Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 28) making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2019, and for other purposes, and providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 52 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko), 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

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Madam Speaker, on Wednesday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 52, providing for consideration of H.J. Res. 28, the Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act of 2019 to fund the government until February 28.

The rule provides for consideration of the legislation under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations. Additionally, the rule provides suspension authority through the legislative day of January 25, 2019.

Madam Speaker, we are in day 27 of this government shutdown, the longest government shutdown in our Nation's history.

Nearly 800,000 Federal employees have now missed a paycheck since the shutdown began. Some estimates say those employees have lost an average of $5,000 each so far.

These hardworking Americans are law enforcement officers and National Park Service, EPA, FDA, and IRS employees, and so many others in dedicated Federal service whose families are needlessly suffering. These employees are either furloughed or being forced to work without pay. This is not an acceptable way to govern.

I may not have been a Member of this body as long as some people here, but I don't think there is a single Member, Democrat or Republican, who doesn't care about securing our border, but it is foolish to think that keeping our government shut down will in any way help secure the border.

You know what Border Patrol and Coast Guard members want more than a wall? They want their paychecks to come on time.

Democrats have made it clear, we are more than willing to come to the table to talk about sensible border security, but the first step has to be to reopen the government and get our government back to functioning.

This majority has already voted to open the government seven times, with support from across the aisle. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has yet to act on any of these bipartisan pieces of legislation, the same legislation, I might add, that has already passed the Senate.

There are more than 100 freshmen Members of this body, comprising over 20 percent of the House, who have never worked in a functioning Federal Government due to the Senate's inaction. All of our constituents, both Republican and Democrat, are suffering because of that failure to act.

Let me share with you the traumatic impact of the shutdown on my constituents and Americans across the country.

Jennifer, the wife of a Coast Guard gunner's mate, wrote to my office to detail the hardships her family is facing. Her husband has served in the Coast Guard for 19 years. They are used to stressful deployments, and her children are proud of their father's service. But now Jennifer has new hardships to face: how to feed her family on only her income, how she could make the holidays special while not knowing when her husband's next paycheck would come, and how to shield her kids from her constant worry over the absence of that income.

This is an embarrassment. Too many Federal workers were already living paycheck to paycheck before those paychecks stopped. Having to put a mortgage payment on a credit card, deal with an eviction notice, or plead with a bank to delay a student loan payment should not be the reality forced upon hardworking Federal employees.

The debts these workers incur during the shutdown will follow them long after the government is reopened. The hits to their savings accounts and marks on their credit scores will serve as painful reminders that they are represented by a government that will put them in harm's way over a policy dispute.

Fran, a newlywed with a premature baby who spent more than 3 weeks in the NICU, has been without an income since her husband's paychecks stopped coming. Their child requires an expensive special formula due to his premature birth, and her husband is now being asked to work overtime without pay.

The fear and anguish in these messages from our neighbors is palpable. It should resonate with every Member of this body. These stories should keep all of us up at night. If we didn't come to Washington to serve these dedicated and hardworking Americans, then just who are we here to serve?

When the government does eventually reopen, fortunately, many of these Federal employees will receive backpay, but the plight of Federal contractors is worse. The term ``Federal contractors'' can conjure up an image of highly paid executives or CEOs of private detention facilities, but they are not the real ones harmed by the shutdown.

Federal contractors are generally small businesses, cleaners, builders, food service workers, and tech support workers. They are our neighbors who rely on these contracts to make their rent or pay their employees or contribute to our local economies.

The callousness with which these Federal contractors are being treated is repulsive. They and their families deserve so much better. The American people deserve so much better.

The longer the Senate Republicans keep our government shut down, the worse things will get.

The Small Business Administration has already stopped approving loan assistance and guarantee applications from commercial banks and small businesses, programs that are critical to the health of local economies.

Security lines at the airports are long, and they will get longer. TSA has already been forced to close security lanes at major airports across the country. This is not because the hardworking men and women of the TSA do not want to keep our skies and our passengers safe, but because they have been forced to take second jobs to pay the rent or look after their children at home because they cannot afford childcare. Without a paycheck, some cannot afford gas or carfare to get to work at all.

Just a few days ago, I met with the air traffic controllers from my district. They shared that not only is the shutdown impacting their current workforce, but it is drastically impacting their recruiting efforts to hire and train new employees for this workforce. Can we blame people for being fearful of taking a job that hinges on the Federal Government's functionality, given what we have seen during this shutdown?

