To designate the United States courthouse and Federal building located at 118 South Mill Street, in Fergus Falls, Minnesota, as the "Edward J. Devitt United States Courthouse and Federal Building.".

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 366 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), the ranking member of the committee and my friend, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

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

House Resolution 366 provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.J. Res. 59, the Continuing Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2014, and a closed rule for consideration of H.R. 3210, the Pay Our Military Act of 2013.

Mr. Speaker, at midnight on Monday, just 2 days from now, the Federal Government will shut down if Congress does not act to provide the necessary appropriations. The legislation before us today will ensure that a shutdown does not happen; and, if adopted, the House amendments would make important steps to ensure that ObamaCare, the Affordable Care Act that President Obama and every Democrat voted for, does not have the opportunity to hurt American jobs and drag down our economy.

The first of these three amendments would repeal the medical device tax included in ObamaCare. This medical device tax is also known as what might be the tax that will harm not only the creation of investment but also the products of medical devices, including pacemakers and other medical products that keep America's health care a leading edge. The medical device industry provides our Nation with innovative health care services as well as much-needed jobs for many, many hardworking Americans. ObamaCare's onerous medical device tax-- what we also call the pacemaker tax--is already causing job loss in this industry and negatively impacting innovation of new and other lifesaving devices.

I would like to insert into the Record a letter from a gentleman from Dallas, Texas, Mr. Walt Humann, CEO of OstoeMed, who came to my office over a year ago in June of 2012. He spoke with me about how innovative medical devices clearly help not only Americans, but doctors perform very difficult and leading-edge surgeries. And I will tell you that Mr. Humann spoke very clearly about how this onerous tax would literally tax the production, not the sale, but the production of medical devices to an industry that needs more and more innovation. That clearly explains the damaging effects that this has on American businesses. His letter, Mr. Speaker, clearly outlines how it harms not only his company, but the industry as a whole.

The second amendment would delay all aspects of ObamaCare for 1 year. This proposal is an important step to prevent the costly job-killing regulations contained in President Obama's health care plan from becoming an unfortunate reality. The President has already delayed several pieces of the law; and just as he begins to see how ill- conceived and unworkable his plan is, it's time for us to stop it dead in its tracks. So much for the hundreds of waivers that he has issued; so much for him delaying for his friends in business; so much for him delaying the pieces that he wants to, knowing that the harm will be on individuals all across America. It makes sense to delay the entire law for a year in an effort to protect American families from paying higher health care premiums and having fewer options.

This is important, and the Republican Party is on the floor of the House of Representatives today on behalf of taxpayers and what we believe is about 60 percent of Americans who are opposed to this bill starting to work October 1. So that's why we are here.

Finally, this rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3210, the Pay Our Military Act. This important piece of legislation is designed to ensure that our Nation's men and women in the military continue to receive their paychecks in the event that the Senate does not adopt a responsible CR and forces our government into a shutdown.

Our Nation's military puts their lives on the line, and they have throughout the history of our country. They remain engaged in combat operations as we go to sleep tonight. They are protecting this great Nation, and the services that the men and women of the military provide to the United States of America should be aided and helped, and we should make sure that we do not stop the pay to the men and women

of the United States military. In the event of a government shutdown, this body should take the necessary measures to ensure that our servicemen and -women continue to be compensated for their services.

So, Mr. Speaker, we have finished a Rules Committee meeting upstairs. We spoke about this, the impacts, at the committee hearing that allowed Mrs. Lowey, on behalf of the minority, and Mr. Hal Rogers, our Appropriations Committee chairman, to talk about the important part of what we're trying to do today.

So I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on the underlying legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

OsteoMed,

June 5, 2012.

Hon. Pete Sessions,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Representative Sessions: Thank you for taking time to

visit with me last week regarding OsteoMed and my concerns

about the significant ``headwinds'' we face, especially

related to the 2.3% medical device tax that is scheduled for

implementation in 2013. On behalf of OsteoMed's 400

employees, I thank you for your support of H.R. 436, which

would repeal this onerous provision that otherwise will

negatively impact innovation and job creation at a time when

we can least afford it.

