An Act to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue Department of Homeland Security-wide guidance and develop training programs as part of the Department of Homeland Security Blue Campaign, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 670 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my friend from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

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

Mr. Speaker, most of what you just heard from the Reading Clerk you could have heard during the previous 4 hours of testimony that we have been taking in the Rules Committee this morning. I understand there was no other game in town going on this morning, so if folks were tuning in to C-SPAN, they were treated to my friend from Massachusetts, our ranking member from New York, our chairman from Texas, and all the gang there on the Rules Committee as we worked through this.

But forbid the thought if someone else had something else on their mind this morning, I want to go through just briefly what you heard from our Reading Clerk.

This is a single rule that provides for consideration of two measures. The first is the Senate amendment to H.R. 1370. It is continuing appropriations to make sure the lights stay on and the checks go out the door. It makes in order a motion to concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment consisting of the text of this continuing resolution.

To debate that, Mr. Speaker, we provide an hour of debate divided between the chair and the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee. I think every Member of this Chamber understands the nature of this legislation, but we provided that time nonetheless.

The second measure is H.R. 4667. It is the disaster aid package.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, this House has been working through, in a bipartisan way, funding our neighbors who have been so dramatically affected by disasters, whether in the Virgin Islands, in Puerto Rico, in Florida, in Texas, or the devastating wildfires in California. This has been a national focus, and billions of dollars have already gone out the door to meet the initial emergency needs. This is an additional appropriations measure.

It comes under a closed rule, Mr. Speaker, but it does self-execute two amendments that had been offered: an amendment by Mrs. Mimi Walters and an amendment by Miss Gonzalez-Colon.

It also provides for an hour of debate, equally divided between the chair and ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, and it provides for a motion to recommit for the minority.

The rest of what you heard from the Reading Clerk, Mr. Speaker, was that typical language that you hear at the end of the year when Members are going to be traveling, to allow for the housekeeping that takes place here, to allow the House to continue to function as the traditional authorities provided in December and January during the district work period.

With that, Mr. Speaker, again, I think we have exhaustively debated these issues. I urge my colleagues to support the rule. Let's get on to the underlying measures.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, this time of year folks get rightfully exorcised about the issues of the day.

We all came here to do something for the men and women whom we represent back home. Every time we get to the end of a year, we think: I have got to get it done; I have got to get it done; I have got to get it done. I recognize those passions are going to exist.

I actually don't believe for a minute that my friend from Massachusetts believes my vote in favor of the tax bill had anything to do with fundraising or my donors. He might believe that about somebody in this Chamber--I hope that he does not--but I know he doesn't believe it about me. It just isn't true.

I have been fighting for tax reform since the day I was elected. In fact, I ran for this job to fight for tax reform. We do the American people a disservice when we suggest something nefarious is going on. Sometimes we just disagree, Mr. Speaker, and those disagreements are okay. In fact, those disagreements are expected. Our Founders intended them, and they created this institution to sort those disagreements out. So I hope we won't sell either ourselves or the American people short in that regard.

But I do want to agree with my friend that this is frustrating. It is frustrating to be here for a continuing resolution, Mr. Speaker. Remember that we passed the National Security and Defense Appropriations bill in July of this year. We have waited patiently for the Senate to be able to take it up, and it has not.

We passed all of the appropriations bills, Mr. Speaker, before the end of the fiscal year, back in September, and we have been waiting for the Senate to take those up. It has not. It is an incredibly frustrating time.

Now, my friend suggested a solution would be bipartisanship. I could not agree with him more. It takes 60 votes to move something through the Senate. I just barely have over 50 Republicans. The only way these funding bills are going to move through the Senate is with bipartisan support. For anyone in this Chamber to deny that is going to be to deny the reality of math. Bipartisanship is the solution.

I remember, Mr. Speaker, when my President invited the Democratic leadership down to the White House to work on exactly this issue a month ago. Folks got frustrated with the tweet he sent out that morning and decided they were going to stay home.

