[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 15365-15369]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I appreciate the remarks of our 
distinguished

[[Page 15366]]

majority leader. He has probably the most frustrating job there is 
because he has continuously brought up and passed bills to get us out 
of this and reopen the government, and he is blocked by the Republican 
leadership in the other body.
  Today marks the 8th day of this unnecessary government shutdown, more 
than 192 hours since the world saw the doors to the United States 
Government closed for this embarrassing and needless shutdown. While 
the Republicans in the House have the ability to end this shutdown 
right now--before noon today--they refuse to pass the clean continuing 
resolution approved by the Senate.
  I have joined other Senators in coming to the floor to speak about 
the pervasive impact of the shutdown, and there isn't a single family 
in Vermont or in America--Republican, Democratic, or Independent--that 
this shutdown hasn't affected. All these families have been affected, 
but now we face cascading worsening effects to come the longer this 
senseless shutdown continues. I have joined the chorus of voices urging 
the relatively few in the House of Representatives holding up this 
process to put an end to this political act of destruction. It might 
allow them to send out bumper stickers and raise money from their 
supporters, but it is not helping the country.
  If the human toll of the impact--if a Vermonter is not able to buy a 
home, or children turned away from potentially life-saving clinical 
trials, or the parents of our fallen soldiers who won't receive death 
benefits to pay for their funerals--and that is not an exaggeration. We 
have always had a program, when one of our soldiers dies overseas in 
combat, there are benefits established so the family can at least be 
there when the casket returns at Dover Air Force Base and to provide 
for the funeral. Even that is cut out. We send our soldiers to war. We 
tell them we are there to take care of their families if something 
happens. Now, because of a small group of tea party Republicans, we say 
we can't even take care of their families when they die in the service 
of the country. For shame if that happens.
  If all of these examples don't motivate them to do the right thing, 
maybe I can speak their language for a moment and point to the fiscal 
cost of this Republican shutdown. The estimated cost per hour of the 
Republican shutdown--that the government remains shut down--is $12.5 
million. That is $300 million a day wasted or nearly $1.6 billion per 
week. And what do the American people get for that? They get to watch 
fake budget conferences, staged photo ops, and the very Members 
shutting down the government and running to every single TV camera they 
can find. Over the last 8 days we have spent more than $2 billion for 
the government to not work, not function, and not serve the American 
people.
  Can you imagine the actual good that could have been done with that 
$2 billion that was just wasted? And that figure only covers the cost 
of work and services the government can't perform because 800,000 
Federal workers are furloughed. It doesn't take into account the ripple 
effects throughout our overall economy.
  Where are the deficit hawks who claim we don't have enough money to 
provide SNAP benefits to hungry Americans in the farm bill? Where are 
the Members who shamefully held up disaster relief after Tropical Storm 
Irene and Hurricane Sandy, while insisting that spending be offset? 
Surely, they would want to put a stop to the shutdown to end this 
wasteful government spending. Yet here we are, waiting for the 
Republican leadership in the House of Representatives to pass the clean 
continuing resolution and put an end to this shutdown.
  Instead of passing a clean Senate-passed continuing resolution 
pending in the House--based on budget levels that, as the leader 
pointed out, Republicans themselves wanted--the proposals being offered 
by House Republicans would actually expand the deficit.
  First, the House proposed we repeal the Affordable Care Act because 
of claims it is harmful to our economy. But if we repeal it, we would 
actually accelerate the health care cost spiral and boost the Federal 
deficit by $109 billion. They don't tell people they are voting to add 
another $109 billion to our deficit. Then they suggest we repeal just a 
portion of the Affordable Care Act, but add $30 billion to the deficit 
for which they don't want any offsets. Where were the Members in the 
House who attacked appropriations bills and insisted on cuts to funding 
for law enforcement officers, disaster preparedness, and medical 
research? Where were the Members who insisted the devastating costs of 
sequestration must remain in place because we simply can't afford to 
spend and must reduce the deficit, no matter what it does to law 
enforcement or medical research or disaster preparedness?
  They ditched their principles, and now they have forced a government 
shutdown which is costing more than if we had stayed open because of 
the money wasted. It appears the only time the House is willing to 
compromise is when it comes to adding to the deficit in order to 
prevent access to affordable health insurance for millions of 
Americans.
