 35 days. It
is in their DNA.
The interesting thing about that government shutdown is that while we
had taken the majority in January of 2019, the government shutdown
started in late December. In other words, the government shutdown
started with a Republican in the White House and Republicans in the
majority in the House and in the Senate. You shut yourselves down at
that particular moment. It is in their DNA.
That is the backdrop and context for how we arrived at this moment.
After the district work period throughout the month of August, we came
back to Congress ready, willing, and able to get things done for the
American people, to find common ground, to put people over politics,
which is what we are committed to doing every single day we are here in
Washington.
When we came back in September, that is what House Democrats were
prepared to do. We were told that to the extent any illegitimate
impeachment inquiry would be launched, it would be done only with a
serious up or down vote on the floor of the House of Representatives.
That is what we were told by House Republican leadership. That is not
what happened.
Instead of coming back to Washington in September, knowing we were
faced with the possibility of an extreme MAGA Republican government
shutdown, and being laser-focused on finding the common ground
necessary to fund the government in a way that protects the health, the
safety, and the economic well-being of the American people--instead of
doing that, without a vote on the floor of the House of
Representatives--House leadership announces an illegitimate impeachment
inquiry.
There was no evidence of wrongdoing. There was no evidence of an
impeachable offense. There was no evidence that any high crimes or
misdemeanors were committed by the President. There was no evidence
that the President broke the law.
How do we know this?
The Republicans' own witnesses told the American people that 2 days
ago in a hearing that House Republicans called.
Mr. Speaker, for 3 weeks, instead of focusing on solving problems for
hardworking American taxpayers, House Republicans launched an
illegitimate impeachment inquiry when House Republican witnesses have
now testified before the American people that no evidence exists to
justify impeaching the current President.
{time} 1345
That is part of the context of why we are here: House Republicans
wasting time doing the bidding of the former President, the
insurrectionist-in-chief, who demanded an illegitimate impeachment
inquiry be opened.
As opposed to working together to find the common ground to meet the
needs of the American people, they have been wasting time and taxpayer
dollars on a reckless political stunt. That is why we are at the brink
of the government shutting down right now. That was week one when we
came back, the week of September 11.
What happened in week two? Week two, the week of September 18, House
Republicans, my colleagues, decided that they were going to try to jam
extreme rightwing policies down the throats of the American people,
strip away reproductive freedom, criminalize abortion care, bully the
LGBTQ community, cut public education, cut public safety, cut
affordable housing programs, cut the ability for veterans to receive
the nutritional assistance that they needed.
Week two they decided, the House majority, Mr. Chairman decided to go
to the floor to pass bills that would do nothing to make life better
for everyday Americans, do nothing to avoid a catastrophic government
shutdown, do nothing to find common ground in a bipartisan way. During
the week of September 18, a decision was made to try to jam extreme
rightwing policies down the throats of the American people, and not a
single bill was passed because House Republicans had an inability to
get their act together with each other.
Colorful words were used--I won't use them on the floor; they are in
the public domain--as part of a Republican civil war, shooting at each
other, fighting each other. Let me make something clear, House
Democrats are here
[[Page H4930]]
to fight for the American people, to fight for the American people.
That is what we should be doing; Not fighting each other as part of a
Republican civil war.
Last week, time was wasted by our House Republican colleagues
fighting each other in what has been described as a Republican civil
war--colorful language used not by Democrats to describe what was
taking place on the other side of the aisle, but used by House
Republicans to describe each other.
I won't call out any individual Members on the other side of the
aisle, but former Members, including a former Speaker, Paul Ryan, a
good man--I disagreed with him on a whole host of issues, but he
believed in the institution--made the observation that House
Republicans are dysfunctional and need to get their act together. That
is Paul Ryan, former Speaker. That same sentiment was echoed by current
House Republican Members.
Last week, they wasted time fighting each other as opposed to finding
the common ground necessary to reach a bipartisan spending agreement.
The former chair, top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee,
Rosa DeLauro, has made clear from the very beginning she was ready to
sit down and talk to her Republican counterpart anytime, anyplace,
ready, willing, and able to find bipartisan common ground. However, we
couldn't find a partner on the other side, and so we proceeded in
conversation with Senate Democrats, Senate Republicans, and the Biden
administration. They were all in alignment in a strongly bipartisan
bill to avert a government shutdown earlier this week that passed in a
motion procedurally to advance the legislation 77-19, strongly
bipartisan.
We were a part of those conversations thanks to Rosa DeLauro. That is
a bill that would avoid a government shutdown and meet the needs of the
American people in every single way and give us another 45 days or so
to work through the normal appropriations process and reach common
ground.
