Providing for consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 1892) to amend title 4, United States Code, to provide for the flying of the flag at half-staff in the event of the death of a first responder in the line of duty.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry I can't support this continuing resolution today.

The great government of the United States of America that has been called ``the last best hope of man'' cannot be funded in tranches of maybe 2 weeks to 3 weeks. This is the fifth continuing resolution that we have done since the 30th of September. That is an atrocity. I mean, I can't think of any legislative body anywhere totally unable to do its job. And as sorry as I am to say it because of my great respect and affection for my fellow Members, I don't believe that this majority is capable of governing.

We are 2 days before the shutdown of the government of the United States, before it closes for business. Late last night, about 10 p.m., they finally released the details of this short-term spending bill. And we will be back here as soon as this one expires doing yet another one.

We are 5 months into the fiscal year, and this is the majority's fifth continuing resolution. We are virtually in the same position today as we were on September 8, December 7, December 21, and January 18 when this Chamber passed the prior continuing resolutions.

The majority isn't learning from any of this. They just keep repeating those mistakes. Like the bill before it, the proposal was written by and for the majority.

Let me repeat. The Democrats had virtually no say in this.

And once again, it ignores many of the priorities that we all agree need to be addressed: providing additional disaster relief after a storm season that saw historic wildfires, hurricanes, and mudslides; three rail wrecks in 2 weeks with fatalities, certainly proving to us, if we didn't know it already, that our neglect of the railroads, the bridges, the infrastructure in the United States is a mess. Saving America's endangered pensions is also a priority, and extending additional health access for our veterans certainly is not just a priority, but an obligation.

What is included here is woefully inadequate. This bill pays for extending community health centers--which is very important to me, let me hasten to add--by eviscerating funding for one of the most important parts of the Affordable Care Act that helps keep people well: the Prevention Fund. This fund focuses on children's health by expanding access to lifesaving vaccines and reducing the risk of lead poisoning, among many other things. The majority is paying for opening the centers by gutting the Prevention Fund while we are experiencing the worst flu epidemic in nearly a decade.

Now, I have heard a lot of talk about prioritizing the national defense. We don't take a back seat on our side to anybody who loves and respects the people who defend us, who every day--an all-volunteer military--stands on the line for us.

But we also believe that this bill does not raise the Budget Control Act sequester level of spending caps for nondefense. That is a shame, and it is also the Budget Control Act.

Mr. Speaker, one-third of the nondefense domestic budget that we are trying to get parity for goes to national security, part of our defense: to our veterans, to homeland security, the State Department, the Justice Department, and counterterrorism initiatives.

Refusing to equally raise the defense and nondefense caps is irresponsible. Secretary of Defense General Mattis has said: No enemy is more harmful than unpredictable funding from Congress.

But it isn't just defense that has had undependable funding. Not a single agency of the Federal Government knows from one week to another whether they will be funded or what they can do. We have cut down on almost everything that they can do, including travel to places that they absolutely need to be. It is pretty awful.

We have had the warnings, yet here we are today with a fifth short- term continuing resolution. The majority has 238 seats in the Chamber, but it only holds 51 seats in the Senate. They have the ability to draft a partisan agenda, and routinely do.

And we just saw that spectacle coming from the Intelligence Committee in the House, when a memo, governed by the majority--and one was acted on and put out for the public--but we are waiting and hoping that the one for the minority will be given the approval by the President of the United States.

But for anything, including this bill, to have a chance of getting 60 votes in the Senate and becoming law, you have to involve the Democrats. They don't have enough over there. Fifty-one is not 60. This is simple math.

The minority leader in the Senate has said this proposal is a nonstarter. He added that moving forward with this plan would ``jeopardize the positive discussions going on right now about the budget, immigration, disaster aid, and more.'' So we know, standing here today, that we are wasting our time.

We should finally bring an end to the continuing resolutions and the failed my-way-or-the-highway approach to governing. That is the only way the majority can fulfill what Speaker Ryan pledged when he took the gavel and said: ``Only a fully functioning House can truly represent the people. And If there were ever a time for us to step up, this would be that time.''

Mr. Speaker, the American people and the world have watched for months as the greatest democracy ever devised has been defined by its dysfunction. If ever there was one, this is the time for the majority to step up.

I am very much concerned, Mr. Speaker, that we are reaching the tipping point. That the dysfunction and chaos displayed not just with the actions of the stock market in the past 3 days, but our inability to really know whether or not we are going to keep the lights on has cost us dearly with respect to the rest of the world. And I need to point out as well, just a few minutes ago, the President of the United States thought that a government shutdown would be a good idea.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, President Trump said to reporters earlier today that if Congress can't reach a deal on immigration: ``I'd love to see a shutdown if we can't get this stuff taken care of. If we have to shut it down because the Democrats don't want safety . . . let's shut it down.''

We are also the people who were accused last week at the State of the Union--because we didn't show great enthusiasm for his speech--that we were treasonous. It is really pretty frightening to me, Mr. Speaker, what is going on here, and I can't avoid talking about it. I said earlier in the Rules Committee that I think we are reaching a tipping point, and I honestly do believe that.