  We are here right now because the Republican leadership in the House 
refuses to act. They could end the shutdown right now and make this the 
last day we spend $300 million on nothing. Yet there is this faction 
within the majority of the House that has now brought the government of 
the United States to a halt, wasting hundreds of millions of dollars 
each day, day after day, and they will not relent. They talk about the 
Affordable Care Act, which, if we have children in college, allows them 
to be on our insurance policy. They want to do away with that, but they 
don't have any alternative. The Affordable Care Act allows a member of 
your family with a preexisting health condition--heart, cancer, 
whatever--to get insurance. They want to do away with that. They have 
no plan of their own.
  I want to get back to work for Vermonters. I want help for the 
Vermont company who can't start their new business because the 
certificate is sitting on a desk at the Department of Treasury's 
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau but nobody is there to sign 
it--I want pregnant Vermonters and new moms going without meals and 
whose babies are going to go hungry because they are unable to get 
healthy food and baby formula without the WIC benefits they are 
supposed to have access to--I want to see them fed. I want to see our 
farmers have the ability to continue to work as they do every single 
day and know the farm bill has been passed.
  Let's stop the sloganeering here. Let's stop rushing to the TV 
cameras. Let's actually do what is best for America. Wouldn't that be a 
wonderful step in the right direction?
  Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded and I be allowed to speak for up to 12 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator is recognized.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, we are in the eighth day of a completely 
unnecessary partial government shutdown. Last week there was an 
official at the White House who said they were winning the shutdown 
debate and they were not concerned about how long the shutdown lasts. 
Well, there may be Democrats and folks at the White House who are 
content with the current situation, but Republicans remain focused on 
finding a solution to reopen the government.
  The Republicans have offered multiple solutions to fund the 
government and will continue to work to find common ground while 
providing ObamaCare relief for middle-class Americans. Middle-class 
Americans deserve the same relief from ObamaCare the Democrats have 
already given themselves and big business. Senate Democrats even had 
the opportunity to give the same 1-year relief from

[[Page 15367]]

ObamaCare to their constituents that President Obama has already given 
to big business.
  We believe this is an issue of basic fairness. We believe this law 
should be delayed--not just for big businesses and not just for the 
favored constituencies but for all Americans because of the harmful 
impact it is having.
  In fact, there is bipartisan support for giving individuals and 
families relief. A colleague of ours on the other side of the aisle--a 
Senate Democrat--recently said a delay for individuals would be very 
reasonable and sensible. There have been a number of votes in the House 
where Democrats have voted with Republicans in support of providing 
that delay to middle-class Americans.
  With regard to where we are right now, we have a near-term issue and 
we have a slightly longer term issue. The near-term issue has an awful 
lot of folks increasingly concerned about the impact the government 
shutdown is having on people across this country. The House of 
Representatives has passed nine bills that have been sent to the Senate 
which are sitting here at the desk that would provide funding for some 
of these programs and services which impact people across this country 
that could be picked up today and passed by unanimous consent. And, by 
the way, many of those have passed with bipartisan support.
  As recently as Saturday the House passed a bill that would provide 
back pay for Federal workers. There were 189 Democrats in the House of 
Representatives who voted in support of that bill. There have been up 
to 57 Democrats in the House of Representatives who have voted to give 
pay to our National Guard and Reserve, the same thing we have done for 
our active-duty military. They have also voted to provide relief to our 
national parks so they can open again. They have voted to provide 
funding for the National Institutes of Health so that those lifesaving 
medicines can continue to be provided. They have voted to provide 
funding for FEMA so FEMA can respond to the natural disasters that are 
occurring across the country.
  There are nine bills sitting at the desk of the Senate that could be 
picked up and passed today by unanimous consent. There wouldn't be a 
single Republican that I know of who would object to any of those 
measures being passed that would provide funding and relief in support 
of the services and programs which impact people across the country.
  The House will pick up a couple of more bills today. They will do one 
that funds Head Start and will then send it over here, so that will be 
the tenth bill that will be sitting at the Senate. They will pass a 
bill that funds Impact Aid, something which is very important to the 
people I represent in South Dakota. That will be the 11th bill that 
will be sitting at the desk in the Senate awaiting action. As I said, 
they could all be passed by unanimous consent. There would not be a 
single Republican that I know of who would be opposed to any of those 
being moved forward.
