Making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2011, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1741 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

I yield myself such time as I consume.

General Leave

I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 1741.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1741 provides a closed rule for consideration of H.J. Res. 101, making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2011, and for other purposes. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.

The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the joint resolution except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The rule provides that the joint resolution shall be considered as read. The rule waives all points of order against provisions of the joint resolution. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit the joint resolution with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of approving a continuing resolution to maintain a level and consistent funding stream for our Federal Government. It is one of our primary constitutional responsibilities as Members of Congress to keep the Federal Government running through the passage of appropriations legislation. This continuing resolution will ensure that all necessary and vital functions of government will continue uninterrupted until both Chambers of our legislature have completed their work.

If we do not act now, Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government will effectively shut down this Friday, December 3. This continuing resolution is a short term, straightforward measure to keep the government running and get us through the next 2 weeks, until December 18, while bipartisan negotiations continue in the House and the Senate. It is my hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will work with us to move this important bill forward and to pass a clean continuing resolution contained under this rule.

This continuing resolution will fund the Federal Government at levels already approved by the House in the fiscal year 2010 appropriations bills and the fiscal year 2009 supplementals. This includes extending the authority for the Department of Defense to execute the Commanders Emergency Response Program, an essential tool for military commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It would also continue the application period for retroactive stop loss benefits through the duration of the continuing resolution.

The Retroactive Stop Loss Pay Program provides $500 for each month served in stop loss status with an average benefit of $3,700 to the brave servicemen and -women, veterans and beneficiaries of those whose service was involuntarily extended under stop loss.

This continuing resolution would also continue to fund VA hospitals already under construction, including one in my home State of Colorado, the Denver VA Hospital, which serves 58,000 veterans living in Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, and Wyoming. Millions of veterans and their families across this Nation depend on the VA for medical care and support, and we must pass this CR so we continue to build these much- needed facilities. Absent this CR, construction on these VA facilities will grind to a halt, leaving our veterans in the lurch. Our veterans took an oath to defend our country, and they deserve to come home to better care and a quality hospital that meets their needs.

This CR would also allow the Federal air marshals to maintain the existing fiscal year 2010 fourth quarter coverage levels for international and domestic flights. This funding will allow for continued training, including investigative techniques, criminal terrorist behavior recognition, firearms proficiency, aircraft specific tactics, and self-defense measures that are necessary to protect the flying public.

This funding allows the Federal air marshals to fulfill their mission of protecting air passengers and crew. Protecting our Nation and combating terrorism is a top priority for this Congress, and without the passage of this CR, those efforts with regard to our air marshals will grind to a halt, leaving the traveling public at greater risk.

This continuing resolution would also allow the commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection to maintain the level of Customs and Border Protection personnel in place for the final quarter and the final few weeks of fiscal year 2010. This provides proper funding to keep terrorists and their weapons out of the United States, secure and facilitate trade and travel and enforce hundreds of U.S. regulations, including immigration and drug laws.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection law enforcement professionals serve as America's front-line defense on our Nation's borders at ports of entry, field stations and check points across the United States. It's important that we maintain a consistent level of personnel at our Nation's borders. By interrupting these funds, we would be jeopardizing Customs and Border Protection's ability to do their job and protect America. This funding enables these officers to inspect our borders, process trade, combat terrorism and smuggling.

A vote against this continuing resolution is a vote to gut our border security when we need it the most.

In addition to extending the existing authority for the Department of Homeland Security to regulate chemical facilities to prevent high levels of risk, this continuing resolution would also extend the existing Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA authority, to provide technical and financial assistance to States and localities for pre-disaster hazard mitigation activity.

As an example, in my home State of Colorado, this continuing resolution would mean keeping in place vital programs like the 2008 Colorado Springs Wildfire Mitigation Project that removes vegetation around critical facilities and communities; to the 2008 Denver Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan, which assists 37 communities, townships, and counties in the Denver metro area in analyzing and assessing their hazard risks; the 2007 Coal Creek Crossing affecting the town of Erie in Boulder County, Colorado, flood reduction project that helps the town of Erie modify infrastructure around the Coal Creek Crossing to eliminate future damages.