But this isn't the first time that President Trump encouraged a government shutdown, which would be devastating. The last one we had was for 16 days and took $24 billion out of this economy. This is remarkable and, I think, pretty sad.

The President keeps injecting uncertainty into what already is a chaotic process from the majority. No one in this Chamber is against safety. We are asking them to take action on the bipartisan priorities that have languished while they passed tax cuts for millionaires.

In 2016, during an interview with CBS This Morning, President Trump said: ``I'm the king of debt. I'm great with debt. Nobody knows the debt better than me.''

Well, Mr. Speaker, according to this article from The Washington Post from February 3: ``The U.S. Treasury expects to borrow $955 billion this fiscal year. . . . It's the highest amount of borrowing in 6 years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the Federal Government borrowed last year.''

He is definitely the king of debt.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the article from The Washington Post titled: ``The U.S. Government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year.''

[From the Washington Post, February 3, 2018.]

The U.S. Government Is Set To Borrow Nearly $1 Trillion This Year, an

84 Percent Jump From Last Year

(By Heather Long)

It was another crazy news week, so it's understandable if

you missed a small but important announcement from the

Treasury Department: The federal government is on track to

borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year--Trump's first

full year in charge of the budget.

That's almost double what the government borrowed in fiscal

2017.

Here are the exact figures: The U.S. Treasury expects to

borrow $955 billion this fiscal year, according to documents

released Wednesday. It's the highest amount of borrowing in

six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal

government borrowed last year.

Treasury mainly attributed, the increase to the ``fiscal

outlook.'' The Congressional Budget Office was more blunt. In

a report this week, the CBO said tax receipts are going to be

lower because of the new tax law.

The uptick in borrowing is yet another complication in the

heated debates in Congress over whether to spend more money

on infrastructure, the military, disaster relief and other

domestic programs. The deficit is already up significantly,

even before Congress allots more money to any of these areas.

``We're addicted to debt,'' says Marc Goldwein, senior

policy director at Committee for a Responsible Federal

Budget. He blames both parties for the situation.

What's particularly jarring is this is the first time

borrowing has jumped this much (as a share of GDP) in a non-

recession time since Ronald Reagan was president, says Ernie

Tedeschi, a former senior adviser to the U.S. Treasury who is

now head of fiscal analysis at Evercore ISI. Under Reagan,

borrowing spiked because of a buildup in the military,

something Trump is advocating again.

Trump didn't mention the debt--or the ongoing budget

deficits--in his State of the Union address. The absence of

any mention of the national debt was frustrating for Goldwein

and others who warn that America has a major economic problem

looming.

``It is terrible. Those deficits and the debt that keeps

rising is a serious problem, not only in the long run, but

right now,'' Harvard economist Martin Feldstein, a former

Reagan adviser, told Bloomberg News.

The White House got a taste this week of just how

problematic this debt situation could get. Investors are

concerned about all the additional borrowing and the

likelihood of higher inflation, which is why the interest

rates on U.S. government bonds hit the highest level since

2014. That, in turn, partly drove the worst weekly sell-off

in the stock market in two years.

The belief in Washington and on Wall Street has long been

that the U.S. government could just keep issuing debt because

people around the world are eager to buy up this safe-haven

asset. But there may be a limit to how much the market wants,

especially if inflation starts rising and investors prefer to

ditch bonds for higher-returning stocks.

``Some of my Wall Street clients are starting to talk

recession in 2019 because of these issues. Fiscal policy is

just out of control,'' says Peter Davis, a former tax

economist in Congress who now runs Davis Capital Investment

Ideas.

The Federal Reserve was also buying a lot of U.S. Treasury

debt since the crisis, helping to beef up demand. But the Fed

recently decided to stop doing that now that the economy has

improved. It's another wrinkle as Treasury has to look for

new buyers.

Tedeschi, the former Treasury adviser to the Obama

administration, calls it ``concerning, but not a crisis.''

Still, he says it's a ``big risk'' to plan on borrowing so

much in the coming years.

Trump's Treasury forecasts borrowing more than $1 trillion

in 2019 and more than $1.1 trillion in 2020. Before taking

office, Trump described himself as the ``king of debt,''

although he campaigned on reducing the national debt.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget predicts the

U.S. deficit will hit $1 trillion by 2019 and stay there for

a while. The latest borrowing figure--$955 billion--released

this week was determined from a survey of bond market

participants, who tend to be even faster to react to the

changing policy landscape and change their forecasts.

Both parties claim they want to be ``fiscally

responsible,'' but Goldwein says they both pass legislation

that adds to the debt.

Politicians argue this is the last time they'll pass a bill

that makes the deficit worse, but so far, they just keep

going.

The latest example of largesse is the GOP tax bill. It's

expected to add $1 trillion or more to the debt, according to

nonpartisan analysis from the Joint Committee on Taxation

(and yes, that's after accounting for some increased economic

growth).