A National Air Traffic Controllers Association official warned recently that if the shutdown continues to drag on, there may not be any air traffic controllers left working.

Let me pause to make those statements abundantly clear. This shutdown is making us less safe. If it continues much longer, there will not be enough employees on duty to make sure passengers are safe to board a plane, not enough employees left to make sure planes are safe to land, and not enough employees to direct air traffic in our skies.

If you think you are insulated from the effects of a government shutdown because you are not a Federal employee, you are wrong.

What I fear this administration and Republican leadership in the Senate have forgotten is that this is the people's House. We have an obligation to work for them. Refusing to uphold that commitment, that promise, is a slap in the face to the American people.

Before I conclude, let me share with you one final story of how the shutdown is harming American families.

Jessica from my district is a mother of six with a special needs child. Her husband is Active Duty Coast Guard. She has been forced to tell her children they can't have seconds at dinner, because she doesn't know if she will have enough food to last the week. Her daughter has an ultrasound coming up, and she is unsure if she can afford the specialist copay.

She writes that she and her husband supported President Trump, but that after this, she does not see ``how we could support someone so out of touch and willing to damage so many people in order to save his own face.''

Jessica ended her message by saying that they are prepared to stand strong, but she is also prepared to stand at the corner of an intersection with a cardboard sign if that is what she has to do to feed her children.

This is not the America I was raised in.

Let's end the shutdown today and get our country back on track.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I understand the frustration of the gentlewoman from Arizona with the lack of progress in ending this shutdown, but I would suggest that her frustration is misdirected.

The House has sent seven bills to end the shutdown to the Senate, and the Senate leadership has refused to entertain any of them or bring them to a vote: #whereismitch.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Golden).

Madam Speaker, I am surprised to hear my colleague talk about political theater. We have a reality-show President in the White House who is ignoring the real lives impacted by the shutdown, all to try to make another made-for-TV moment to please his rightwing base and radio pundits. Government isn't a game. Real lives are at stake, and we need to reopen the government.

Madam Speaker, may I inquire if the gentlewoman has any remaining speakers. If not, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I don't know when this shutdown will end, but I know that Democrats and all the Republicans who are serious about getting Federal employees back to work will vote in favor of this rule and the underlying resolution.

I am heartened by my colleagues from across the aisle who have already voted to reopen the government, and I am hopeful that even more will join us this time around.

No serious person can claim that any Member of this House is against border security. Not only have we sworn an oath to protect and defend this country, but we have voted repeatedly to fund billions of dollars in border security appropriations.

The discussion about the best methods for protecting our border is a valid policy question that should be debated thoughtfully and deliberately by both sides of the aisle, not used as a vehicle for the President to fulfill a campaign promise at the expense of American families.

It cannot be overstated: this is the longest government shutdown in history. The House has done its job. We have passed bills to reopen the government on bipartisan votes and will continue to do so for as long as it takes.

We have committed to working on solutions to border security once the government is opened back up. The votes are there in the Senate. They have already shown that. And given the chance, I am sure they would show it again.

Why won't Senator McConnell bring to the floor any one of the House- passed bills to open the government?

I will end by saying this: Senator McConnell, do the right thing for working families in your State, in my State, and across the country. Hold a vote to open the government.

Let's end the pain American families and businesses are feeling from the shutdown and get to work on making this country a better place for all.

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

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

The previous question was ordered.

Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Scanlon from Pennsylvania for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I agree with Representative Scanlon. I want to open the government. Republicans want to open the government. Democrats want to open the government. So I respectfully ask House and Senate Democrats to stop holding our Federal workers hostage.

You know, on December 20, I voted for and Republicans voted for in the House a bill right here, standing right here on December 20, that would have kept the government open, and then we would not have had any of these discussions or need for these bills, because the government would still be open. Unfortunately, not one Democrat Member of the House voted for it.

I, too, have Federal workers in my district who are hurting, these great men and women who work hard each and every day of their life, single mothers who are waiting for their paycheck. So I call on my colleagues across the aisle to please come to the negotiating table.

I believe the number one rule in Negotiations 101 is you have to show up. Repeatedly, we have seen the Republicans and the President request the Democrat leadership to come and negotiate, give a counteroffer. They refuse to show up.