As president & CEO of OsteoMed, a dynamic, 20 year old

surgical device manufacturing company based in your district,

I confront the challenges that America's innovators face

every day. In addition to challenges with the FDA and

reimbursement, this 2.3% excise tax--which is on gross sales,

whether or not a business has any profits--will directly

impact our ability to create new jobs, invest in research and

development and effectively compete in the global market.

OsteoMed formed a new subsidiary company a couple of years

ago to develop an innovative spine product that greatly

simplifies spine fusion surgery and improves patient

outcomes. OsteoMed launched this product last year which

quickly grew to almost $5MM in sales in 2011 and currently

employs a number of highly skilled, high paid individuals.

Due to the significant upfront investment and on-going

development costs, this new company is not projected to make

a profit in the near future but is nevertheless subject to

the device tax which will further delay this subsidiary's

success. As a result, OsteoMed has now delayed additional new

product developments and personnel in order to make ``ends

meet'' and achieve the returns initially envisioned when this

company was created.

OsteoMed's core business manufactures surgical implant

systems for use in craniofacial, neurosurgical and small bone

orthopedic (upper and lower extremities) surgeries. These

systems require extensive, specialized instruments that are

typically not sold, but are used to implant the devices that

drive OsteoMed's revenue stream. The device tax will not only

tax gross product revenues, but my understanding is it will

also tax the instruments OsteoMed must invest in and place

into hospitals at no charge thereby further reducing my

company's profit opportunities and forcing expense reductions

in other areas in order to achieve our profit goals.

OsteoMed's products are sold through a variety of sales

channels and will require a new level of administrative

burden in order to track the ``gross'' revenues defined by

this tax. This requirement, along with the recent challenges

imposed by the Physician Payment Sunshine Act, force

additional levels of administration and non value added

expenses that male OsteoMed less competitive and viable.

The market in which OsteoMed competes is in turmoil and has

become increasingly competitive with many new offshore

competitors. As economics and recent government restrictions

have largely removed surgeons from the surgical device

purchase decision process, hospitals are now forcing

increasingly price concessions. Despite increased raw

material and labor costs, OsteoMed has been unable to raise

product prices over the past several years and is now equally

unlikely to simply pass along the device tax to our

customers.

Like any other responsible business, OsteoMed must

carefully manage expenses in order to make profit and

continue to grow and succeed. In order to cover the shortfall

the new device tax will create, OsteoMed has already started

to implement cut backs in its operations including the delay/

cancellation of new product development projects and the

hiring of additional personnel, including biomedical

engineering positions. It should be noted that OsteoMed is

also aggressively re-directing its business focus to

international markets that provide a less cumbersome and

lengthy regulatory pathway with revenue streams that are not

subject to the medical device tax . . . immediately

``saving'' 2.3% in the process. In the past month, OsteoMed

initiated the search for sales managers in China and the

Middle East to supplement recent managers hired in Korea and

Italy. Unfortunately, OsteoMed has already started to

effectively trade U.S. jobs for overseas positions as a

direct result of the medical device tax and other

governmental involvement.

The medical device industry not only provides numerous

highly skilled and attractive jobs across the U.S., but it

also pays its workers on average 40% more than the typical

job. We are a vibrant sector of the economy and one of the

few remaining industries that produces a healthy export of

products. Tragically, this industry has now become the focus

of misguided and short-term government intervention and the

growth and continued prosperity of this proud American

industry now faces great hurdles.

Again, I thank you for your service to our country and

specifically for your support of H.R. 436 to repeal this tax

and to help America's innovators continue to improve patient

care and drive job creation. I look forward to your ability

to visit OsteoMed when you are back in Dallas so you can see

firsthand our great employees and the innovative products

they produce to help people around the world. Please do not

hesitate to contact me to discuss this issue or any other

issues impacting the medical device industry.

Sincerely,

Walter J. Humann,

President & CEO, OsteoMed.

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

I am intrigued by the notion today that Republicans were meeting secretively. In fact, we have had several meetings over the past few days, and probably two or three today, and the nature of that is to make sure that our Members, some 233 Republican Members across this country, that Republican leadership like myself is hearing from them, that we are moving together and talking about the terrible and disastrous effects of ObamaCare and how we're going to work together.