My district, Mr. Speaker, recently suffered one of the worst forest fires in the history of Colorado, which completely destroyed over 100 residences. These emergencies can strike anywhere, anytime; and if we fail to pass this continuing resolution, we will cripple the ability of the Federal Government to help with emergencies wherever they occur and whatever their nature is.

This continuing resolution would also maintain the additional $23 million in funding for the Department of the Interior's new Bureau of Ocean Energy Management for increased inspections for offshore oil rigs. In light of the recent disaster we all witnessed unfold this summer in the Gulf of Mexico, these funds should be the last thing that we want to allow to expire or to cut. These funds are critical to ensure that tragedies like the Deepwater Horizon spill are not repeated and that our oil rigs are inspected.

These funds allow existing rigs to continue operating in a manner that protects the workers on the rigs in the sensitive environmental areas in which these rigs operate, as well as protect our economy from future job loss. Interrupting these funds will put offshore oil rig workers' lives in danger, the environment in danger, and our economy in danger as well.

The continuing resolution before us also maintains the current rate of the Foreign Military Financing, FMF, program, to include the $965 million that was advanced for Israel, Egypt, and Jordan in the fiscal year 2009 supplemental. By providing assistance and aid to our allies in the Middle East, we strengthen our position and make a vital investment in global and national security.

A vote against this continuing resolution is a vote to cut off aid to our allies like Israel and the Middle East at a time when they are critical for the global fight against terrorism and to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons to Iran.

Through this continuing resolution, we also continue the rate of operations

for the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund at $700 million. This section also continues the terms and conditions included in the fiscal year 2009 and 2010 supplementals which will help build and maintain the counterinsurgency capability of Pakistan under the same terms and conditions.

Mr. Speaker, I have not been a supporter of the escalation of efforts in Afghanistan or in Iraq, but I think there is a strong bipartisan consensus in this body that assisting the Government of Pakistan in counterinsurgency efforts is one of the most critical fronts to protect Americans from terrorism, from a resurgence of the Taliban and from allowing al Qaeda a foothold in that area.

There are vital programs that we must continue to fund without interruption. There may be some who question the need for a CR. Let me remind everyone that with the exception of fiscal years 1989, 1995 and 1997, at least one continuing resolution has been enacted for each fiscal year since 1955.

I encourage my colleagues to support the necessary rule for this CR as well as the underlying CR to prevent the Federal Government from shutting down, jeopardizing our allies and friends across the world, as well as the safety and security of Americans.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I agree with my colleague from California that to the extent we can grow American markets we need to work together in a bipartisan way to do that. I joined my colleague on letters to the President as colleagues on both sides of the aisle to encourage the further development of trade relationships, certainly starting with trade agreements that are very near completion with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea.

And also, I had the opportunity to host the honorable ambassador from Panama, Jaime Aleman, in my district of Colorado not too long ago, and I was able to introduce him to a number of Colorado businesses which stand to benefit from these.

Now, of course, as a matter of how this comes to pass, that these efforts could not be initiated by this body, we could not have an amendment to a CR if this was an open rule. We could not have an amendment to an appropriations bill which contained a trade agreement. It has to be negotiated and delivered to us by the administration.

And I know that President Obama has been committed to delivering and working on these trade agreements. In fact, in this very body, in the State of the Union address, President Obama very proudly talked about the export agenda and what it meant for American job creation. Of course, this means union jobs and it means nonunion jobs. It means job creation overall. The President remains committed to continuing to grow the market for American products and services across the world. That includes enforcing intellectual property provisions and it includes making sure that American products are available across the entire world.

Now, again, one of the issues that would be threatened if this continuing resolution is not passed is the flow of products across our border. The funding will run out for the Border Patrol and the ports of entry. Products coming into this country, for good reason, have to be inspected. Some of that has to do with whether there are illegal, illicit products, narcotics that are being smuggled, whether there are illegal people that are being smuggled, or whether products that are not allowed to be sold here or were not created in compliance with our existing trade agreements are created. The border security efforts would be gutted if this continuing resolution does not pass, leaving trade in the lurch and leaving American job creation in the lurch. So this bill has an important nexus in international trade.

The passage of this continuing resolution will facilitate the continued funding of our ports of entry, the continued funding of our border inspection services for both goods and people, which must continue. What degree of confidence would our negotiating partners of South Korea, Panama, and Colombia and many others have on our own ability to deliver on our trade agreements if the funding runs out at our ports of entry for goods and products? We must not allow that to happen.