I say, if the House Republicans already passed a bill that would have kept the government open and now we are at this impasse, but the Democrat leadership refuses to come to even a negotiating table or a counteroffer, I just don't know what to say.

Well, Madam Speaker, once again, we have returned to the House floor to consider yet another short-term spending bill that once again is most likely going nowhere. For what is now the fourth time in 3 weeks, we have returned to the House floor on a rule to consider an appropriations bill as part of the majority's efforts to fund the government without working with President Trump.

Unfortunately, we think this effort is just as shortsighted as the previous bills over the last couple of weeks, and today's rule is again destined to ignore the fundamental realities at issue.

But first, as I said before, let's take a quick look at how we got to this point.

On December 20, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would have funded the government and prevented the shutdown. It included a continuing resolution through February 8. It included disaster relief and funding for border security that the Democrats say they want, but are not listening to our own law enforcement on the border on their recommendations. That was a bill the majority of the Senate supported and the President said he would sign.

Unfortunately, as we all know, the Senate refused to take up the House measure, mostly because of their 60-vote rule, where they need Democrats to get on board, and parts of the government shut down when appropriations lapsed. Again, not one single Democrat in the House voted for this bill, which would have avoided this whole, entire partial government shutdown.

On January 3, when the new Congress was sworn in, the House took up a continuing resolution through February 8, only this time swept clean of essential disaster relief funding or funding for border security. To date, the Senate, as we know, has refused to take up this measure, and the President has said he would not sign it because it doesn't have additional money for border security.

Last week, then again, the House took up four more spending bills, that covered four of the outstanding seven appropriations titles. Unfortunately, like the week prior, these bills also did not include funding for border security. Even more unfortunately, these bills were ones that were produced by the Senate alone during the last Congress, and that did not even reflect any work by, or input from, the House of Representatives. Just as publicly stated the Senate has not taken up any of these bills during this Congress and has no plans to take this one up either.

On Tuesday, the majority put up yet another continuing resolution. This one a suspension bill, to fund the government through February 1, but, yet

again, omitting any funding for border security, which is the key ingredient to get negotiations done. That bill failed to reach the two- thirds threshold to pass under suspension of the rules.

And then, yes, yesterday, the House took up a supplemental disaster appropriations bill that was intended only to provide just over $12 billion in necessary disaster relief for affected communities. This was a bipartisan bill. We could have passed it out of here.

But instead of bringing up this bipartisan disaster relief bill to the floor, the majority chose to play politics once again and decided at the last minute to attach yet another continuing resolution to this bill, again, without any border security funding, and, again, to fund the government through February 8. That bill passed the House yesterday, yet there is no sign that the Senate ever has any intention of taking that bill up. In any event, the President has made it clear, and I believe the American public has made it clear, that we want border security.

And that brings us to today. I have to tell you, I am running out of ways to describe what the majority is doing, but I imagine the Speaker knows where I am going with this. Once again, the majority is bringing up yet another continuing resolution--this one goes to February 28-- and, again, with no funding for border security. And yet again, it is clear that if we pass this bill, the Senate will not consider it and the President will not sign it because it does not include funding for border security.

We now see the common thread in all the majority is doing: bringing up bills again and again and again, to fund the government, without dealing with the fundamental problem. All of these repeated continuing resolutions are the same. Only the date has changed. All of them fail to fund border security, which Americans have told us again and again they want and need. And all of them are continued avoidance of what needs to happen in order to end this shutdown: real, sincere negotiations with the Senate and the President over border security.

I feel that this is an exercise in futility. The majority is failing to acknowledge the crisis happening at our southern border. As you know, I am a Member from Arizona, a border State. When will the Democrats get serious about ending this government shutdown and come to the negotiating table to work out a deal that has a real chance of being signed into law?

Listen, I know that border security is a crisis. The other night on TV, when Speaker Pelosi and Chuck Schumer said it is a manufactured crisis, I can tell you firsthand, that is not accurate. We do have a crisis on the border, and we need to fix it. I have been to the border. I have been to the border several times. I recently visited the United States-Mexico border in Nogales, Arizona, where I met with Customs and Border Protection agents. The crisis we are dealing with at the border is not just illegal immigration, they said. There is illicit drugs flowing through our borders, which are killing our children and adults, human trafficking, and they told us that dangerous cartels are using our loose immigration laws to exploit the women and children, having them travel thousands of miles.