However, instead of partnering with House Democrats, Senate
Democrats, Senate Republicans, and the Biden administration, House
Republicans decided to go it alone, fight a civil war, stand on an
island on their own. So last week nothing happened on the floor of the
House of Representatives.
That brings us to this week. This week we returned earlier and had
every opportunity. We continued to say, we want to partner with our
Republican colleagues to find the common ground necessary to meet the
needs of the American people and avoid a catastrophic government
shutdown that will hurt everyday Americans, hurt children, hurt
families, hurt the middle class, hurt all those who aspire to be part
of the middle class, hurt working families, hurt veterans, hurt the
poor, the sick, the afflicted, hurt the least, the lost, and the left-
behind.
We have said from the very beginning that we were ready, willing, and
able to find the bipartisan common ground to meet the needs of the
American people and avoid a catastrophic government shutdown.
Instead, my Republican colleagues spent this week peddling more
chaos, more dysfunction, and more extremism, trying to jam extreme
rightwing policies down the throats of the American people, cutting
Social Security, slashing public school funding, criminalizing abortion
care, including in the Department of Defense bill that House
Republicans advanced earlier this week, to restrict military
servicewomen from being able to travel in order to seek reproductive
healthcare and threatened a government shutdown unless the American
people were to be forced to agree with a policy that they don't
support. They spent this week doing things like that.
Yesterday, a bill was brought to the House floor to cut spending by
30 percent or more in a manner that would do things like take food out
of the mouths of women, infants, and children. We will never let that
happen--not now, not ever, not in America. We will never let that
happen. That is one of the extreme rightwing policies that my
Republican colleagues spent this week threatening to do--threatening to
do--taking us to the brink of a government shutdown.
Now, from the very beginning, there was a clear path forward because
a spending agreement was reached in May that everyone in this town
agreed to abide by as a matter of law: House Democrats, House
Republicans, Senate Democrats, Senate Republicans, and President Biden.
Why, then, have we spent the last several weeks here in the House of
Representatives trying to break that agreement and threaten a reckless
government shutdown which, by the way, will have catastrophic
consequences for the American people?
We want the American people to know that we are going to do
everything possible to stop extreme MAGA Republicans from shutting down
the government. We are fighting on their behalf to put people over
politics. That is why we are here. That is why we are making this
fight.
We want to do it in a bipartisan way, so we are in the process of
evaluating the legislation that was dropped on the American people at
the eleventh hour. Once we conclude that expeditious review of the four
corners of the legislation, we can make a decision as to the best path
forward, when we have said all week that the only path forward is a
bipartisan one, is a bipartisan bill working its way through the Senate
right now--Senate Democrats, Senate Republicans coming together to meet
the needs of the American people. We are evaluating the four corners of
the bill to see if it does what is necessary as part of our effort to
fight for things like lower costs and better-paying jobs and safer
communities, building a healthy economy for hardworking American
taxpayers. Why? Because as House Democrats, we are committed to an
economy that is built from the middle out and the bottom up, not the
top down--not the top down.
Therefore, we are in the process now of evaluating whether there is
anything in the four corners of this bill that would impose upon the
American people the trickle-down economic scheme that has been such a
disaster for the American middle class and for all those who aspire to
be part of the middle class.
I think the American people deserve an opportunity for their elected
Representatives, Democrats and Republicans, to evaluate the legislation
that is in front of us--that is the least that can be done--when we
know that for decades House Republicans and my colleagues on the other
side of the aisle have imposed big tax cuts that benefit only the
wealthiest amongst us and undermine the ability of the American people
to truly pursue the American Dream.
It was done most recently in 2017. The House Republican majority's
signature legislative accomplishment was passing the GOP tax scam where
83 percent of the benefits went to the wealthiest 1 percent. If at the
end of the day this is all about fiscal responsibility, we want our
Republican colleagues to explain why, in a bill that benefited only a
handful of Americans, did they stick the American people with $2
trillion worth of debt? Because the GOP tax scam was not paid for at
all.
House Republicans dropped a bill on the American people at the
eleventh hour earlier today, and all we are simply saying is that we
want time to evaluate whether there is anything within the four corners
of that bill that would try to impose some trickle-down economic
scheme.
I have come to the conclusion over the years that trickle-down
economics means only one thing for everyday Americans. You may get a
trickle, but you are guaranteed to stay down. That is what trickle-down
economics is all about.
At the end of the day, we need to just evaluate where we are because
House Republicans started this Congress by saying any bill that is
brought before the people's House will be done so in a manner that
allows for at least 72 hours of review. That was the House Republican
policy, 72 hours of review.