But even before that, Goldwein points to the 2015 extension

of many tax cuts and the 2014 delays in Medicare

reimbursement cuts.

``Every time you feed your addiction, you grow your

addiction,'' says Goldwein.

There doesn't seem to be any appetite for budgetary

restraint in Washington, but the market may force Congress's

hand.

Mr. Speaker, we did hear in the State of the Union that we will be asking for $1.5 trillion for infrastructure. Given the $1.5 trillion that we have already started borrowing for to give the top 1 percent a great tax cut that would be permanent, I am not sure anybody will finance that request. And, frankly, taking on that amount of debt would mean that almost everything else that we do in the country would take a back seat, or even further behind than back.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 3440, the Dream Act. This bipartisan, bicameral legislation would help hundreds of thousands of young people who are American in every way except on paper.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Napolitano) to discuss our proposal.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to say that I would not come to the floor if I were in the majority and lecture the minority when the majority runs the House, the Senate, and the White House and accuse us of shutting down the House or not producing the votes. We don't have enough votes in the first place. That is why we are the minority.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), the distinguished ranking member of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Tax Policy.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Texas an additional 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from Texas an additional 2 minutes.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have heard the majority speak with great urgency today about the need to pass the continuing resolution. But where was this urgency from the majority for the last 5 months of this fiscal year?

They were so consumed with providing tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations that they ignored virtually everything else.

This was a bill that was sold as a middle class tax cut. But 83 percent of the tax cuts go to the wealthiest 1 percent; and for corporations, the tax breaks are permanent. For individuals, they are sunsetted.

Speaker Ryan, over the weekend, promoted the fact that a secretary in Pennsylvania received an extra $1.50 a week under the tax scam. That is $78 a year for her. You can see what the middle class actually got.

But compare that with the wealthy. One analysis found that the Koch brothers and their corporate empire could save between $1 billion and $1.4 billion combined in income taxes every year as a result of the tax law. It is important to remember that this is a permanent cut.

It was a bill written for the rich to help the rich. It spends money we don't have, while adding $1.5 trillion to the deficit. That is such a staggering amount that the Congressional Budget Office said last week that because of this tax bill, our government now is expected to run out of money sooner than anticipated.

The deadline to raise the debt ceiling has now been moved from early April to mid-March. Only during the Second World War was our debt as a percentage of gross domestic product higher than it is today. I hope we can forever end the myth that the majority is the party of fiscal discipline. The situation we are in today is a direct result of the majority prioritizing the wealthy over doing the most basic functions of keeping the government running.

And now, after ignoring Democrats as this bill was drafted, they expect us to fall in line and support a flawed proposal. That is not how it works. If they want our support, they need to work with us. And Democrats have been clear: We cannot afford to keep kicking the can down the road. It is past time for a long-term bill that addresses urgent national priorities.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question, on the rule, and the bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 727 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Rochester, New York (Ms. Slaughter), my dear friend and ranking member of the Rules Committee, 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

have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying legislation. The rule provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 1892, the Further Extension of Continuing Appropriations Act of 2018.

Mr. Speaker, the House amendment will extend government funding until March 23, 2018, while simultaneously funding the Department of Defense for a full year. This will ensure our Nation's defense and pay for our proud servicemen and -women who will no longer be in jeopardy during ongoing discussions on funding for the long-term spending caps, until we agree to that.

Mr. Speaker, we just have come out of Rules Committee where we had a hearing for several hours where we detailed not only the parts of this bill, but also the agreement and disagreement between the two parties. I want you to know that I am pleased to report today the Rules Committee favorably reported out this bill, and we will be talking about the substance of that today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague for being here so that we may move forward on this important funding for the government.

Mr. Speaker, from time to time, there are Members of Congress who distinguish themselves in ways that draw not only attention upon an organization more than just themselves, but also distinction. Our next speaker is a gentleman who served for 14 years in the United States Air Force. He holds the record for the fastest nonstop flight ever in the world in one of the United States Air Force planes that is called a B-1 bomber. This gentleman not only served with distinction and honor but is here today to speak about the importance of funding our United States military.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Stewart).

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge, also, Mr. Stewart's service to the United States Air Force and this country.

Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity to talk with a security officer from Pearl Harbor, Lieutenant Kevin Fahland. Lieutenant Fahland essentially told me: We are out in the middle of the Pacific faced with danger every day, and we represent the greatest Nation in the history of the world. Please do us a favor and recognize that we need the funding to continue what is an aggressive race against us.

He is a lieutenant in the Navy, a security officer, who sees firsthand the attack, all sorts of ways, at Pearl Harbor that happens every day, and it is his job to protect this great Nation. I want to thank the lieutenant and other members of the United States Navy and the United States military for their service.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) from the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas.

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

It is amazing how the President, by honing the message and focusing his ideas on Congress, has brought this entire issue to a forefront.