I also certainly agree that the public, as demonstrated in the last election, they want a change in the business as usual, and I think that change has not yet fully manifested itself. Yesterday this body passed the Pickford-Cobell bill, a long-overdue bill to pass, but it had one earmark in it, a Republican earmark from the Senate, from Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, a very large earmark that apparently was the price of support of getting it out of that body.

I am happy to say that this continuing resolution before us today is a very clean CR, a very clean continuing resolution, that would allow during this negotiating process--and where we wind up with regard to these appropriation bills next year and the year after is a very important issue for political discussion, a very important issue between both parties to come to consensus around what we can do to pass both bodies. But it is not what we are debating here today. We are simply allowing the Federal Government to continue to operate its ports of entries, its border security, counterinsurgency efforts in Pakistan, continued aid to Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and the Middle East, continuing to allow these programs to operate for a 2-week period while we seek the bipartisan consensus that will emerge and is necessary to continue to be able to pass the appropriations bills that are necessary to allow government to continue funding.

So this CR is an important part of our democratic process, and at least one continuing resolution has been enacted for every fiscal year since 1955. Traditionally they have been in many of those cases clean continuing resolutions, and simply allowed at the previously agreed upon rates by these bodies the Federal Government to continue while the negotiations are pending.

I also believe it would strike panic in global financial markets if the Federal Government closes down and people don't have confidence that this Congress can even allow the Federal Government to continue its routine operations while the negotiating process for future agreements is still underway. So I encourage my colleagues to support this process through its conclusion over the next 2 weeks and support this continuing resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is standard and bipartisan practice to consider continuing resolutions under a closed rule. I would say this has been the practice on both sides of the aisle. Republicans have issued closed rules for every continuing resolution that they considered in both the 108th and 109th Congresses. Our goal with this continuing resolution is to do this in as clean a way as possible that allow these vital functions of government to continue to function: facilitation of international trade, our counterinsurgency efforts in Pakistan, our border security, and our sky marshals.

In recent history, again since 1955, at least one continuing resolution has been enacted in each fiscal year except for three. And, in fact, during the entire 59-year period, from 1952 to 2010, there were only four instances when all of the regular appropriation acts were enacted on time.

Mr. Speaker, the democratic process is a time-consuming one, but it is one that is worthwhile, and it is one that ultimately will reflect the will of the American people with appropriations bills that emerge from the Senate and from the House ultimately to be signed by the President. This continuing resolution gives our democracy time to work and makes sure that the world will not lose confidence in our country. It makes sure that our vital security interests here and abroad are maintained--our aid to our allies, our security, and our ports of entry here at home. We must make sure that the safety of the American people doesn't pay the price for the time it takes for our democracy to work. I strongly encourage my colleagues to support the rule and the bill.

I would like to thank Chairman Obey for his leadership on this bill, and his staff for their hard work and their dedication.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and the rule.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I want to begin by expressing my appreciation to my good friend from Boulder, a hard-working member of the Rules Committee, and I want to associate myself with much of what he said.

We obviously have very important priorities that need to be addressed, whether it's dealing with environmental issues, border security, FMF, the Pakistani anti-insurgency effort, all of those things are very, very high priorities which need to be addressed; and so I think he is right on target in pointing to those.

The unfortunate thing, Mr. Speaker, is what is it that got us to the point where we are at this moment.

We all know that the American people are hurting. We know that unemployment benefits have expired. We know that we have looked at the election that took place on November 2 and that, in and of itself, was evidence of a high level of anger and frustration that has been shown by the American people, I mean, the largest turnover in this institution in nearly three-quarters of a century. And by virtue of that, it seems to me that we need to realize that there is a message that has been received, and that message is a clear one.

This business-as-usual pattern cannot continue. And when I say ``business as usual,'' it's a very tragic and sad commentary as to what business as usual has become. Because in this 111th Congress, we have for the first time since passage of the 1974 Budget and Impoundment Act not passed a budget. We have not even dealt with the budget issue, and that has played a role in getting us to where we are at this moment.

The importance of keeping the government running is one which Democrats and Republicans alike acknowledge, but we also know that we have what my friend described as constitutional responsibilities; and those constitutional responsibilities, under article 1, section 9, are for us to do everything that we can to make sure that we responsibly expend those taxpayer dollars. We basically abrogated our responsibility.