Some of the common things that have been talked about in those meetings, as if we need to remind ourselves--but I will again--in that ObamaCare bill, $716 billion was cut and taken away from senior health care to go directly to ObamaCare. But we've also seen the real effects of ObamaCare, as we know that since ObamaCare has been passed, there have been 7 part-time jobs created for every one new full-time job.

Mr. Speaker, we're here on the floor of the House of Representatives because our country is in trouble. This is a continually difficult time for Americans back home not just to find work, but to keep work.

We find that large companies, these large corporations that are talked about from time to time on this floor, especially by our friends, are moving people off the health care that they're on because it makes sense to do it, but also because of the expense.

We saw just in the last few weeks large companies like UPS and Walgreens move their employees and make very, very difficult decisions. Just like Delta Air Lines had to make a decision. They announced that ObamaCare alone would cost Delta Air Lines over $100 million next year alone.

These are destructive and devastating consequences of ObamaCare. The Republican Party is on the floor because this law is going to start very quickly: October 1 and January 1. People begin signing up October 1.

Of course, what we've seen is the President very clearly over the last few years has given waivers to the people that he chose to give waivers to. He turned around and let business off the hook. But he keeps the law on individuals. He keeps this onerous law on individuals--and it's causing chaos and panic.

It's causing chaos for people like my family and others who have children that they have to take care of that are sometimes disabled. And we are seeing problems because now we're not sure in this mix who will be the doctor. Will that be a doctor we've gone to in the past? Will that be a doctor that one time we may see and another time we may not see?

There is uncertainty. And this uncertainty has been driven to what I believe has become reality. And the reality is, if you look, there is a CBS and New York Times poll showing that a majority of Americans disapprove of ObamaCare. And when a majority of Americans say this to CBS News and The New York Times, I think even our colleagues, the Democrats, should listen.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, for every opportunity that Republicans have to talk about how bad this bill is, there is an equal opportunity for our colleagues to talk about how great it is. But the facts of the case are the American people don't see it yet. The reason why we don't see it is because this President and this administration have given out over 1,200 waivers to people, saying, It's okay for you to not have to come under this law; what you do is okay. But it's not okay for the American people, individuals of this Nation, the men and women who get up and go to work every day.

And let's note, too, that we have a section of this bill that's about paying the military in case we do shut down. I would think that our colleagues on the other side of this building would want to make sure that we pay members of our military. They're important to this country. This body is going to do it.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Woodall), a distinguished young gentleman of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, you know, one of the most commonsense classes that we've ever had of new Members of Congress has arrived in Washington. They're in their first year, and they're seeing some amazing things that are happening.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Pittenger), one of these new freshman gentlemen.

Mr. Speaker, you know, I would have to beg to differ with the gentlewoman. That's not what this bill is about. Evidently, the gentlewoman has not had time to read the bill. We are not debating shutting down the House. We are debating what is called a continuing resolution, Mr. Speaker. So I would encourage her to please go, and we will help her at the Rules Committee and make sure she understands what the bill is about.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Meadows), a distinguished young man.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Bucks County, Pennsylvania, Congressman Fitzpatrick.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

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

I will remind my friends that we hear stories after stories about companies dropping their employees from their employee-sponsored health care plans because of the costs and the way the health care bill is written.

I think it is very interesting how--I have great sympathy for individuals who are having problems. They are in the district that I represent from Dallas also--the vast majority of people who are going to be just like them, huge amounts of people, are now being impacted by ObamaCare.

It goes back to an argument that we made years and years ago moving forward: don't impact the people that have health care and insurance; help the people that don't have that. This is a case that is happening all across this country.

The problem is the President played a Robin Hood plan. He went after everybody that has got insurance, he went after everybody that had a job, he went after employers. Rather than us taking care of those that did not--and let's say there were going to be 23 million people that were going to be covered, and I believe that that was the number years ago--23 million people times about $5,000 a contribution so that they could get an insurance plan would be far less destructive on our economy than going after 230 million people and destroying their health care plans.

