[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 146 (Thursday, September 19, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6319-S6321]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           GOVERNMENT FUNDING

  Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, it is the middle of September. The end 
of the funding year is actually just over 10 days away. The Senate has 
brought up exactly zero appropriations bills, although the Committee on 
Appropriations has worked in a bipartisan way to be able to get those 
through the Committee on Appropriations. But zero of them have come to 
the floor for a vote, which means we are facing a continuing resolution 
in the next week and another one of those hanging deadlines out there.
  We could have worked on it last week, except last week, there were 
just judges, and this week, it was some tax judges and other folks on 
the docket and some political votes that came up. So we didn't work on 
it last week, and we didn't work on it this week. We

[[Page S6320]]

didn't work on it 2 months ago or 3 months ago when they had already 
been out of committee. They just haven't come up at all.
  So once again, the Nation is whispering about, will we have another 
government shutdown based on the fact that Congress has not finished 
its work. Quite frankly, even during this September, we have not even 
brought up appropriations bills for a vote on the floor at all.
  I have come to this floor multiple times to say that this is not the 
way it should run. Quite frankly, a hundred of us would all nod our 
heads and say it is not the way it should run.
  I continue to be able to bring to this body a very simple idea that 
Maggie Hassan and I--my colleague from New Hampshire--have had together 
for years now that, if it ever came to the floor, would pass. We have 
plenty of support on both the Republican and Democrat side of the aisle 
to be able to deal with ending government shutdowns. It is a simple 
idea that she and I have; that is, if we get to a moment like this that 
we have not finished our work, the government doesn't have a shutdown; 
we have, actually, a shut-in where all of us have to stay here and 
continue our work. Federal employees and the Nation are held harmless, 
but we have to actually finish the work.
  We have multitrillion dollars in debt and little to no conversation 
here about it, and we won't have any in September. Now, it looks like 
we will punt this for several months. My question is, Will we have it 
then? Probably not because it may punt to November or December or it 
may punt into next year. We haven't decided yet.
  When that is decided, there will be another deadline sitting there, 
and there will be more things to do during that time period, whether it 
is the end of this year, because there are so many unaddressed things 
that have not happened this year that have to be addressed, so they 
will be crammed into the end of the year, so there will be no serious 
conversation then; or it will be punted into next year, and there are 
so many things under a new Presidential term that have to be done, 
there won't be any serious conversation then.
  So my simple question is, When do we ever have this conversation on 
something we all acknowledge is a problem? But instead of working on 
what we all know is the big issue, we are instead voting on judges and 
chitchatting and pretending it is not a problem when it is.
  We are not voting on the national defense authorization either. That 
has come out of committee already on wide bipartisan support months 
ago, but it has yet to come to the floor of the Senate. My 
understanding now of the latest rumor is that there is no plan to 
actually bring it to the floor of the Senate, that there seems to be an 
intent to say: We will just not ever bring it to the Senate and just 
kind of pretend we did and then move to a conference report at the end 
of year.
  One of the single most important bills that we do during the course 
of the year is our funding for Americans' tax dollars in our National 
Defense Act. So far, we have not done any of the 12 bills dealing with 
our funding, and apparently, we are not going to do the National 
Defense Act this month, next month; maybe November, December if they 
can form an agreement with Members of the House behind the scenes. So 
the first time we may ever see the bill may be after some deal has 
already been struck, and we will have no amendments, no conversation; 
just the single biggest thing that we work on during the course of the 
year--national defense--landing on the floor of the Senate, saying: 
Vote up or down. Does anyone think that is the way it should operate? 
Anyone at all?
  In this bill, I fought for things like Tinker Air Force Base. It is 
the largest sustainment base in all of the Air Force, and it happens to 
be in Oklahoma. There are serious things that are there.
  We are in the transition between two different airplanes, the E-3 to 
the E-7. The E-7 has not come on fast enough, and the E-3 was already 
fading away, not being sustained. So in this bill, it actually says: 
Hold on, Air Force. The other platform is delayed. We can't give up 
this one until that one is on board.