So for the first time in history, we have not passed a budget. And then, Mr. Speaker, if you look at what has happened in the last 2 years, we have for the first time ever not allowed Democrats or Republicans an opportunity to participate in a free-flowing open debate on appropriations bills, which had always been the case on virtually every appropriations bill up until this Congress.

And it's unfortunate that we have gotten to this point, because if we had had that free-flowing debate, Mr. Speaker, I'm convinced that we wouldn't be here today with this continuing resolution. Of course, I acknowledge that continuing resolutions have taken place in the past, but I wrote down the remarks that my friend just offered when he said that this continuing resolution will continue the funding levels that we have had already in existence. That's the funding level for the massive trillion-dollar so-called stimulus bill, the appropriations bills which have seen a 91 percent increase in the past 4 years in nondefense--nondefense discretionary spending. That's what is being maintained with this continuing resolution, and that is why we are very, very concerned, Mr. Speaker, about continuing to move in that direction.

Now, I believe that there are a number of things that have to be done. And the reason that I'm concerned and opposed to the continuing resolution that we have before us is that it does perpetuate this ``business as usual.'' So I mentioned the message that came from the November 2 election. We all know that. Democrats and Republicans alike recognize that the American people are angry, they are hurting, and they want change.

Well, Mr. Speaker, we know how important this issue is that we are trying to address. We have the Debt Commission, which was scheduled to have a vote today. It's now been postponed until Friday. They are looking at attacking this issue. We have a month before the 112th Congress convenes. And it seems to me that at this moment, certainly following the outcome of the November 2 election, the responsible thing for us to do would be to take on these issues right here and now.

We are looking at the challenge of getting the economy growing, as I said in my 1-minute presentation. And I bring this up because I know my friend from Boulder shares the commitment I have to prying open new markets around the world so that we can create good American jobs for people.

In fact, I met yesterday with the new Ambassador, Gabriel Silva, from Colombia, who has just taken over from Carolina Barco, who did a spectacular job, as we all know, working diligently to try and pass that U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement which has been languishing for 3 years. And again, for the first time in history, having passed the Trade Act in 1974, we saw that measure thrown aside by Speaker Pelosi nearly 3 years ago after the deal had been signed and was sent up by then-President Bush.

The numbers that we got yesterday from this meeting that I'm going to be releasing in a ``Dear Colleague,'' that I know my friend will look at, interestingly enough is in the area of agricultural products. We have seen the level of exports of U.S. agricultural goods drop from 46 percent to 22 percent in the last 2 years from the U.S. to Colombia. And at the same time, Colombia is dramatically expanding its trade relationship with Mercosur, the four countries in South America: Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, and Brazil. They developed a greater linkage with Western Europe. And here in the United States of America, we could create good jobs, get our economy growing and generate revenues to deal with many of these priority items that my friend mentioned in his remarks that need to be addressed. We'd have the revenues to deal with border security, foreign policy issues, and environmental issues if we could create good American jobs by opening up these markets.

And so that is why, Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that, as we look at the notion of a 17-day continuing resolution to keep the government going and the expiration of unemployment benefits, what we should be doing is we should have a laser-like effort focused on our need to create good American manufacturing jobs.

My California colleague was critical of me for talking about the importance of creating union jobs. He said that I couldn't have it both ways because I didn't vote for the nearly trillion-dollar stimulus bill and somehow want to create good union jobs by expanding market-opening opportunities for U.S. workers. Well, I believe that union and nonunion workers will benefit.

Workers from companies, as I mentioned in my 1-minute speech, like Caterpillar, like John Deere, like Whirlpool and others, companies in my State of California, would have a chance to have union members, union and nonunion workers, have opportunities that

don't exist today because we haven't opened up these markets.

And so, Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that as we look at the challenges that are lying ahead, the notion of saying we are going to continue funding at the levels that created a 91 percent increase in nondefense discretionary spending, that we're going to continue the funding levels that have created that obviously failed $787 billion, if you add interest and all, it's a trillion-dollar stimulus bill which has been decried as having failed by people all across the political spectrum, and if you look at the notion of our denying the American people a chance to have their proposals heard through their elected representatives with the kind of free-flowing debate when it comes to the notion of trying to bring about reductions in spending is just plain wrong.