Last year, the President said: I am calling on Congress to please resolve this issue with the DACA people who are in this country. I am asking Congress to please do this by next March.

Now he is being treated--instead of like a firefighter, he is being treated like an arsonist; and he is not. He is the person who has the ability and the desire to lead Congress, on a bipartisan basis; lots of meetings down at the White House. For months now that has been happening, with the date of March.

What happens?

Somebody gets frustrated and they want not what we agreed to do in March, but they want it in January--actually, December, rather than attempting to work with the President, who, I believe, forthrightly, has held lots of meetings.

So, Mr. Speaker, what I would say to you is that it is a moving target. There is never something that this President can do that will satisfy our colleagues on the other side. If it is not DACA, it is going to be the caps issue. If it is not the caps issue, it is going to be the military issue. If it is not the military issue, it is going to be Children's Health Insurance Program.

Mr. Speaker, we are addressing those. We are trying to bring those issues professionally, on a bipartisan basis. Just a week ago--10 days ago, we respectfully did not include yearlong funding for the United States military.

What did we hear back over and over and over from the other body?

They said: Well, I would have voted for this bill, but the funding for the military is not in there for a 1-year basis for the remainder of the year.

So that is what we have done. We are trying to bring forth ideas of agreement that say we need to find a deal. We need to come to an agreement. We recognize this is not the last funding agreement for the year, but what we are trying to do is to avoid a government shutdown. The way you do that is by voting ``yes,'' and that is what we are asking people to do today.

That is why we had Dr. Burgess. That is why we had Major Chris Stewart, the United States Congressman from Utah. That is also why we have the gentleman from Waterford Township, Michigan, here, a member of the Republican leadership, a bright, young, thoughtful, articulate man.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Mitchell).

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

Mr. Speaker, a year or so ago, I received a rather urgent phone call from Dr. Shelley Hall from Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas and Dr. Rick Snyder from Medical City in Dallas, which are hospitals, and they spoke with me about a change in the law some year and some ago that would change infusion therapy.

What is infusion therapy? It involves administering medication through a needle or a catheter, which is prescribed when a patient's condition is so severe that it cannot be treated effectively by oral medications, meaning, through this needle or the opportunity for a catheter. What happened was there was a change in the law that did not fully fund this effort.

``Home infusion'' means, instead of having to receive this in the hospital, which is more expensive, they would be able to do this at home, and the doctor would manage that. As a result of the change in some law and funding levels, that stopped the patients from being able to do this at home.

I want to congratulate Kevin Brady, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, for working not only with these doctors, but also with me on this insistence that we go and review this,

an opportunity for more effective healthcare and cost effective from the perspective of not only the patient, but also to make sure that physicians would stay involved in the health of their patients.

I would like to thank Dr. Shelley Hall of Baylor University Medical Center and Dr. Rick Snyder, both from Dallas, Texas, for working with me to make sure that this change happened today.

This is one of the pages of the changes that we are making today, to go in and offer some corrections and to update and extend the privileges that we have in this country to have the greatest healthcare system in the world.

I want to thank Chairman Brady for his work, and his staff, to make sure this was involved in this change today.

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

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

I appreciate the gentlewoman's advocacy because, in many respects, I feel the same way. But I would offer, in speaking to you, Mr. Speaker, that you made sure this House passed the $81 billion spending bill on October 12 last year. The House of Representatives, through the leadership of not only Speaker Ryan, but also the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen) were tasked with the duty of making sure that we would take feedback from States, from cities, and came up with a figure of $81 billion. That is not in any way not living up to our responsibility, Mr. Speaker.

We are the ones who did this--this whole body. It is stuck in the United States Senate, and the President and this administration have not been authorized to spend more than what has been appropriated.

I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.

And continue to right now.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time because the gentlewoman is going to switch subjects.

I would tell the gentlewoman that the House, respectfully, before we got to any tax cut bill, made sure that we did a constitutionally responsible thing, and that was to make sure that we measured three times, sawed once, came up with the $81 billion. It is, in my opinion, something that the United States Senate needs to solve.

I would also add that I don't know what the Democratic Party is doing over there to push this issue. I think it needs to be an important attribute. But we are waiting for the Senate, Mr. Speaker. And for us to blame both houses, I think, is not fair to the leadership that Paul Ryan has provided, to the leadership that Rodney Frelinghuysen has contributed to this effort, and most of all, Mr. Speaker, to the people who voted for the bill in the House. They did the responsible action. And I think that if we are going to do anything, we need to look to the United States Senate, which is constitutionally required.

President Trump and Vice President Pence not only visited the ravaged areas, but they tried to provide the leadership. But it is up to the constitutional provisions of the United States Senate, and that is where the problem lies.

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

Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?

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

I thank the gentlewoman, my dear friend from Rochester, New York, not only for her working together, but for her long hours that are a requirement of being on the Rules Committee; for her leadership not only of her team, but each of the individuals who represent not only her team, but, really, Members of Congress, and the collegial activity that she brings to the table. I thank the gentlewoman very much for that.