{time} 1400
Like many other things that have been broken promises throughout this
do-nothing Republican Congress, you promised the American people they
would have 72 hours to review any bill brought before the American
people. You dropped this bill at the eleventh hour today and gave the
American people minutes to evaluate it. That is unacceptable. It is un-
American. It is unreasonable. The American people deserve better.
[[Page H4931]]
The American people deserve better because, at the end of the day,
what we are endeavoring to do is to try to figure out where we are at
on behalf of our quest to lift up the great American Dream for the
middle class and all those who aspire to be part of the middle class,
to do things that are pro-American, pro-worker, pro-labor union, pro-
entrepreneurial, pro-small business, pro-job creation, consistent with
our views that, in America, when you work hard and play by the rules,
you should be able to provide a comfortable living for yourself and for
your family, educate your children, purchase a home, and one day retire
with grace and dignity.
Is that too much to ask? That is what we are fighting for on behalf
of the American people. All we want is time, just a handful of moments,
to be able to evaluate.
Is there anything within the bill that was dropped on the American
people at the eleventh hour--notwithstanding the fact that the American
people were promised 72 hours for any bill, let alone consequential
legislation. We just want to be able to evaluate within the four
corners of the agreement where things are at in terms of uplifting that
basic American principle.
As I mentioned at the very beginning of my remarks, House Democrats
continue to stand ready to find common ground with our Republican
colleagues whenever and wherever possible. However, we will oppose
Republican extremism whenever necessary. We will oppose any efforts to
cut Social Security and Medicare. We will oppose any efforts to slash
public school funding. We will oppose any efforts to undermine American
democracy. We will oppose any efforts to flood our communities with
weapons of war. We will oppose any efforts to undermine the progress
being made on the climate crisis. We will oppose any efforts to
undermine the great American Dream. We will oppose any efforts to
undercut public education. We will oppose any efforts to walk away from
the people who keep us safe at our border and around the United States
of America. We will oppose any efforts to undermine the ability of the
middle class to continue to thrive in the United States of America.
All we are doing is making sure that we can assess the four corners
of the legislation that is before us, avoid a catastrophic government
shutdown, put people over politics, and make sure that we can continue
the great American Dream; that you don't undermine freedom, you don't
undermine reproductive freedom, you don't undermine the things that are
necessary for every single American to thrive in every ZIP Code
throughout the land, in urban America, in rural America, in suburban
America, in small-town America, in the heartland of America, in
Appalachia. That is all we are doing.
When we complete our review, we will come back to the floor. We will
make a decision. As Democrats, we will continue to put people over
politics and continue America's long, necessary, and majestic march
toward a more perfect Union.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) will control the time for the majority.
There was no objection.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
the State of Nevada (Mr. Amodei).
Mr. AMODEI. Mr. Speaker, there has been some indication of concern
because the bill on the floor lacks language to prohibit a cost-of-
living increase that doesn't exist, that was not given, and which has
no appropriation in the existing fiscal year budget.
Normally, that would be the end of the discussion. However, I guess,
being generous here, out of an abundance of caution and respect for
those bill-drafting experts in the Senate, fixing that to include the
Senate's genius language in this measure is something that is eminently
doable in short order unless it becomes midnight because we have to
have a couple more September State of the Unions.
Therefore, even though it was not included in our legislation, even
though there is no existing COLA or appropriation for it, if that is
the only thing--I am going to say that real slowly--if that is the only
thing that is wrong, then it is eminently fixable for that belt-and-
suspenders insurance policy for those who would support the bill but
for the lack of that language.
We shall see.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida has 4\1/4\
minutes remaining. The gentlewoman from Connecticut has 2\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend
debate for both sides by 10 minutes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, House Republicans have shown they are
unwilling and unable to govern. Some have shown they are willing and
able to abandon our allies.
Russian tyranny and aggression threaten more than just Ukraine's
borders. We learned in Georgia, and we learned in Crimea, if you stand
by while Russia takes an inch, they will take a mile. Vladimir Putin
must be held to account for upending Europe's security in peacetime for
a pointless and bloody war, which has disrupted energy markets and
triggered food insecurity around the world.
We must be clear about what this means, plain and simple. This is
appeasement like the world experienced in 1938, which led to a
cascading, murderous result.
Ukraine's fight for democracy and sovereignty requires decisive
action and absolute support from the free world. We must act like the
leaders of the free world. We must not abandon our position as the
world's beacon of democratic values. We must not surrender our global
influence to Russia, China, or any group that threatens democracies.