Do you know that Doctors Without Borders say that, I believe one in three of these women have been sexually abused? This is unconscionable. We need border security. And it is the law enforcement, the Customs and Border Protection, that have said repeatedly, have told me personally, yes; part of the solution is a border fence.

In 2006, Democrats supported a border fence. Chuck Schumer and then- Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton funded $52 billion for 700 miles of fencing. Now the President is asking for $5.7 billion. That is only 1/10th of 1 percent of the Federal budget. And, unfortunately, because of their refusal to add this to any bills, it has shut down the government.

This rule before us today is just another ploy. Democrats are refusing to negotiate and refusing to deal with this national security issue. Please, let's stop these games and pass a real bill that funds border security, that opens the government, that funds disaster relief, send it to the Senate, and have it signed into law.

Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), my good friend.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry), my good friend.

Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close as well, and I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, in closing, this is the fourth time we have deliberated on this floor, in the last 3 weeks, on the exact same type of package.

The date keeps changing--sometimes it is February 1; sometimes it is February 8; sometimes it is February 28--but it is all the same. None of them include funding for border security. It is the fourth time that the same result will ensue. The House of Representatives is in a perpetual cycle of Groundhog Day that we cannot seem to escape.

Representative Scanlon and I serve, of course, on the Rules Committee together, and it is Groundhog Day. We just say the same things each and every day. Really, let's get to the negotiating table, and, really, let's get something done.

The majority seems to be insistent on reviewing these same appropriations packages again and again, fully knowing that the Senate has made clear they will not take up these bills because there is no border security in them.

Finally, Madam Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not mention that this bill is again coming to the floor under a closed rule. Of the eight bills the House has considered under a rule this Congress, seven have been closed, with no opportunity for Members to present new ideas and new amendments.

Now, I know that Chairman McGovern has assured us he wants a more open process, and I believe he is sincere in his assurance. We saw a more open process on the disaster supplemental bill we considered earlier this week, which has so far been the outlier of this Congress, with 15 amendments made in order on a structured rule. I look forward to considering more rules that have a more open process than the one we are considering today.

Madam Speaker, I urge ``no'' on the previous question, ``no'' on the underlying measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Aderholt from Alabama has just said this is ``veto bait.'' What is veto bait? A proposition to open up the people's government. Veto bait?

What is the Republican position? Unless the coequal branch of government, the House of Representatives, says ``yes'' to the President of the United States, you will continue to support, ad infinitum, closing down the American Government.

Our Russian--I won't call them enemies, but adversaries, at least, are very happy, I am sure, that the American Government is shut down.

Our Chinese competitors are very happy that the American Government is shut down.

We look ridiculous on the national and international scene.

I ask one of my Republican colleagues to stand, and I will yield to them. Tell me which government of the world shuts themselves down.

You are correct. The answer is, I can't find any government in the free world that shuts themselves down.

Is that what you won't vote for, opening up your government, the people's government? Is that what this fight is about?

Or is this fight about, Mr. President, you tell us what to do?

Mr. McConnell says he won't put anything on the Senate floor that the President won't sign. My, my, my, what a coequal branch of government we are.

Article I says we make the policy. We decide what is rational to spend $5.7 billion on. Experts tell us this wall won't work. Senator Cornyn, Senator Graham, Senator Kennedy, other Senators have said this is not a good investment. By the way, somebody else who said that was Mick Mulvaney, some years ago. He is now Chief of Staff at the White House.

This is not a partisan issue, and this is not about the wall, nor was it about the ACA, nor was it about the level of education funding when Gingrich shut down the government or when Ted Cruz and the Freedom Caucus shut down the government.

Thank God for John Boehner, who had the courage to say shutting down the government does not make any sense. It is a stupid policy. Thank God for John Boehner, who came to the floor, notwithstanding the fact only 87 of his Republican colleagues would support it, but with all the support of the Democrats, we opened up the government after 26 days.

Now, we have exceeded it this time. What happens 2 weeks from now when the President says: Either you do it my way or no way, or I am going to shut down the government.

We are paying a high price, Mr. Speaker, for shutting down this government, not only the 800,000 hostages who have been taken by the President of the United States, with the complicity of his Republican supporters in the House and in the Senate. 800,000 people, 440,000 of them forced to work without getting paid, 360,000 of them sitting home and saying: How am I going to pay my mortgage? How am I going to pay my car payment?