I understand the frustrations. What I don't understand is missing out on an opportunity to build this bridge. It happens above my pay grade, I am going to confess. To the 700,000 people I represent back home, Mr. Speaker, let me go ahead and confess this deal is taking place way above my pay grade.

But it is probably right there at the pay grade of the President of the United States, the Speaker of the House, and the minority leader. When folks don't show up to the table for the conversation, it makes it harder to get there.

Is there always a good reason to stay home?

I am sure there is.

Are there more good reasons to be there?

I think the answer is: Yes.

Mr. Speaker, I will advise my friend from Massachusetts that I don't have any speakers remaining this morning. Folks have been exhaustibly elucidated by the 4 hours of discussion we had this morning, and I am prepared to close when he is.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, here, in these cold days outside, it is easy to create a lot of rhetorical heat on the inside. I would argue that legislative light is what we need more often than not.

We brought the Children's Health Insurance Program bill to the floor that my friend from Texas just referenced, Mr. Speaker. We didn't just bring it to the floor; we brought it through committee. We brought it through committee, and we passed it. We brought it to the House floor, and we passed it. We sent it to the Senate, and there it sits.

But when it passed the House floor, my friend from Texas voted ``no.'' He voted ``no.''

Now, do I believe for a moment that is because he hates children? I do not.

Do I believe for a moment that it is because he doesn't want folks to have access to healthcare? I do not. I believe he had legitimate policy reasons for deciding not to reauthorize the program then that he has just taken to the floor and talked about the merits of reauthorizing.

It is okay to disagree on those issues, and it is even okay to highlight those differences. What is not okay is to describe this Chamber as a Chamber that doesn't care. What is not okay is to describe this as a Chamber that doesn't act.

My friend was absolutely right: it is a bipartisan priority to fund the Children's Health Insurance Program, and we did. The Senate has not acted. It hasn't gotten the full reauthorization done. If we pass the continuing resolution today, that funding will continue.

Let's disagree on those things that we disagree about, but let's be honest with ourselves about the legitimacy of those disagreements. Let's try to find more light than heat in this new year.

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

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

My friend from Florida is a good accountability partner up on the Rules Committee. I have learned from his intellect, and I have learned from his experience in this Chamber. I value that, and I value his friendship.

When he says that more closed rules have been passed in this Congress than any other, he is absolutely right. He is absolutely right. And that is worth talking about, as my friend does regularly in the committee.

Unfortunately, we usually just have that half of the conversation. What we don't talk about is that many of those closed rules were for bills that were so well worked out in a bipartisan way in committee that there were no amendments offered, that we had already come together in such a collaborative, productive, admirable way that we ought to be bragging about instead of denigrating that we didn't have amendments that were offered.

Other bills, Mr. Speaker, were bills that might not have been so generally agreed upon. But when my friend the chairman of the Rules Committee sends the call out to all 435 Members of Congress and says: If you have any ideas, bring them to the Rules Committee. For many of those bills, Mr. Speaker, there wasn't one idea suggested, not one idea suggested to change the underlying bill.

So did it come under a closed process?

Well, of course, it did, if closed means we ask everybody for all of their ideas and no one had one, so there was no idea to debate on the floor.

Mr. Speaker, there are so many ways that we can do better with one another, but I would suggest to my friends that the way to do better with one another is to build that on a foundation of trust, not a foundation of recriminations.

We have an opportunity in this new year, Mr. Speaker, to turn a page in this institution. I want to say, in my time on the Rules Committee, Mr. Speaker, I have never had a chairman who worked as hard to open the process and hear from Members as the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), the current chairman.

Time and time again, where other folks would have walked away from the table, the chairman has stayed there to get input, to hear ideas. Time and time again, when the process would have been truncated, he has extended it to make sure folks had a chance to have their voice heard.