Mr. Speaker, we have an obligation to ensure our Nation's servicemen and -women are adequately trained for missions and to support this great Nation. We have talked about several members of the military today. My son is at Pearl Harbor also and is on duty as we speak today. He is proud of his service to the United States Navy.

There are proud parents all over the country, patriots, veterans, people who deeply believe in our military. We have got to get this funding done. That is what we are doing here today.

This rule and the underlying legislation provides funding for the Federal Government and fully funds our Nation's military. But I will tell you that the discussions we have had here today are similar to what we had at the Rules Committee.

The gentlewoman gave us credit. The Republican Party is the party of fiscal responsibility. But also, I would say to you, we are trying to do the right thing across the board, not just what we do today. But what we are faced with is similar to a changing viewpoint about how someone justifies a ``no'' vote; a ``no'' vote that they know means that while they are for something, they can't vote for it because of an issue.

Just an hour ago at the Rules Committee, we had a Democratic Member who came and wanted more money for a specific project. And I asked that Member how much money were we going to spend in the budget this year. They didn't know. I asked: How much do you want to add to that?

They said: Well, I don't know.

It is a continuing drumbeat that we, as Republicans, are puzzled by. And that is: Why do we fund the government fully for the entire year?

Let's know how much we have agreed to, and then let's make a determination if we are not meeting the needs.

Mr. Speaker, this Congress must ask the tough questions, but this Congress must be up to tough decisionmaking also. I was sent to Congress to make tough decisions, not just popular decisions. So I think I would recalculate each of us today and say the bill that we have on the floor today and the rule are designed to fund the government for the remainder of the fiscal year.

We would ask that all Members really look deep within them and let's end this mess that we are in. Let's fund this effort and let's look to March 23, when we can finalize all that we have done.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation.

Mr. Speaker, when the Committee on Rules filed its report (H. Rept. 115-547) to accompany House Resolution 727) the Committee was unaware that the waiver of all points of order against consideration of the motion to concur in the Senate Amendment to H.R. 1892 included:

A waiver of section 302(f) of the Congressional Budget Act, which prohibits consideration of legislation providing new budget authority in excess of a 302(a) allocation of such authority.

A waiver of section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act, which prohibits consideration of legislation that would cause the level

of total new budget authority for the first fiscal year to be exceeded, or would cause revenues to be less than the level of total revenues for the first fiscal year or for the total of that first fiscal year and the ensuing fiscal years for which allocations are provided.

A waiver of clause 10 of rule XXI, which prohibits the consideration of a bill if it has the net effect of increasing mandatory spending over the five-year or ten-year period.

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the further consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 1892.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 727, I call up the bill (H.R. 1892) to amend title 4, United States Code, to provide for the flying of the flag at half-staff in the event of the death of a first responder in the line of duty, with the Senate amendment thereto, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk.

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

Mr. Speaker, for the fifth time since last fall, I rise today to present another continuing resolution, the House amendment to Senate amendment to H.R. 1892, to fund the operations of the Federal Government through March 23, fund the Department of Defense for the rest of fiscal year 2018, and extend critical healthcare programs, including funding for community health centers.

Our current continuing resolution expires on Thursday, and without this legislation, large segments of the Federal Government will shut down again. Of course, all of us are keenly aware that more time is needed for our leaders in the House, the Senate, and the White House to negotiate overall funding levels for the 2018 fiscal year. This bill should allow that to happen.

Mr. Speaker, this continuing resolution also makes a very limited number of technical changes in funding levels for only the most essential needs, including:

To prevent delays in preparation for the 2020 Census;

To ensure that the judicial branch is able to pay jurors;

To provide $225 million in emergency funding for the Small Business Administration to provide emergency loans to those whose lives and livelihoods were destroyed by last year's historic natural disasters.

This legislation also includes the full fiscal year 2018 Department of Defense Appropriations bill, totaling $659 billion for our Armed Forces.

And I don't have to remind my colleagues that this bill has already passed this House three times on a bipartisan basis--most recently, last week.

Mr. Speaker, we ask a great deal of our men and women in uniform, and we have an obligation to provide them and their families the resources they need to be safe, to complete their missions successfully at home and abroad. Governing from CR to CR just creates more unpredictability, more instability, and has real-life consequences for both our troops and civilians who support them.

Mr. Speaker, the challenges we face around the world cannot be met under this Federal CR stop-and-go process. While we delay doing the Nation's business, our military and economic competitors are consolidating their gains.

Finally, I would add, this legislation includes necessary funding extensions for bipartisan health priorities like community health centers and other public health programs. It also funds important Medicare extenders and includes commonsense reforms and improvements in the program.

But let no one doubt our position on continuing resolutions. They are bad fiscal policy. They do not allow programs to grow, to be reduced or eliminated, if that is needed. They maintain outdated policies and stop new, critically important programs from ever starting, including programs that enhance national security and protect our Armed Forces from our enemies.

Continuing resolutions are fiscally wasteful and prevent the executive branch and Congress from planning and preparing, and this is true for the private sector as well.