They don't know. I talked to a veteran just 3 days ago who represents a lot of veterans organizations. He said to me: Do you know the highest reason for veteran suicide?

I said: No, what is that?

Fiscal uncertainty.

We have a lot of veterans in the Federal Government. We have a lot of veterans who are either laid off or working and not getting paid. We are creating financial instability and anxiety among our employees. What a stupid way to run a business.

Yesterday, we had a motion to recommit, and it was to strike opening up the government of the United States. That was apparently, as the chairwoman has expressed, a poison pill for my Republican colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, I don't get it. We were sent here by our people to make their government run more efficiently and effectively for them and for our country, and what have we done? We have said: If the President won't agree to opening up the government, we won't either.

Yes, we have tried every kind of alternative: opening it up for 7 days, opening it up for 14 days where we can negotiate, and now we are saying to open it up for a month, put people back to work, give them a paycheck.

And what does the President's Council of Economic Advisers say just the other day? We are hurting the economy of the United States, which hurts everybody and the international community.

I don't get it. I can't think that the American people will get it, that their Congress sits supine and says we will only pass something if the President says it is okay.

Have we come to this state where the Article I branch of government, given the power by the people to make policy, says to the person in the Second Article, given the responsibility of executing policy, to tell us: You guys who make policy, don't do it unless I tell you you can?

How sad, how lacking in respect for our own responsibility and duties to sit idly by while not only 800,000 people are held hostage, but also millions and millions and millions of others who are served daily by those 800,000 people.

I plead with my colleagues: Stand up. Reject this policy of shutting down government whoever does it, whichever side does it.

And we don't do it. We don't believe in it. Mitch McConnell doesn't believe in it. He said just a few years ago it was a failed policy. And he, Senator McConnell, was the guy that opened up government. That is what he said. He has now abandoned that, unfortunately, to the detriment of our country--not just to the detriment of our Federal employees, to the detriment of the country.

Mr. Speaker, I would hope every American would call their Member and say: Look, you guys have differences. That is all right. But don't shut down my government; don't hurt my economy; don't hurt my neighbor; don't hurt my mom and dad; don't hurt my child; don't send people to the border to make us secure when you talk about border security and then don't pay them and have them worrying about when they are going to get their next paycheck.

We are better than this. The Congress ought to be better than this.

In a bipartisan way, we ought to say to the President of the United States: We are for you, against you on this, that, or the other policy, but we are united in the fact that we do not want to shut down the people's government.

Pass this bill. Send it to the Senate. Let's open this government. It is the right thing to do.

Madam Speaker, folks in the audience, and folks that are watching this on TV, this is all theater. This is all just political theater.

Everybody knows. I know. My good friends on the other side of the aisle know that this isn't going to solve anything. This is not a solution.

If we were serious about solving this, we wouldn't be voting on another bill here that doesn't fix anything, that is never going to be moved through the Senate, that is never going to be signed by the President.

If we were interested in opening the Federal Government, we would be negotiating. We would be talking about what our differences are about border security.

Remember, this is a bill that includes the funding for border security. That is why we have this partial shutdown, because we have a disagreement about border security. And we are trying to work it out, but we can't work it out just by running the same bills that don't do anything and that are never going to move through the Senate and aren't going to be signed by the President.

It is time to get serious.

Last year, this government was shut down for a few days over amnesty. Now it is shut down because the other side doesn't want to talk about border security. You put amnesty and the lack of border security together, and that is open borders. That is completely open borders.

Just on the news, if you were watching the last couple days, more caravans heading north out of Central America through Mexico to the United States border. That is what is happening right now while our Border Patrol agents are out there working but not being paid.

Here come these folks. We don't know what their circumstances are. I am sure there are a lot of fine people in there. I am sure there are children in there, and the horrors that they are going to suffer on this trek north up through the desert in these points between the points of entry.

Madam Speaker, the most recent numbers out of Homeland Security in November, 51,000 people--that is the ones we caught--51,000 people came across the border between the ports of entry.

If they were coming to the ports of entry, this wouldn't be half of a problem, but the problem is they are coming between the ports of entry. That is one month, 51,000. And those are the ones we caught. We don't have any idea how many other ones made it through.

And yet some folks are saying: Well, we are going to give you an extra billion dollars to fix this problem.

It is not an extra billion. It is the same billion, and it is to fix problems at the ports of entry.