That is why I'm going to urge my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, to oppose this measure. I believe that we can do better.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume.

Mr. Speaker, by any definition, this year's appropriations process has been a complete and utter failure. We are now 5 weeks past the beginning of the new fiscal year and Congress has yet to enact a single appropriations bill. Out of 12 total bills, two have passed the House, while 10 bills were never even considered by the full committee.

Even more astonishing, Mr. Speaker, is this fact: During all of 2010, the full appropriations committee met just once--in July--and that meeting occurred almost a full year since the last time the committee met--in July of 2009.

This record is all the more striking when you consider the fact that the House has spent week after week, month after month considering hundreds of insignificant bills, while ignoring the substantive work required of the Congress to pass a Federal budget.

Today, the House is considering a 2-week extension of the current continuing resolution. Chairman Obey and the Democrat leadership are hoping that 2 weeks will be enough time to muster enough Democratic votes to pass a massive 12-bill package, loaded with earmarks, with a price tag exceeding $1.1 trillion. If they succeed, House Democrats will pass an omnibus without a single Republican vote.

Democratic staff in the House and the Senate began negotiations on the omnibus spending bill after Members of Congress left Washington in October. Realizing that these negotiations excluded input from the elected Members of Congress, and recognizing the likelihood that these negotiations would lead to yet another massive trillion-dollar government spending bill, I directed my staff not to engage in these negotiations. While Democratic staff was focused on additional ways to spend money, Republican staffers on the committee were working to identify spending cuts.

As I have made clear time and time again, I am strongly, unequivocally opposed to any potential omnibus spending bill the Democratic leadership may be planning to bring to the House floor before the end of the year. Likewise, I remain adamantly opposed to extending the CR for the balance of the fiscal year to current spending levels, which are, frankly, too darn high. I am encouraging my leadership and each of my colleagues who are concerned about excessive spending to oppose any effort to pass an omnibus or extend the CR beyond February.

Voters have made it abundantly clear that they want Congress to cut spending, starting today. There is no better place to begin this process than by returning to the U.S. Treasury unobligated funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, one of the most costly and ineffective bills in modern history. For this very reason, I introduced legislation on November 15 to immediately rescind billions of dollars of unspent stimulus funding and immediately applying those dollars to the deficit. I am hopeful that rescinding this funding will be among the first orders of business in the 112th Congress.

This commitment to cut spending will also consist of rescinding previously appropriated dollars passed under the current Democratic majority as well as dramatically scaling back funding proposed by the President in his final 2 years in office.

I believe we ought to extend the CR until February, allowing the House Republicans the opportunity to begin putting our Nation's fiscal house in order by completing the FY 11 appropriations bills at an FY 2008 level or below, and saving taxpayers at least $100 billion. It would be the clearest signal the House could send to the American people that we got the message and take seriously their commitment to cutting spending.

Should the Democratic leadership muster the votes to pass an omnibus in its last-gasp effort to spend yet another trillion-plus dollars, every penny above and beyond the 2008 levels will be on the chopping block come January. Or put another way, if House Democrats use their last 4 weeks in power to spend another $1.1 trillion, House Republicans will rescind every penny above and beyond the 2008 levels when the new Congress convenes.

Mr. Speaker, I believe we should have shut down the government, but I cannot and will not support this CR because it continues unsustainable levels of spending established last year. At a

time of historic deficits, record debt, and 10 percent unemployment, I believe we owe our constituents more than the status quo. Let's start cutting spending, Mr. Speaker, today. I urge a ``no'' vote.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to my colleague from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, due to illness, I was unable to participate in the following votes. If I had been present, I would have voted as follows:

November 29, 2010

Rollcall vote 581, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass--H.R. 5877, To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 655 Centre Street in Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts, as the ``Lance Corporal Alexander Scott Arredondo, United States Marine Corps Post Office Building''--I would have voted ``aye.''

Rollcall vote 582, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree--H. Res. 771, Supporting the goals and ideals of a National Mesothelioma Awareness Day--I would have voted ``aye.''