Most importantly, they undermine congressional oversight that is constitutionally mandated for our appropriations.

While I am pleased that we are here to include the Defense Appropriations

bill in this continuing resolution, we must still pass all 12 appropriations bills for the 2018 fiscal year, as well as our third emergency disaster supplemental.

As soon as congressional and White House leaders reach a bipartisan agreement, which could and should happen at any moment, our committee will get to work immediately to finish negotiations on all 12 year-long funding bills.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter), the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations' Subcommittee on Homeland Security.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith), chairman of the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the House Ways and Means Committee.

I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Nebraska.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), who is the vice chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), who is a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter), who is a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Dunn).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Tennessee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am in receipt of the Statement of Administration Policy, which indicates that the administration supports this continuing resolution and that the President's advisers would recommend his signature on the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the Statement of Administration Policy dated February 6, 2018.

Statement of Administration Policy

House Amendment to H.R. 1892--Further Extension of Continuing

Appropriations Act, 2018--Rep. Frelinghuysen, R-NJ

The Administration supports the House Amendment to the

Senate Amendment to H.R. 1892, the Further Extension of

Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018. This bill funds most

Government programs at current levels through March 23, 2018,

while incorporating the text of the House-passed fiscal year

(FY) 2018 Department of Defense Appropriations Act, which

provides the resources the military needs to keep the Nation

safe. As the Administration has noted previously, the House-

passed Department of DefenseAppropriations Act is consistent

with the President's pledge to undo the looming defense

spending reductions that are harmful to America's national

security and military readiness.

The House-passed Department of Defense Appropriations Act

incorporated in the bill includes a total of $659 billion for

the Department of Defense (DOD), including $584 billion in

base spending and $75 billion for Overseas Contingency

Operations. These amounts are consistent with a total funding

level for DOD similar to that authorized by the National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018, which was

signed into law by the President. It includes $1.2 billion

requested by the Administration to support increased troop

levels in Afghanistan, special operations forces

capabilities, and other urgent needs.

The United States military's greatest asset is the men and

women who volunteer to serve. This bill keeps faith with

service members by providing a 2.4 percent military pay

raise. It increases end strength across the military services

for active duty, reserve, and National Guard personnel, and

includes funding for training and maintenance to ensure that

United States troops are properly equipped and ready to

fight.

In addition to supporting the defense bill, the

Administration supports language in the House Amendment to

H.R. 1892 that provides for an extension of a variety of

healthcare provisions, including Community Health Centers.

The Administration is also appreciative that the bill

includes language requested by the Administration to ensure

continuity of operations for the 2020 Decennial Census

Program and the Small Business Administration's Disaster

Loans Program.

The Administration supports continuing discussions over a

two-year budget agreement that ensures funding for national

defense and other priorities. As those discussions continue,

however, it is dangerous to

hold defense funding for the current fiscal year hostage to

arbitrary demands for lower-priority domestic programs.

If the Further Extension of Continuing Appropriations Act,

2018, were presented to the President in its current form,

his advisors would recommend that he sign the bill into law.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues in the House to support this continuing resolution to keep the government open for business until March 23 and to support our men and women in the armed services who do the work of freedom each and every day.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me, and I commend her for her extraordinary leadership on the Appropriations Committee, where important decisions are made about how to allocate the resources of our country to invest in the aspirations of the American people, to respect the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform, and to honor the vows of our Founders for a country that is making the future better for every generation to come.

The distinguished chairman of the committee, Mr. Frelinghuysen, opened his remarks by saying he came to the floor to introduce the fifth continuing resolution. And the gentleman who followed him talked about this being the fifth continuing resolution.

The more is not the merrier. It is like golf: the lower the score, the better. To have five continuing resolutions is a statement of incompetence and ineptitude.

The Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House; yet they are pressing forward on their fifth stopgap, short-term spending bill, demonstrating their failure to govern.

Since President Reagan was mentioned, I will mention our very first President, our patriarch, George Washington. President Washington, when he was leaving office, cautioned against political parties who were at war with their own government.

Does that sound familiar to you?

Here we are again, 2 days from another shutdown, careening toward another manufactured Republican crisis, demonstrating the Republican failure to govern.

We don't want to go to that place. As Members of Congress, we take a solemn oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and to protect the American people.

Democrats support a strong national defense. We, too, want our men and women in uniform to have the resources they need to keep them safe and to keep the American people safe as they accomplish their mission.

But we will not allow Republicans to use this continuing resolution, the fifth time they had to come to the floor because they could not govern, to hollow out our Nation's commitment to the health, education, and economic security of America's working families.

We all know that our military might is part of our Nation's strength, but the health, education, security, and well-being of the American people is also a source of that strength.

Instead of working constructively with Democrats to meet the needs of the American people, Republicans are trying to starve the domestic budget. I just want to remind our colleagues: One-third, 34 percent-- one-third--of the nondefense domestic budget goes to national security. When you starve the domestic budget, you are not making us stronger. One-third of the domestic budget is about security; Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs, the State Department, and antiterrorism activities of the Justice Department.