This comes back to a simple ideology, Mr. Speaker. They want a government-run health care system. That is what they are after--a government-

run health care system, just like they want in other areas of the free economy. That's why they've done so many outward things with not only student loans to the banking industry, health care industry, the energy industry; they have an attack and an assault on employers and the American people.

I have great respect for these individuals that we're talking about. I share their concern and I guarantee you I and my office will help these people and have been helping these people, and we care about them.

But that's not what we fixed. We did a Robin Hood plan to take from everybody else and put everybody in trouble then, including the economy, including jobs, and we are now a part-time American economy.

By the way they wrote the bill, it is not only expensive but it kills jobs. It is just as effective as what their EPA war on coal is. It is an attack and assault on the free enterprise system and free people.

To say that the Republican Party doesn't care about these individuals is simply not true. We would offer a plan, a different way to look at it, and take the 230 million Americans that had something and worry about the others. That is what we have been trying to do all 17 years I've been in Congress.

The biggest divide in this country is on taxes, and it's on health care. Republicans want normal, regular people to be able to have health care. That is what we believe in. That's the difference and the real story behind tonight.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is not I. It will not be I. I am here to help, and the legislation that's on the floor is about a continuing resolution.

At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Houston, Texas, Congressman Culberson.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

To advise the gentlewoman, I am through with my speakers, and I will then, as she finishes, offer a close.

I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to just go through the things that we've talked about that are the attributes of why we are here tonight.

The cost to taxpayers: $716 billion was cut from senior care, Medicare, to fund ObamaCare. That harms our seniors.

Just one example of the cost to employers: Delta Air Lines announced that ObamaCare will cost its company $100 million in increased health care costs over the next year.

Americans are losing their current health care coverage. We read about it, and we know that UPS, Walgreens, and many other employers are losing their health care coverage that they have today.

Fewer hours and fewer full-time jobs. Since ObamaCare was passed, there have been seven part-time jobs for every one full-time job that was added.

Mr. Speaker, this is not a way to move our country forward. The Republican Party is prepared. We believe and can substantiate that a ``yes'' vote is for making sure that we keep this government open-- something that the American people want and need. That's why the Republican Party--233 strong--is here tonight. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on the underlying legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and gentleman for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

What we have before us today is not a solution; it's another attempt to undermine the Affordable Care Act. As written, this dangerous proposal has no chance of becoming law. It is not only a political nonstarter but a bad Federal policy. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, a repeal of the medical device tax alone would add $30 billion to the Federal deficit.

However, finding a solution to the crisis before us may not be the majority's top priority. Based upon news reports from earlier in the day, it seems that far from responsible governing, the majority is concerned with simply keeping their political house of cards from falling down.

According to POLITICO, Majority Leader Eric Cantor said:

We've had enough disunity in our party. The headlines are

Republicans fighting Republicans. This will unite us.

By now, the majority's inability to find consensus within its own ranks is well known. It started almost as soon as they assumed power, as extremists within their own party refused to provide relief aid to victims of Hurricane Sandy for more than 3 months. Divisions within the majority also led to the first ever expiration of the Violence Against Women Act in over 20 years; most recently, a failure on the House floor to pass a bipartisan farm bill, which had never happened before. The bill had been 5 years in the making, and they couldn't get it done.

Unable to find consensus on even the most noncontroversial bills, the majority has held more than 41 votes on the one issue that unites them. If we are to believe the majority leader, the one issue that unites them is to try to kill the health care bill for Americans.

Now, polls have shown that the American people want action on everything from strengthening gun laws to passing immigration reform. Yet, instead of addressing any of these issues, the majority has tried any way they can to repeal, defund, undermine, delay, whatever, the historic health care law. And remember that Presidents--most of them since the time of Teddy Roosevelt--have tried to achieve health care.

Frustration has reached a boiling point within the majority's ranks. Republican Senator John McCain has declared parts of his own party ``whacko birds'' and said:

Many in this group didn't come to power to get things done.

They came to power to keep things from getting done.

Well said, Senator.

By now, the majority is well aware that a 1-year delay in the Affordable Care Act threatens access to secure and affordable health care for millions of Americans and that my Democrat colleagues and I refuse to take away health care for American families just because the majority is unable and unwilling to find common ground.