Members of this body have come together again and again to reaffirm
our commitment to helping Ukraine defend itself against vicious
invasion.
Let us keep the government open, and let us proceed to make sure that
we do not abandon our allies.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Valadao), another fellow appropriator.
Mr. VALADAO. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida for the
time.
Mr. Speaker, I think today we are at a really important moment in our
history. Obviously, we are all frustrated, myself included as an
appropriator. We have gone through this process. There was an effort to
bring bills up sooner. We all would have liked those to have come up
sooner, but playing games and dragging this out, and watching Members
drag the process out even further than it needs to be, is not helpful.
Ultimately, we need to get this passed. We need to get this over to
the Senate as quickly as possible because the American people want us
to get this done.
There are a lot of efforts that need to move forward. We obviously
need to continue the process of appropriating, and I think we have a
commitment now from leadership to keep us here over the next 2 weeks,
which I think is the right thing to do, so that we can finish the
appropriations bills.
We have done quite a bit, obviously. Moving the four bills off the
House floor is a huge step for us. We have two more to move out of
committee, and I think we will be moving that soon enough.
The reality is, we need to finish our work, and these 45 days will
give us the ability to do that. It makes a difference for the American
people and makes a difference for us here in Congress, and sadly, it is
something we need to do.
Ultimately, we have to vote here in a few minutes, and I ask that all
of my colleagues support the CR and get us through those 45 days so we
can finish our work.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to note here that,
first of all, I am very interested that there was a rereading of the
bill as it came from the House and from the Senate and that there is a
view that it needs
[[Page H4932]]
to be reviewed in some way because, in fact, as the bill stands, there
is a pay raise that is being done, in addition to which there are
student loan efforts that are thwarted, as well, making it more
difficult for about 45 million borrowers to be able to get the kind of
services that they need.
I really want to make the point that I have had the opportunity to
chair the Appropriations Committee for 2 years--and for those 2 years,
with a 3- or 4-person majority--with the assistance of colleagues in
the House and in the Senate. Last December, it was honestly just in the
Senate because House Republicans refused to participate in the
negotiations. I think there were very few, in the continuing resolution
that we put forward, Republicans who voted for a continuing resolution.
I think, if I recall the number precisely, it was nine, but it allowed
us to be able to hammer out the bills over the next several weeks until
December.
At that juncture, what we did was we came together. We hammered out
the bills. No one got everything that they wanted, but we could pass
the bill.
Now, I move forward to what happened last May and last June when
there was a budget agreement that was hammered out by the President and
the Speaker of the House. To be very honest with you, I did not vote
for that budget agreement. I would have never let this Nation default,
but I was very concerned about the harm that was going to be done to
the people of this country through the appropriations process that was
established by the majority, and that was to significantly cut $142
billion from the services that we provide. That is education, mental
health services, medical research services. All of that, I viewed, was
going to be curtailed.
{time} 1415
It is the law of the land. It is civics. When the House passes
something, the Senate passes something, the President signs the bill,
it is the law of the land. The Speaker of the House and the Republicans
in this House walked away from that agreement, and that is why we stand
where we are today in this effort.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from New York (Mr. D'Esposito), an amazing leader.
Mr. D'ESPOSITO. Mr. Speaker, just over 3 hours ago, we walked onto
this floor with a plan and an opportunity to make sure that our
government continues to work.
Instead of moving that plan forward, we have spent the last hour
hearing from a Member on the other side of the aisle trying to gain C-
SPAN ratings and I believe win a contest on how many times we could
hear the term ``MAGA.''
We are here this afternoon to keep our government running. Over the
last hour, I walked across the street to my office, taking calls from
constituents on Long Island in New York's Fourth Congressional District
whose homes and cars were destroyed yesterday after a massive amount of
rain and flooding.
These are individuals who are Democrats, who are Republicans. They
are not calling because they are from a political party. They are
calling because they are Americans, and they are pleading with us to
keep our government open. They are pleading with us to do the job that
we were sent here to do and to govern.
Mr. Speaker, that is what we have the opportunity to do, is to cast a
vote, cast a vote today to continue to make sure that our government
continues to run, that our government remains open so that we can do
the job that we were sent here to do. That is what I urge my colleagues
to do on the other side of the aisle.
Today, Members are not making a partisan vote, they are making a vote
in support of the United States of America. They are making a vote in
support of residents back home who need our help. They are making a
vote in support of moving this country forward.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Molinaro), another great leader.
Mr. MOLINARO. Mr. Speaker, having listened for 45 minutes, I am
amazed and confused as to what exactly my colleagues across the aisle
thought we were doing in this very moment.