I am grateful for that, Mr. Speaker. I am grateful to the chairman for that model that he sets in that committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) to speak on this rule.

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

Mr. Speaker, we talk a lot about what isn't in the bill today, and we could actually talk a lot longer about what isn't in the bill. It is a fairly narrowly focused bill, but what is in there, in addition to funding to keep the government operating, is funding for our community health centers that we all care so much about; is funding for the Children's Health Insurance Program--that is a bipartisan issue across this Chamber--is funding for the Special Diabetes Program. Mr. Speaker, that is so important to so many families. I can go on and on and on.

Are there things that are not in this bill?

Of course there are, and I look forward to coming back with my colleagues to address each and every one of those, but there is so much good that is in this bill, Mr. Speaker. If we conclude this debate to pass this rule, we can get on and make those things a reality.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, you likely did, as I did yesterday, get a wonderful Christmas card from our friend from California, which I very much appreciated. She was there with her beautiful family. I appreciate the sincerity of her words today.

I will just remind this Chamber that we are having that conversation for

one reason and one reason only. That is because, when Democrats had the White House, the U.S. House, and the U.S. Senate, but--much like Republicans today--didn't have 60 votes to get around the filibuster, instead of President Obama and the Democratic leaders in the House and the Senate trying to find a bipartisan pathway forward that could get 60 votes, they chose to craft an administrative solution, one that I thought was illegal, one that I thought was unconstitutional, but chose to go it alone.

Mr. Speaker, that is not a blame statement. It is an explanation of some systemic challenges that exist in this place.

I can assure my colleagues, and I am happy to have someone disabuse me of the notion, but I have yet to see the issue that we have solved by blaming each other more for it. I have yet to see that pathway to success.

The pathway I have seen is when folks turn the cameras off, when they roll up their sleeves, when they decide they don't much care who gets the credit for a solution, they just want to solve it.

I will put another one on my colleagues' plate, because, again, I don't doubt their sincerity. Raju is one of my constituents. He is here on an H1-B visa. His wife, Manju, is here on an H-4 visa. He came to this country legally 11 years ago. Every few years, he has to renew his visa, which costs thousands of dollars. When his visa expires, when his driver's license expires, he has to go back and do it. He is not complaining. That is what the law of the land said. When he agreed to come here, he agreed to follow the law of the land. He can't start his own business. He can't change employers. He is a captive of the visa program that he came in on. There is no pathway, Mr. Speaker, for Raju and Manju to get the same benefits that my colleagues are arguing so passionately for for 800,000 additional people.

Mr. Speaker, the human stories don't begin and end with the DACA program. Again, a problem that President Obama created; not solved, but created.

I can go line by line by line of folks who are facing similar challenges, and I question where the justice is when I can name constituent after constituent after constituent who has done everything right, who has paid every dime the government has asked, who has applied for every piece of paperwork that the government has asked, who has stood in every line that the government has asked, and there is no pathway forward for them.

Let's not pretend that there is not common ground that we can come together on. Let's confess that perhaps we haven't spent enough time trying to do it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would advise the gentleman from Massachusetts that I have no further speakers and I am prepared to close when he is.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would advise the gentleman that it appears I have committed all of my time.

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

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

There has been a lot of productivity this week. There has been a lot of work that has gone on this week. I am looking around up there at the dais with you, Mr. Speaker. I see a lot of unshaven faces. I'm not just taking about Josef. I am talking about folks who intended to shave and might not have made it home last night to get that done.

It takes an incredible amount of staff time to do this. So what Mr. McGovern and I do up in the Rules Committee, our staffs have been there past midnight time and time again this week and then back in at dawn.

I wish that more of the American people, Mr. Speaker, could see the hardworking, dedicated staff, the team that goes into making all of this possible, because I think it would make them proud. I think, in a season like this, it would lift them up and make them feel better about who we are as a people and the things that we could accomplish together.