Madam Speaker, the problem is between the ports of entry and the ports of entry. But we are not going to do anything about the ports of entry. The billion dollars we are talking about is to muddle around and maintain things at the ports of entry but do nothing between the ports of entry, nothing at all. That is the status quo.

That is why we are in this argument, because we are saying we cannot withstand, we cannot maintain the status quo of 51,000 people a month coming illegally across our border and do nothing.

We are pleading with the other side: Please, let's do something. Let's do something different than the status quo, because the status quo gives us 51,000 people coming illegally across the border.

And they are saying: Well, we are just going to run the same bill to open the government and do nothing.

We cannot abide that. The American people cannot abide that.

People are working, Madam Speaker, without being paid while people pour across our border, and we are expecting them to stop them. They don't have the resources because we are not providing them.

It is time to end this needless show of work. We are here working, right? We are all here working. We are not doing anything to solve the problem.

What it is going to take is somebody to sit down at the table and say, ``Look. See here. This is what I think the issue is,'' and find some solution somewhere in the middle. But you can't do that if you are not willing to have a discussion.

We are asking to have a discussion so we can get past this, so people can get paid and the American people can be assured that their government is securing their border, their property, their country, and stopping all these illegal immigrants from coming in; and making sure that, if they are going to come in--and we are a country of immigrants.

My grandmother, my great-grandmother came here from Colombia, South America, with the shirts on their backs. They came through Ellis Island because we had a process. We are all immigrants, and we welcome immigrants more than any other country on the planet, but we want you to come legally.

We have a process. We don't want you to just pour across the border into our country with gang-related violence, with fentanyl, with opioids that are killing people in our own communities, all these drugs and crimes and violence. We are asking you to come to the ports of entry and quit pouring in between the ports of entry. But our laws now invite them to do that, which is why they are coming.

So I just beseech you, Madam Speaker--and I thank you for your indulgence and for your time--let's quit this show. Let's quit this charade. Let's quit this theater. Let's get serious for the people who are working, for the American people who expect more, and get down to negotiation, come to a solution, and move on with things, the important things that plague our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 52, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 28) making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2019, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Today is the 27th day of the Trump shutdown, the longest government shutdown in American history.

Hardworking public servants are seeing their financial security jeopardized. Small businesses are being frozen out of critical contracting and loan programs. Businesses of all sizes are being hurt by delayed regulatory approvals and a lack of government data. Farmers are unable to access vital Federal services. Our national parks are being vandalized and filling up with garbage. Critical environmental inspections to protect families and communities have stopped. Lines at airports are swelling, as many TSA workers can't afford to work without pay.

Mr. Speaker, this is unacceptable. But, unfortunately, we heard yesterday in this very House that Republicans think reopening the government is a poison pill. Reopening the government is a poison pill? Frankly, that, my friends, is unbelievable.

We can and we must do better, which is why House Democrats are bringing up our ninth piece of legislation to reopen the government and end the Trump shutdown.

The continuing resolution would provide an additional option for President Trump and Senate Republicans to take ``yes'' for an answer and end the shutdown. It would reopen the government through February 28, providing time for Congress to come to a full-year agreement without further jeopardizing vital services or the pay of Federal employees.

The order of business, Mr. Speaker, should be simple: Reopen the government, pay Federal employees, and then negotiate on border security and immigration policy.

It is long past time for my colleagues across the aisle and across the Capitol to come to their senses and end this shutdown.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and reopen the government through February 28.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), an outstanding senior member of the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished majority leader.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, my friends, end this Trump shutdown, vote ``yes,'' and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, I must reiterate, today is the 27th day of the Trump shutdown, the longest government shutdown in American history. Therefore, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

This continuing resolution would provide an additional option for President Trump and Senate Republicans to take yes for an answer and end the shutdown. This CR would pay employees; it would reopen government through February 28, providing time for Congress to come to a full-year agreement, without further jeopardizing vital services or the pay of Federal employees.

The order of business would be simple, my friends: reopen the government, pay Federal employees, and then let's have a serious negotiation on border security and immigration policy. Maybe I will repeat that again, because the order of business is very simple: reopen the government, pay Federal employees, and then negotiate on border security and immigration policy.

It is long past time for my colleagues across the aisle, and across the Capitol, to come to their senses and end this shutdown.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this motion to recommit and open the government today.

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