  It is not a question of addressing the funding concerns and making 
sure the programs and services which impact people across this country 
are being funded; that can be done. It has been done by the House, and 
those items have moved over here to the Senate. All that is necessary 
is for the majority leader to come over, pick them up, ask for 
unanimous consent to pass them, and those items would pass.
  I see the near-term issue as being one that is very easy to solve, 
and all that it entails is for the leadership in the Senate to pick up 
those bills and pass them.
  The other issue I mentioned that is a little bit longer term, but not 
much, because it is about 9 days away, is we are going to hit the debt 
limit, which means the United States of America will no longer have 
borrowing authority. We will hit up against the amount we are able to 
borrow on our credit card to fund the services of our government. There 
is a request obviously to increase the debt limit to allow the Federal 
Government to borrow more money. I have had private conversations with 
members of the administration's team. They said they would like to see 
a debt limit increase that would take us through the next election--
through November of 2014. To do that we would be looking somewhere in 
the trillion-dollar range. It strikes me that--and I think it is 
something supported by the American people--if we are going to have a 
debate about increasing the debt limit, we ought to do something about 
the debt. I think that is a sensible position to take. By a 2-to-1 
margin, polls show the American people believe if we are going to raise 
the debt limit, we ought to do something to fix and address the debt.
  What we are simply saying is: Let's sit down and have a discussion 
about things we can do that will put us on a different and sustainable 
fiscal trajectory for this country that won't saddle future generations 
of Americans with massive amounts--trillions and trillions of dollars--
of additional debt. That issue is looming out there and it is not very 
far away. We don't have a lot of time to deal with that. It is not, as 
I said, as immediate as the government shutdown, which can be addressed 
by the majority of the Senate. I think the debt limit is going to 
require both parties here in Congress and the President and his team to 
get together and figure out what it is we can do that would not only 
raise the debt limit--the amount we can borrow--but address the 
underlying fundamental problem, and that is the fact that we have a $17 
trillion debt.
  There has been a lot said about things that various Senators have 
said in the past on the floor and in the course of these various 
debates we have had about debt limit increases, and I wanted to point 
out that the President of the United States, President Obama, when he 
was here in 2006, said raising the debt limit is a failure of 
leadership. He said it is a failure of leadership and described it as 
unpatriotic. Unpatriotic--failure of leadership to raise the debt 
limit.
  Now he is saying he wants a clean debt limit increase--no 
negotiation, period. No negotiation on the debt limit. Well, at the 
time when he said that raising the debt limit was a leadership failure, 
the total Federal debt was $8.3 trillion. Today it is $16.8 trillion, 
$16.9 trillion. So the Federal debt, literally, is double what it was 
when the current President said back in 2006, as a Member of this 
Chamber in the Senate, that raising the debt limit would be a failure 
of leadership. Now it is twice that amount. It was $8.3 trillion in 
2006, and now we are going on $17 trillion.
  It seems to me the President of the United States--who described 
raising the debt limit in 2006 when the debt was half of what it is 
today as a leadership failure--ought to be willing to exercise some 
leadership and engage himself in a process that would allow us to sit 
down and talk about what we can do to get this debt under control.
  There is a series of spending reforms that have been put forward by 
many of my colleagues on this side of the aisle that would deal with 
the out-of-control spending, particularly on what we call the mandatory 
spending part of the budget, those entitlement programs that currently 
are on an unsustainable path. We would like to try and get that 
spending under control. There are a number of other things that have 
been proposed that, frankly, would be good for the economy.
  One of the best ways to get our fiscal house in order is to get the 
economy growing and expanding at a faster rate. When the economy is 
growing and expanding, more people are working, more people are 
investing, more people are paying taxes, and government revenues go up. 
When we have an economy growing at 3 to 4 percent instead of an economy 
growing at 1 to 2 percent, which is what we have today, the result is a 
dramatic increase in the amount of tax revenue that comes into the 
Federal Treasury.
  When they are talking about raising the debt limit, we should look at 
what we can do in association with that discussion to actually reduce 
the debt. One would be to put spending reforms in place, and the other 
would be growing and expanding the economy.
  One of the things that has been proposed that would grow the economy 
is tax reform. I happen to believe, and I

[[Page 15368]]

think a lot of us do, that the best thing we can do to get the economy 
growing at a faster rate is to reform our Tax Code in a way that makes 
us more competitive in the global marketplace. That would mean reducing 
the tax on business, which is the highest in the world. The United 
States has the highest corporate tax rate in the entire world.