But Republicans refuse to give our patriots funded on the domestic side of the budget the resources they need to do their job, just the chaos and uncertainty of yet another stopgap extension.

As Defense Secretary Mattis said, stopgap CRs ``just create unpredictability. It makes us rigid. We cannot deal with new and revealing threats. We know our enemies are not standing still, so it is about as unwise as it can be.'' And here are, as unwise as can be for the fifth time.

And while their continuing resolution seeks to ransack every other commitment to the health of the American people, Republicans hide behind a fig leaf of a 2-year extension of community health centers.

We all support community health centers. It was a very important part of the Affordable Care Act. A very important part. Our colleague, assistant leader Mr. Clyburn from South Carolina, was one of the great champions of all time of Congress on expanding funding for programs for care and for bricks and mortar for our community health centers. This is a very important piece for us. We should be extending it in a fuller bill to 5 years, except it is used here to hide from the fact of so much other domestic investment that we are not making.

Republicans are eliminating the Home Visiting initiative that is vital for maternal and child care, and cutting off workforce training for low-income Americans seeking good-paying jobs in healthcare.

The sole purpose of this Republican bill is to destroy our leverage to achieve parity in the caps, to eliminate any need for bipartisan compromise, to eliminate any need to invest in working families.

Why?

Because if they get their defense number, then they don't have to negotiate about the domestic number. And as I said, we support our men and women in uniform having what they need to be safe and to keep us safe. But the strength of our country is measured in other ways as well.

They don't believe that and they can't pass that, so they have to put the defense bill there. But we cannot support that because, again, it comes at the expense instead of as a source of strength to our country.

Democrats simply want action on the critical overdue and bipartisan priorities of the American people so beautifully spelled out by our ranking member, Congresswoman Lowey.

Again, we need funding for the opioid epidemic. The President talked about that. Show us the money. The opioid epidemic claims the lives of 115 Americans every day, and it is getting worse every year in every district in the country. Bipartisan support is there to fight the opioid epidemic. Let's do it.

We need more funding for veterans, to meet our responsibility and ensure that no veteran is denied the care they deserve upon returning from the battlefield.

We need emergency disaster funding for all communities ravaged by hurricanes and wildfires.

We need to save millions of hardworking Americans' endangered pensions.

We need to pass the bipartisan Dream Act immediately. This is a moral priority for us. This is about the character of our Nation, who we are as a country. A nation, over time, constantly invigorated by people coming to our country to seek the American Dream; a dream that is predicated on every generation working to make the future better for the next; a dream that takes determination, optimism, hope, and courage. And when these newcomers come to America with that determination, that courage, that optimism, that hope, they associate themselves with the values of our Founders to make the future better for the next generation. These newcomers to America make America more American.

So we asked to bring the Hurd-Aguilar bill to the floor. It is bipartisan. It has bipartisan support on the floor. It would pass. Have the courage to bring a bill that protects the DREAMers to the floor of the House.

These priorities that I mentioned are all bipartisan. They would pass if brought to the floor for an up-or-down vote. The GOP squandered all their time, energy, votes, and enthusiasm on tax breaks for corporations and the wealthiest, with 83 percent of the tax bill going to the top 1 percent. And now Republicans need to get serious and get to work on a budget that funds both the military and the domestic investments that keep our Nation strong.

I just want to make one point about that tax bill again. Did you see that the Speaker of the House sang the glory of the tax bill because a woman was getting $1.50 a week more in her paycheck? Did you see that? Do you believe that that is a good thing when the top 1 percent were probably getting $1,500 a week compared to her $1.50 a week in their paycheck?

Thank God, after millions of people objected, the Speaker withdrew that tweet. But I don't think he withdrew that sentiment, because it is the same sentiment that haunts all of these negotiations about investing in the American people.

Republicans must stop governing from manufactured crisis to crisis, and work with Democrats to pass many urgent, long-overdue priorities of the American people. As our distinguished ranking member, Mrs. Lowey, said earlier in her remarks, ``We must abandon these short-term bills.'' She spelled out very clearly why. I associate myself with her remarks.

I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, I associate myself, and I think it is important for my colleagues and the American people to know, that this body, this government, this Congress, is controlled by one party: the Presidency, the House, and the Senate. Just a few minutes ago, the President of the United States called for a shutdown. I am shocked. I am not calling for anything but relief.

I am delighted that the gentleman from Dallas was able to craft a support system for infusion therapy, but it goes to show you who controls this place. I don't know what Democrat could get any additions to this particular CR. It is not an appropriation. It is not an authorization bill.

I am just on the floor begging for what my colleagues, both Republicans and Democrats from Texas, have been asking for but my Republican House has not been able to produce, or the Senate. When I say that, we have not been able to produce a disaster supplemental bill that is going to respond to the needs of those who are still suffering.