One of those young people, Mr. Speaker, is Nate Blake on the Rules Committee. He is sitting right here behind me. He is leaving us after 5 years of service. I want to put that into perspective, Mr. Speaker.

There is not a staff member up here that can't leave today and get better hours and more money going anywhere else in town. You will work on Capitol Hill for one reason and one reason only, and that is that you believe, if only you work hard enough and long enough, you would make America just a little bit better.

Mr. Blake is one of those believers. We will miss him on the committee. It is a great honor for me that his very last rule is to be one of mine, and I thank him for his service.

Mr. Speaker, they often say everything's been said but not everyone has said it. We don't need to go down that path today. This House has done its job. It has done its job in a collaborative way. It has done its job in a way that the American people can be proud of.

If we pass this rule, we will not only fund the government, send money to the troops, send money to community health centers, send money to education, send money to courts, send money to the environment; we will not only take care of those funding responsibilities; we will also provide those dollars needed for those men and women spread out from Florida to Texas to California to Puerto Rico to the Virgin Islands. There is a real human being behind each and every one of these dollars that will go out the door today.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues, vote ``yes'' on this rule so we can get to that underlying legislation.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, we are strongly opposed to this rule.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say to my colleagues that this is really a sad day, not only for the institution, but for the United States of America.

It is frustrating that we are here today doing a third continuing resolution. For those who are watching these proceedings, we should be actually passing appropriations bills that fund the government for an entire year. We shouldn't be funding the government week to week, month to month.

Yet my Republican friends have ended up doing just that. They can't seem to get their act together, notwithstanding they are in control of the House of Representatives, they are in control of the United States Senate, and they are in control of the White House. They simply cannot govern. They are lucky that the American people can't sue them, because they would be sued for political malpractice.

The one thing that they are supposed to do is to keep this government running and to keep the lights on, yet we lurch from one crisis to another crisis to another crisis to another crisis.

Today, what they are saying is: Let's kick the can down the road until January 19. You know what will happen then?

Another crisis. Then we will be in the same situation, and we will probably kick the can down the road another few weeks.

That is not the way government is supposed to run. People need certainty, and this Congress has delivered anything but certainty. It has to stop. It is frustrating.

A solution, if I can be so bold as to suggest a solution to dealing with some of the problems that the Republican leadership is confronting, might be a little bipartisanship, might be opening up this process a little bit, might be a little bit more deliberation on the floor of the House of Representatives.

There are a couple of ways they can govern. One is, they can govern in a way where they respect all points of view, where they actually respect the viewpoint of the minority, where they open the process up so the minority can, every once in a while, offer some amendments and offer some alternatives, where they negotiate on spending bills in good faith, where they know they are not going to get everything and the minority knows they are not going to get everything, but they end up in a compromise that is good enough to get bipartisan support.

That is the way things used to be done around here. I don't know why it is so difficult to get back to those days, but if they want the government to run better, that is what they need to do. They have to stop this my-way-or-the-highway approach to every single piece of legislation that comes before this body.

My friends have had more closed rules than any other session of Congress. This is the most closed session in the history of the Congress. That is what this session will go down in history as being: the most closed session in the history of Congress.

They have used martial law, they have used closed rules, they have had emergency meetings, all to try to get us to this point where we are kicking the can down the road for a couple of weeks. That is it.

What we should have been doing is working together not only to keep the government open, but we ought to have been working together to raise the caps.

Democrats want a strong national defense. We also need an equal increase in our domestic budget, which includes critical national security functions and commitments to hardworking families.

My friends ought to know that one-third of the nondefense domestic budget goes to national security, veterans, homeland security, and the State Department's and the Justice Department's counterterrorism initiatives.

I would also say that supporting housing initiatives and investing in education and environmental protection so that our fellow citizens don't have to drink water that is contaminated with lead is also a part of our national security.

We ought to have been working in a bipartisan way to resolve all of these issues together.

We need to work to fund the opioid epidemic. What we have done in this Congress is given lots of speeches about how terrible this opioid epidemic is. We have talked about the need to support our local communities.