  So it is a literal national defense issue to say: We have to be able 
to resolve this. It is Congress speaking into what we should speak into 
in a very practical area to say these are things that need to be 
solved.
  We have personnel issues, like pay raises for our military. We have 
issues for spouses and their work. We have all kinds of things that are 
built into this bill dealing with our different installations around 
the world and the fight that is happening in Europe and the Middle East 
and our preparation all around the world to be able to secure the 
United States. But we are not talking about that. We are having votes 
on judges instead. And apparently, from what I am hearing rumor of, we 
may not have any talk about it at all on the floor of the Senate.
  There is a bill that has been moving through committee dealing with 
energy permitting--it seems to have bipartisan support--saying we have 
to fix the process of how we are doing energy transmission for 
transmission lines and also for pipelines and basic energy needs.
  It is interesting. Ten years ago, I would have people catch me and 
say: We really want to be able to get renewable energy. We want 
renewable energy. We need that for our manufacturing. That is what we 
want to do.
  Do you know what I hear now from manufacturers? We just need energy, 
period, because our electric grid is being strained across the entire 
country because we have more data centers, because we have AI coming on 
board, which uses a tremendous amount of electricity. We have electric 
vehicles that are coming on board, which use a tremendous amount of 
electricity. In the process, we have more and more regulations slowing 
down the production of more and more energy. We are not keeping up, and 
we all know it. Yet a bill to deal with energy permitting languishes. I 
have no idea, after it comes out of committee, if we will ever even 
discuss it on the floor of the Senate, although it has been worked on.
  We have healthcare issues. We all talk about the importance of 
healthcare and trying to be able to bring down the cost for consumers. 
Well, guess what, the Finance Committee did protracted, multiyear work 
on a bipartisan basis to be able to move a bill dealing with pharmacy 
benefit managers to bring down the cost not of 10 drugs but of all 
drugs and to be able to make it more available--and not just available 
by mail, available at pharmacies, especially rural pharmacies that are 
struggling under the oppression of the pharmacy benefit managers.
  Just this year, this calendar year--middle of September to January--
just this year, 2,275 pharmacies in America have closed. Do you know 
why? That pharmacy benefit manager bill that we have that has been out 
of committee on a wide bipartisan vote is still sitting there not even 
debated on this floor while 2,275 pharmacies closed because, 
apparently, we needed to do other things.
  So we have ignored more than 2,000 pharmacies closing, many of them 
in rural areas, because we wouldn't even debate the policy here. If we 
brought it to this floor, it would pass tomorrow with overwhelming 
support on both sides of the aisle, but it has not been brought up.
  There is a farm bill that is out there that was due last year, so 
there was an extension into this year. Well, guess what, that farm bill 
expires now within the month, and there is no debate still about the 
farm bill that was extended from last year into this year on where it 
is going to go.
  Farmers that are dealing with reference prices right now and 
inflation and what they are facing for the cost of fuel, the cost of 
fertilizer, the cost of equipment--as that continues to accelerate, 
Congress continues to ignore bringing up the farm bill, as if our food 
is just going to appear at the grocery store.
  These are big issues. The reason we all were elected was to work on 
these big issues, but so far this year, these issues won't even come to 
the floor of the Senate for debate. It is not that they have been 
brought up and voted down; they are not even brought up.
  My simple challenge is: It is the middle of September. Why aren't we 
working on the budget? Why aren't we working on the national defense 
authorization? Why aren't we working on energy and the cost of 
permitting for energy? Why aren't we working on

[[Page S6321]]

lower-priced prescription drugs? Why aren't we working on the farm 
bill? All of those had wide bipartisan support coming out of 
committee--all of them--but none of them have been brought up here on 
this floor.
  Maybe it is so everything can just get crammed into the end of the 
year and get past ``the election.'' But maybe we need to reset our 
priorities. Let's get the things done that the American people expect 
us to work on, the hard things, the things that are important, whether 
it is healthcare, energy, ag policy, the budget, the national defense. 
Let's address the things that should be addressed, and let's get 
started. I would be OK with starting today, but let's at least address 
them next week. But from my understanding of next week's schedule, they 
are not coming up then either.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader.

                          ____________________