And oh, by the way, we've done nothing about the business of the House. We're doing this resolution, in the first place, because the appropriations bills were not dealt with.

In fact, the whole process has changed here. What used to be the committee process and then go to Rules and then go to the floor has changed; you just go directly to Rules. I would sure like to see the old days come back.

The fact of the matter is this bill will be dead on arrival once it's sent to the Senate. Senator Reid has made that abundantly clear all day long. For the majority to continue to bring it forward shows that today's proposal is nothing more than an attempt to seek political cover as Republicans shut the government down.

Today, Senator Harry Reid said:

The American people will not be extorted by Tea Party

anarchists. To be absolutely clear, the Senate will reject

both the 1-year delay of the Affordable Care Act and the

repeal of the medical device tax. After weeks of futile

political games from Republicans, we are still at square one.

As if this weren't enough, the process that has led us here has trampled upon the majority's promises of an open and transparent House. Unlike the process that led to the passage of the Affordable Care Act, today's legislation was written behind closed doors, leaving out almost half of the Members of the House of Representatives, the Democrat Party. There was absolutely no input at all from members of the minority, and that is definitely unlike the health care act, which went through the full committee process.

This afternoon, the majority met in the basement of the Capitol. After a secretive, closed-door meeting, they emerged with this partisan legislation in hand and told us to take it or leave it.

Mr. Speaker, every single one of us was elected by our fellow citizens and told to do our part in building a more prosperous country. With the closed, secretive, and partisan process that the majority has repeatedly pursued, they are shutting out half the Chamber and half of our country from participating in a democratic process.

In closing, the majority has every right to pursue their legislative priorities, no matter how misguided we may feel they are, but they do not have the right to take the Nation hostage nor threaten the full faith and credit of the United States in order to get their way.

Let me be clear: a vote for this rule and a vote for this bill are affirmative votes for a government shutdown, because everyone here knows there will be no adequate time for any more ping-ponging. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule and the underlying legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), my distinguished colleague on the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), my distinguished colleague on the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), a most distinguished colleague on the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Castor).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutch).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Edwards).

I understand that the gentleman is prepared to close.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I want to urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule and ``no'' on this bill because--no question about it--a ``yes'' vote on either one of them is a vote for the shutdown in the House. The Senate will not take this up--we are absolutely certain of it--and we are on the road to a shutdown. The Republican Party insists on doing that. Do not help them. Vote ``no.''

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, many of us promised our constituents that we would come back here to Washington and fight for them. I imagine that there are some families in America right now holding an 8- year-old or a 10-year-old, maybe a teenager, with a preexisting disease. Maybe like the little girl that I heard about when we were debating the Affordable Care Act that had leukemia, and time after time after time she was rejected by insurance companies until she died.

And so I asked the question earlier tonight: What is the morally right thing to do? And I want to announce what is going to happen tonight.

Let us be very clear. Let us not be full of smoke and mirrors. Tonight, the Republican majority will vote to shut the government down. I'll say it again: they will vote to shut the government down. They will look that family in the eye, and they will say that they are delaying the Affordable Care Act--long approved. But they are actually destroying it and eliminating it. A delay is eliminating it.

They will stop the American people on October 1 from getting premiums between $100 and $130. They will stop seniors from being able to have help with their prescription part D, their prescription drugs, choosing dog food over their prescription. They will stop preventative care. They will stop research for cancer and leukemia and heart disease and stroke. They will stop the preventative care nonpayments. And they will also stop those young families from being able to have insurance.

Remember what I said: What is the morally right thing to do? Is it morally right to be able to provide for the American people health care that they've never had? Is it the morally right thing to shut down the government so that seniors trying to get

Medicare benefits will not have anybody to process them, or Social Security, or the disabled, or downpayment for homes for young families?

I came here to stand for the American people. Tonight you will witness the shutdown of the government. That is what the vote will be, a shutdown of this government.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the rule and the underlying resolution.