November 30, 2010

Rollcall vote 583, On Agreeing to the Resolution--H. Res. 1736, Providing for consideration of the Senate amendments to the bill (H.R. 4783) to accelerate the income tax benefits for charitable cash contributions for the relief of victims of the earthquake in Chile, and to extend the period from which such contributions for the relief of victims of the earthquake in Haiti may be accelerated--I would have voted ``nay.''

Rollcall vote 584, On Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendments--H.R. 4783, To accelerate the income tax benefits for charitable cash contributions for the relief of victims of the earthquake in Chile, and to extend the period from which such contributions for the relief of victims of the earthquake in Haiti may be accelerated--I would have voted ``nay.''

Rollcall vote 585, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree, as Amended--H. Res. 1585, Honoring and recognizing the exemplary service and sacrifice of the 60th Air Mobility Wing, the 349th Air Mobility Wing, the 15th Expeditionary Mobility Task Force, and the 615th Contingency Response Wing civilians and families serving at Travis Air Force Base, California--I would have voted ``aye.''

Rollcall vote 586, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree--H. Res. 1740, Recognizing and honoring the National Guard on the occasion of its 374th anniversary--I would have voted ``aye.''

December 1, 2010

Rollcall vote 587, On Ordering the Previous Question--H. Res. 1742, Providing for consideration of S. 3307, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act--I would have voted ``nay.''

Rollcall vote 588, On Agreeing to the Resolution--H. Res. 1742, Providing for consideration of S. 3307, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act--I would have voted ``nay.''

Rollcall vote 589, On Agreeing to the Resolution--H. Res. 1741, Providing for consideration of H.J. Res. 101, Making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2011, and for other purposes--I would have voted ``nay.''

Rollcall vote 590, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree--H. Con. Res. 323, Supporting the goal of ensuring that all Holocaust survivors in the United States are able to live with dignity, comfort, and security in their remaining years--I would have voted ``aye.''

Rollcall vote 591, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree--H. Res. 1735, Condemning North Korea in the strongest terms for its unprovoked military attack against South Korea on November 23, 2010--I would have voted ``aye.''

Rollcall vote 592, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree, as Amended--H. Res. 1430, Honoring and saluting golf legend Juan Antonio ``Chi Chi'' Rodriguez for his commitment to Latino youth programs of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute--I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the rule, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 101) making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2011, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.J. Res. 101.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation is one page long. It does only one thing: It changes the date so we can keep the government running from this Friday, December 3 to Saturday, December 18. Otherwise, the government would shut down. For the 2 weeks we are extending the current CR, it will provide us and the Senate time to consider the full year CR and the nominees that the administration should be sending us today.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I made a mistake here today. I assumed that because the election was over that we would have at least a temporary suspension of election-year rhetoric. But evidently I was wrong. It's not the first time, but nonetheless I had hoped it would be otherwise today.

Let me simply say that I will take a lot of lectures from a lot of people on a lot of subjects, because I have made more than my share of mistakes in the years that I have served in this place. But the one thing that I will not take is lectures from the other side about fiscal responsibility. I mean, these are the folks who managed to turn $6 trillion in expected surpluses when Bill Clinton left office into a $1 trillion deficit. These are the same folks who insisted on passing two tax cuts primarily targeted at the wealthiest people in this country, all paid for with borrowed money.

These are the same folks that have insisted that we fight two wars on borrowed money rather than paying the bills. And these are the same folks who attacked President Obama for the so-called bailouts when, in fact, the mother of all bailouts, TARP, was brought to this Congress by the previous Republican administration.

While I don't like the way they implemented that bailout, I happen to think that that administration did what was necessary under the circumstances, circumstances created in large part by previous policies that were pursued by the folks running Washington, D.C. I don't want to go any further than that. I didn't intend to get into the political side of the debate, but neither am I going to sit by and have these comments go unanswered.

With that, I would simply say this, again, is a very simple proposition. It extends the budget for 2 weeks at existing levels so that the Congress can make an attempt to finish its work so that we do not do what was done to us 4 years ago, because when we took over 4 years ago, we had to clean up all of the last year's fiscal mess before we could turn to next year's problems.

I would think that it is worth trying to finish action on our budget this year so that our friends, as they assume majority status in January, can start with a clean slate and be looking forward rather than backwards, and this resolution is an attempt to facilitate that. I urge passage of it.

I yield back the balance of my time.