  Lowering marginal income tax rates, broadening the tax base, doing 
away with many of the loopholes, deductions, exemptions, and 
preferences that are in the Tax Code today that benefit particular 
constituencies and going to a broader based tax base, but one that has 
marginal rates that are significantly lower than where they are today--
I think that would dramatically unleash economic growth in this country 
and get people back to work so they can pay taxes and get government 
revenues up.
  In the context of raising the debt limit, we ought to do something 
about the debt, and as I said, that is fairly straightforward.
  One of the ideas that has been put forward here is that we need a 
clean debt limit increase; we can't have any discussion or negotiation 
about this. If we look at history, it has been the case that many of 
the big accomplishments, if you will, when it comes to deficit 
reduction, when it comes to fiscal plans being put into place, occurred 
in the context of increasing the debt limit. In fact, throughout our 
history, going back to 1978, the debt limit has been raised 53 times in 
those 35 years. Of those 53 debt limit increases, 27, or more than 
half, were done around other policy considerations and policy 
discussions and legislation that was put forward to address issues--in 
many cases to address the out-of-control spending and debt we have in 
this country.
  For 35 years now, with 53 debt limit increases, more than half have 
involved discussion of other matters. In fact, some of the biggest 
accomplishments we can point to in the history of the last 30 years 
occurred at a time when we had both sides trying to figure out a path 
forward for dealing with fiscal imbalances our country faced.
  The Gramm-Rudman-Hollings legislation passed in 1985, the Budget Acts 
in 1990 and 1993 and 1997, and more recently in 2011. All occurred in 
the context of a debt limit increase. So there is ample precedent in 
history for doing big things that are good for the country and good for 
future generations around the debt limit increase. It defies history to 
suggest we cannot come to the table and cannot negotiate in the context 
of a debt limit increase.
  As I look at these issues that are converging on us now and what they 
mean for our children and our grandchildren and for future generations, 
it seems to me that taking a position of we will not negotiate, 
period--which is essentially what the President has said and what has 
been echoed here by the Senate majority--is not only wrong in terms of 
what we need to do to fix the debt and to get our country on a more 
sustainable fiscal path, but it is also completely at odds with what we 
know to be the case throughout our history. We can do better by the 
American people. We should do better by the American people. It 
requires leadership.
  The President of the United States, President Obama, as Senator Obama 
back in 2006, said at that time that raising the debt limit would be a 
leadership failure and described it as unpatriotic. Here we are these 
many years later, with double--double--the amount of debt we had back 
when he made that statement.
  This situation we are in today cries out for leadership. It cries out 
for leadership from the President and from those of us in Congress. I 
hope we can find our way to get together, to sit down, to negotiate, to 
come up with solutions that are good for the future of this country 
that would deal not just with raising the borrowing limit so we can 
borrow more money to fund government, but to address the underlying 
problem, and that is the fact that we have a $17 trillion debt that 
continues to grow at $600 billion, $700 billion a year.
  We continue to have a chronically high unemployment rate. We continue 
to have a labor force, a workforce that is at historically low levels; 
in other words, the number of people who are working today as a 
percentage of those who could work is at the lowest level it has been 
in 35 years. We have a sluggish economy that is growing in the 1- to 2-
percent range. Take-home pay for most Americans has gone down since the 
President took office by about $3,700.
  We need to get middle-class Americans back to work, middle-class 
Americans earning more, being able to provide for their families, 
increasing family household income and take-home pay in this country, 
and the way to do that is to get the economy growing and expanding.
  The other way to do that, I would argue, is to get spending here in 
Washington under control so we are not out there borrowing more and 
more money all the time, so that more and more of our country's assets 
and resources can be deployed toward things that will yield a return, 
that will put more people to work, that will grow the economy, and 
expand the standard of living and the quality of life for people across 
this country. Time is short. The clock is running. Time is a-wasting. 
We need to get this done.
  In the near term we need to bring up the nine bills sitting here in 
the Senate that were passed by the House. That would put funding for a 
lot of these services and programs that impact people--which has been 
expressed so many times by my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle--back in place.