In just moments, we have the opportunity to avert a Federal
Government shutdown. It is a responsibility that we have to ensure that
the people who work for this Federal Government have the support and
the backing of those who employ them. It is critically important to the
men and women who serve and sacrifice across the globe that they know
that we have their backs. It is critically important that those in law
enforcement, emergency response, and those all across this country know
that in this moment we vote ``yes'' to keep this government
functioning.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text
of H.R. 5860, as proposed to be adopted under suspension of the rules,
be modified by the amendment that I have placed at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the modification.
The Clerk read as follows:
In section 101(9) of division A, before the period insert
the following: ``, and section 6 in the matter preceding
division A of Public Law 117-328''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the modification is
agreed to.
There was no objection.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve
the balance of my time.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I once again would reiterate what I have been saying all
along and what I have said in the last several days: this House has
overwhelmingly, in the last 2 days, the majority has demonstrated that
we want to provide support for Ukraine's self-defense.
We had several amendments: a Biggs amendment, a Gaetz amendment, a
Greene amendment, all of which resulted in overwhelming support for
Ukraine.
I continue to believe that this is an appeasement strategy of the far
right and, in fact, does not have a majority support in this body, but
I believe that standing with our allies does have support.
I would reiterate that our own Department of Defense--something that
I believe my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have great
regard for, listen to, support their efforts, increase funding for
defense--care deeply about this issue of our national security and our
ability to be able to defend our allies overseas. They all have a great
affinity for this effort, and I applaud that, but that seems now to be
abandoned.
In the words of the Under Secretary of the Department of Defense,
they cannot do without this funding. I would remind Members that in a
very specific and poignant letter it lays out that: ``The bottom line
is we cannot sustain adequate levels of Ukraine assistance with
transfer authority alone.
``Delays to additional funding would also be perceived by Ukraine as
a sign of wavering U.S. support and likely as a betrayal of our
previous commitments.''
Mr. Speaker, the United States betraying our commitment to Ukraine is
essentially the bottom line on this continuing resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I would remind everyone that before we
can fund anything else Ukraine, we have to start by funding the
government of the United States of America.
We have been on the floor for a while now, and let me just boil it
down to this, if I may, Mr. Speaker:
If you want to shut down the government and all that that entails,
then there is an opportunity to do so by voting ``no.''
If you want to keep the Federal Government working and open and allow
the democratic process to proceed, then all of us have the opportunity
to do so very simply, after all of the words are spoken, to just vote
``yes.'' It could not be simpler, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by
[[Page H4933]]
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5860, as modified.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to
suspend the rules will be followed by a 5-minute vote on:
Agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 335,
nays 91, not voting 7, as follows:
[Roll No. 513]
YEAS--335
Adams
Aguilar
Alford
Allen
Allred
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Barr
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Buchanan
Bucshon
Budzinski
Burgess
Bush
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carey
Carl
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Comer
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Mike
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Grothman
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houchin
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Hudson
Huffman
Huizenga
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaLota
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lynch
Magaziner
Malliotakis
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCarthy
McCaul
McClellan
McClintock
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
McHenry
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Nunn (IA)
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Owens
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Pressley
Ramirez
Raskin
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Santos
Sarbanes
Scalise
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Smucker
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Tenney
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wenstrup
Westerman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
NAYS--91
Aderholt
Babin
Banks
Bean (FL)
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buck
Burchett
Burlison
Cammack
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Crane
Davidson
DesJarlais
Duncan
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Fitzgerald
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gonzales, Tony
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Guest
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hunt
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Jordan
Kelly (MS)
LaHood
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luttrell
Mace
Mann
Massie
Mast
McClain
McCormick
Miller (IL)
Mills
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moran
Murphy
Nehls
Norman
Obernolte
Ogles
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Quigley
Rose
Rosendale
Roy
Schweikert
Self
Spartz
Steube
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Williams (TX)
Yakym
Zinke
NOT VOTING--7
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Donalds
Joyce (PA)
Luna
Peltola
Porter
{time} 1442
Messrs. GREEN of Tennessee and MOOLENAAR changed their vote from
``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. VICENTE GONZALEZ of Texas, Ms. KUSTER, and Mr. BARR changed their
vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
Mr. VAN DREW changed his vote from ``present'' to ``nay.''
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and
the bill, as modified, was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. CARTER of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have
voted ``yea'' on roll call No. 513.
Stated against:
Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted
``nay'' on rollcall No. 513.
personal explanation
Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present to cast my vote
on rollcall 512 today. Had I been present I would have voted nay on
rollcall 512.
I was also unable to be present to cast my vote on rollcall 513
today. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall 513.
____________________