Harris County covers 1,778 square miles. It can fit New York City, Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, Seattle, Austin, and Dallas, with room still to spare; 41,500 square miles of land mass impacted by Hurricane Harvey and the subsequent flooding that covered an area larger than the States of Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont, combined. This is not puffery. It is to show you the depth of devastation.

Hurricane Harvey dropped 21 trillion gallons of water on Texas and Louisiana, most of it on the Houston metroplex. 51.88 inches of rain fell near Cedar Bayou, and at the peak, on September 1, one-third of Houston was underwater.

Our headlines: Hurricane Harvey Recovery Goes Ignored in Washington Yet Again; Republicans Controlling Every Phase of Government; After Harvey, Houstonians Eye Long Road to Recovery; After Harvey, Houstonians Have Long Road; Houses Down on the Ground; Long Road to Recovery; Senior Citizens Suffering; Suffering from Health Conditions.

And you can see, here is the basic point: There is no reason why Republicans joining with Democrats cannot, one, have an $81 billion supplemental that goes up. It is not enough. But it is the administration that has cut into our very life by giving us a skinny disaster aid supplemental. I am looking for the Senate to plus it up because this is not enough.

In this bill, if you want to know why we are voting ``no,'' it doesn't exist. Where is the disaster emergency supplemental money that is needed?

I left my office with six members of local officials in my office. They were telling me about the depression of so many in Texas who do not have the resources. They don't have the housing money. The infrastructure money has not come. Mold is there. They have bad health.

And these are examples of their situation. This is what the rescues look like. This is, of course, what the water looked like. And this gentleman was walking in the water.

This is a house that is evidenced by those impacted by the hurricane. This is a house of someone who is still waiting for that house to be rebuilt.

Finally, the city council, wanting to be responsive--and I thank them--has lifted the permitting to allow trailers. Our people are begging now for trailers. Most people don't beg for trailers. We are begging for trailers in urban Houston because people have nowhere to live.

This is a disgrace. I am not making this personal, but we flooded on August 27. It is now, today, February 6. There is no reason why this Republican administration has not been able to work. And all these additional addendums on this CR should have been done in a bipartisan effort.

We support infusion therapy. We support federally qualified health clinics. But you are taking money from prevention. We support CHIP, but you are taking money from prevention and other things. This is not the way to do, one, spending; it is not the way to provide for national security; it is not the way to provide for the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of State, Department of Justice, law enforcement. We are not doing any of that.

And then there are 140,000 DREAMers in my State. Some of them are impacted by Hurricane Harvey. And let me make mention of the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Florida, and California. I am not in any way diminishing their pain. They are likewise suffering.

So if the American people want to know what the ``noes'' are about, the ``noes'' are because those who are in charge are not doing anything.

By the way, DREAMers are part of those who sought to rescue many who were stranded in Houston. We lost a DREAMer who traveled all the way from Dallas to provide rescue and he died. He died because he loved this country. He died because he loved his neighbors.

Yet we cannot get that fixed, but we cannot help our neighbors get the dollars that they need. If you want to know why there is a ``no'' vote, it is because it is long overdue for our friends to do the real work that needs to be done, and to do disaster supplemental funding and do it right.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record two articles from the Houston Chronicle.

[From the Houston Chronicle, Oct. 26, 2017]

Houston ISD Schools With Most Displaced Students After Hurricane Harvey

(By Shelby Webb)

More than 1300 Houston ISD students are displaced or

homeless after Hurricane Harvey, according to records the

district submitted to the Texas Education Agency.

That number is likely to change after the TEA changed how

districts should categorize displaced students and as Houston

ISD shores up its own internal estimates. But initial data

shows four of the 10 schools with the largest numbers of

displaced students are located in Southwest Houston, three in

Meyerland alone.

Two magnet schools--Carnegie Vanguard High School and Lamar

High School--also saw large numbers of their students

affected by Harvey's floods.

Houston ISD Superintendent Richard Carranza required that

all teachers go through crisis and trauma training during the

first semester of the year to better help students who are

dealing with Harvey-related fears and losses.

Across the Houston area, more than 10,700 students have

been displaced by Hurricane Harvey, according to data

reported to the TEA and given to the Chronicle by 16 local

school districts. But that number does not include estimates

for how many students are displaced in some of the area's

largest school districts, including the Cypress-Fairbanks,

Spring and Pearland ISDs.

Katy ISD had the most students affected by the storm with

2,862. Tiny Stafford MSD had the least, with 32 students

displaced by the storm.

Will the gentleman yield?

The gentleman, we have worked together.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I think the important point is that this has to be a collective effort of the administration and the bodies of the House and the Senate. The only point that I would make is that the administration has not sent forward--yes, the $81 billion--but we are not moving it in the Senate.

The administration has not been engaged actively to say that they want to help the people who are impacted, and they have a skinny impact or skinny impression of what we need of $81 billion for all of the disaster areas.

And, of course, Mr. Sessions, my good friend, understands that $1 trillion tax cut does not help us in getting the increased disaster money.