  Secondly, let's get together--the President, Democrats, and 
Republicans here in Washington, DC--to talk about not only raising the 
debt limit but what we are going to do to address the underlying debt.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I note the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schatz). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. HAGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 
10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I rise to address the negative impact this 
government shutdown is having on my home State of North Carolina. It is 
a shame that some in Congress are playing political games with the most 
basic function of keeping our government open. I did not get elected to 
shut down the government. With each minute that goes by, more and more 
North Carolinians are feeling the impact of this irresponsible 
shutdown.
  North Carolina is proud to be home to almost 1 million veterans. But 
as of this spring, we are also home to one of the worst VA disability 
claims backlogs in the country. We have pushed to have senior VA 
personnel dispatched to North Carolina. More caseworkers have been 
added. After a lot of attention and work, we were finally beginning to 
see the needle move in the right direction.
  Claims were being processed faster, which means veterans were getting 
the benefits they deserved faster. But as of today, the Winston-Salem 
regional office is closed to the public. With claim processors 
furloughed and just a skeleton staff operation inside, this government 
shutdown threatens to reverse the progress we have made in addressing 
that backlog. So I ask, is it worth shutting down the government over a 
political game when veterans get caught in this crossfire? No.
  In my home State we are also proud of the 11 national parks that are 
not simply just beautiful places in our country and in our State but 
also important drivers of our tourism economy.
  As families flock to enjoy these affordable destinations, they stop 
at our local small businesses, they eat at our restaurants, and they 
stay in our hotels. In 2011, out-of-State tourists to national parks in 
North Carolina spent $720 million during these trips, which supported 
nearly 12,000 jobs.

[[Page 15369]]

  I do not know how many of my colleagues have been fortunate enough to 
visit western North Carolina at this time of the year. But right now 
the fall leaves are turning and western North Carolina is opening its 
arms to welcome tourists from around the country and from around the 
world who come to see this beautiful landscape.
  On the other side of the State, in the east, we have Cape Hatteras 
National Seashore and Cape Lookout. They are both closed. October is 
the most popular surf-fishing month of the year. But with beach access 
closed our fishermen cannot get to the fishing areas.
  With parks from out west all the way to down east closed, we fear too 
many families will decide to cancel their vacations. So I ask, is it 
worth shutting down the government over political games when our small 
business owners who support our economy will be the ones to shoulder 
this burden? No.
  In my home State we are proud that our university system includes a 
number of distinguished research institutions that are on the cutting 
edge of new technologies and therapies that will make our world better. 
NIH supports roughly 20,000 jobs in North Carolina. But the NIH will 
not take any action on grant applications or awards or admit new 
patients to clinical trials while our government is shut down.
  So I ask, is it worth putting medical advances and thousands of jobs 
at risk just to play a tired political game? No. I could go on and on. 
While new vaccines are still being delivered, the CDC is not able to 
track flu cases as usual. They cannot support State and local partners 
who help monitor infectious diseases.
  The FDA is not able to support the majority of its food safety 
activities. Pell grants and direct student loans could be delayed for 
14 million American students. School districts, colleges, and job 
training centers could face major cashflow problems without money for 
Federal programs and grants coming in the door.
  Our research universities, in addition to doing this cutting-edge 
research that benefits our entire country, are huge employers. Some of 
them receive tens of millions of dollars a month in reimbursement for 
work already performed for the Federal Government. Without those funds 
coming in the door, these universities can be put in an incredibly 
difficult position with respect to managing their expenses--not to 
mention the time lost in Congress when we should be talking about how 
to continue repairing our economy; we should be talking about how to 
improve job training programs; we should be talking about growing 
manufacturing in our country. But instead, we are just manufacturing 
crisis after crisis after another. There is no reason we cannot end 
this shutdown.
  Fortunately, there is a simple solution. The Senate has passed a 
responsible bill that keeps the government running at currently reduced 
spending levels. The House of Representatives could pass that bill 
today. This shutdown could end within a matter of hours. Then we could 
have the time and space to come together on a long-term, balanced, and 
bipartisan plan to finally put our fiscal house in order. Instead, the 
other side of the Capitol insists on sending us bills that they know 
have zero chance of passing or becoming law over here just to stage a 
political stunt.
  But political stunts will not process VA claims. Political stunts 
will not help restaurant owners in western North Carolina make payroll 
while the national parks are closed. Political stunts will not get this 
government reopened for business. I urge my colleagues in the House of 
Representatives to stop playing this partisan game, take up the Senate-
passed bill, end this government shutdown.
  I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Heitkamp). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________