I oppose this rule because it conditions the funding needed to avoid a government shutdown on a one-year delay in the implementation of the Affordable Care Act and a repeal of the excise tax on certain medical device that helps defray the cost of the affordable, quality healthcare made available for the first time to millions of Americans by the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

I oppose this rule because the two amendments it makes in order to the ``clean'' continuing resolution passed yesterday by the Senate will, if approved, result in a shutdown of the government.

Both President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Reid have it crystal clear that they will not accept any continuing resolution containing any provision to delay, defund, or weaken the Affordable Care Act.

The Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, was passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by the President three years ago. It has been upheld by the Supreme Court. It is here to stay.

Mr. Speaker, you would think our friends across the aisle would have gotten this message by now because they have tried to repeal or undermine the Affordable Care Act more than 40 times without success.

As former President Clinton would say: ``Here's another Obamacare score for you: `Obamacare--42, House Republicans--zero'.''

Since it is clear that anti-Obamacare amendments made in order by this rule are not going to become law, the only purpose to be served by this latest kamikaze mission by our friends across the aisle is to shut down the government and harm the economic recovery and disrupt the lives of millions of Americans who provide and depend upon the services provide by the federal government.

Mr. Speaker, it is well and good that House majority has finally realized the importance of ensuring that our troops are paid so they can provide for their families.

However, this piecemeal approach of singling out worthy beneficiaries on an ad hoc basis is inadequate as it denies many other critical services that Americans depend so heavily on.

That is why it is grossly irresponsible for House Republicans to be wasting time on a resolution like the one before us that will lead to a government shutdown.

Mr. Speaker, we need to pass the clean CR approved by the Senate so we can keep our promises to our veterans, as well as the doctors, nurses, and hospital workers who take care of our wounded and healthy warriors.

We need to pass the clean CR approved by the Senate so we can fund our engineers and technicians who maintain all of our critical military equipment to keep our troops safe and take care of national security infrastructure.

We need to pass the clean CR approved by the Senate so we can fund our IT security folks who protect us from cyber-attacks, and our astronauts who risk their lives to push the technical boundaries of knowledge for all mankind.

These exceptional Americans, and the people who depend on them and benefit from their work, do not deserve to be locked out of their workplaces on Tuesday.

These exceptional Americans deserve a Congress that does its job and keeps America open for business.

Mr. Speaker, make no mistake about it, given the lateness of the hour and the irresponsibility of the House majority in wasting time trying to defund or impede the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, any vote other than one to concur in the clean continuing resolution passed yesterday by the Senate is a vote to shut down the government.

For these reasons and more, I oppose this rule and the underlying amendments it makes in order and urge my colleagues to join me in urging the passage of H.J. Res. 59 as amended by the Senate so that Americans can rest assured that their government will be open for business and to serve them on Tuesday morning.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding me the time and thank you for your leadership on the Rules Committee because when I signed up for Rules Committee, I knew I was going to get a lesson in rhetoric up there. I look at some of my colleagues from the Rules Committee on the other side. We have some long days and some long nights up there. But 9 times out of 10, it's about things that matter. It's about substance. And that's what it's about today.

To talk about a Republican bill to shut down the government is obviously nonsense, Mr. Speaker. I know there's not a point of order here against nonsense on the House floor. If there was, I would have brought it up. Because that's nonsense.

This is a bill to keep the government open. It uses the exact same funding level that the Senate just sent back to us. I've got a lot of colleagues on my side of the aisle who would like for that funding level to be lower. I promise you, if we could get the group together who wanted to lower that funding level, we could do that here, too. But we didn't. This is a bill that brings exactly the same funding level that the Senate sent over to us.

What else does this bill do? This bill empowers the government to continue to pay our men and women in uniform if, by some outside chance, our colleagues in the Senate abdicate responsibility and can't pass a bill. I think we all agree on that. I don't think there's a man or woman in this Chamber that thinks military families ought to have to worry because we can't come together on a bill.

We are going to come together. But that worry is in their hearts and their minds today. We have an opportunity to take it away, and we should.

In terms of bringing people together, Mr. Speaker, you know, something else that's in this bill is the repeal of the medical device tax. We talk about jobs bills here on the floor of the House regularly. If you have a medical device

manufacturer in your district, let them talk to you about the impact this tax is having on their business. It is killing jobs. It is destroying American leadership in this area.

This is not a divisive issue. We agree on this issue here. Our friends in the Senate, Mr. Speaker, voted 79-20 in favor of this very same issue.

I understand folks are worn out, Mr. Speaker. It's been a long weekend. It's been a long couple of weeks. But the American people deserve to know the truth of what's going on here on the floor tonight.

The truth is the passage of this rule and this underlying legislation keeps the doors of the government open; repeals the job-killing medical device tax that both the House and Senate have said they wanted to repeal; protects changes of the Affordable Care Act that American families have come to depend on, like keeping children on their policies; but eliminates all of the uncertainty of all of the broken portions of the Affordable Care Act, all of the broken portions of ObamaCare, all of the portions that have already seen 1,200 waivers-- and waivers again just yesterday. It doesn't ask to repeal it, Mr. Speaker. It asks to delay it for 1 year so all the uncertainty that's happened can be explored.

Every Member in this Chamber has someone in his district who has lost their insurance policy, Mr. Speaker. Everyone in this Chamber has a person in their district who heard from the President of the United States: If you like your insurance policy, you can keep it. And every single one of you know, Mr. Speaker, that someone in your district has had that promise broken for them.

Let's keep what's working. Let's stop what's broken. Let's come together. Let's get this passed. We owe it to the American people.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, there is supposed to be an orderly, thoughtful process around here. Just in case any of my colleagues were asleep in high school civics the day they taught how a bill becomes law, let me go over it slowly.

The House holds hearings and markups in subcommittees and committees, brings a bill to the floor, debates it, votes on amendments, and then votes on final passage. The Senate does the same thing. Then, the House and the Senate meet in a conference committee, agree to a final package, vote on that, and send it to the President for him to either sign or veto.

Does any of this sound even vaguely familiar to my Republican colleagues? Because they did a ``Schoolhouse Rock'' cartoon about it and everything.

Instead, here we are, just a matter of days--hours, really--from a Republican-caused government shutdown. Here we are with yet another completely unnecessary, deeply harmful, politically motivated crisis.

My Republican friends have made it clear that they will not vote for a continuing resolution unless that bill strips funding to implement the Affordable Health Care Act, or ObamaCare. But here's the problem, Mr. Speaker. Mitt Romney tried to make that same argument in the 2012 election. And he lost badly--by 5 million votes. Republicans tried to argue against ObamaCare in the Senate elections. And they lost. They tried to make those same arguments in the House elections, and they lost by about 1 million votes. Thanks to some ingenious redistricting, though, they were able to keep their majority.

And now they're trying to use that narrow majority to undo the results of the 2012 election. But guess what, Mr. Speaker? It isn't going to happen. They don't have the votes. The numbers do not add up. The Affordable Care Act is the law of the land. It's been in effect for 2 years, and it's going to stay that way. If Republicans don't like it, they can make their case to the American people in 2014.

But instead of facing that reality like thoughtful, serious grownups, the Republican majority continues to throw temper tantrum after temper tantrum, threatening to shut the government down, default on the Nation's bills, and throw the economy into a tailspin. It's absurd. Unfortunately, it's hurting real people. A Republican shutdown of government would actually cost us more money, Mr. Speaker.

The Senate has already acted. They passed a clean continuing resolution that keeps the government funded through November 15. Now I don't particularly like that bill because it keeps in place the Republicans' beloved sequester, which is not only unreasonable but it is doing real harm to our economy. But apparently that's not good enough for the extremists in the Republican Conference. They would rather drive this economy off a cliff than make a reasonable compromise.

Instead, they have unveiled a bill that includes two major changes to the Affordable Care Act, including a 1-year delay in the implementation of that law. Senator Reid has made it clear that the Senate will not consider any of these changes, and it's clear the Republicans simply want to shut this government down.

So that's where we are, Mr. Speaker.

In closing, I would just urge my Republican friends, Please don't do this. I have to believe that there are enough grownups on the other side of the aisle who are willing to stand up and say, Enough is enough. In the meantime, we should reject this rule, reject the underlying bill, and get back to work.