We have done a lot of talking, but what we need to do is appropriate the necessary money so that local communities can implement the strategies to effectively deal with the opioid crisis in their areas. We ought to have been focusing on that.

We need additional veterans funding. Democrats are urging Republicans to join us to provide urgently needed resources to veterans facing a dire shortfall at the VA, meeting our responsibility to ensure that no veteran is left behind or denied the care and opportunities they deserve upon return from the battlefield.

CHIP, the Children's Health Insurance Program, and community health centers are incredibly important to us and people throughout this country. We are calling for immediate reauthorization of these vital initiatives, one that doesn't rob Peter to pay Paul, one that doesn't say we are going to fund CHIP by taking money away from the prevention program that provides moneys for immunizations and dealing with issues like lead paint and other issues that affect our kids.

We need emergency disaster relief that is adequate to meet the needs of all the States and localities and territories that have been impacted by these terrible natural disasters.

We need to save Americans' endangered pensions. Millions of hardworking Americans' pensions are at risk, and we are calling for bipartisan action to enact a responsible reform plan to ensure that these struggling pensions will keep on going.

We also believe that we ought to pass the bipartisan Dream Act that we spent a lot of time in the Rules Committee talking about today. Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi; Minority Whip Steny Hoyer; and the head of the Hispanic Caucus, Michelle Lujan Grisham, spent many hours at the Rules Committee today. Leader Pelosi was there for 2\1/2\ hours testifying on the need to pass the bipartisan Dream Act.

We ought to do that before we go home for Christmas. There are 800,000-plus people whose lives are in the balance because, on September 7, Donald Trump decided to end protection for the DREAMers.

Here is what the President I don't think appreciates and what some of my colleagues I think don't appreciate, but we learned about this today in the Rules Committee: we don't have until March to deal with the Dream Act. Each and every day, people are losing their status. On average, about 122 a day, we are told.

So there are people who are here who had the protections under DACA who are losing their status, losing their jobs, losing their livelihoods, and their lives have been thrown into turmoil.

Why in the world would we do that?

The majority of Americans, overwhelmingly Democrats and Republicans and Independents, all believe we should protect the DREAMers.

We heard in the Rules Committee: Well, we need more committee deliberation. Again, the President took their protections away on September 7. It is now December 21.

What have you been doing?

They said: Well, the Judiciary Committee needs to do more hearings. Well, what have they been waiting for?

The Judiciary Committee recently set up a bill, the concealed carry reciprocity bill, which allows people from States that have almost no standards to issue permits for people to carry concealed weapons to be able to go to any State in this country, no matter what those States' standards may be, basically endangering my constituents.

They brought that to the Rules Committee. They had time to bring that before the Rules Committee and before the House. There was not a single hearing. None.

We had this tax scam bill that we just voted on where 83 percent of the tax breaks go to the top 1 percent of the wealthiest in this country. Remember that bill that the President just celebrated with all my Republican friends?

That came before this House, and there wasn't a single hearing on it. But now we need to have hearings when it comes to protecting the DREAMers.

It is outrageous. These DREAMers are contributing to the betterment of our communities. We should celebrate them. We should value them. They have served in our military. They are out front leading disaster relief efforts, saving lives. They are working in Fortune 500 companies. They are going to school. They are valued members of our community. And we treat them like this?

Come on. If we brought the Dream Act to the floor, it would pass with Democratic support and a big chunk of Republican support. There is absolutely no reason to continue to stall on this issue. All that will happen as a result of our stalling is that more people will lose their status, more lives will be thrown into turmoil.

I would just say to my colleagues: It is the Christmas season. This is a time, if ever, where the spirit ought to take over, and we ought to do something good for the American people, not just for the donors, but for the people.

Giving a tax break to corporations and wealthy people will help with the fundraisers, but what we need is to help these people, these DREAMers whose lives are in the balance. We can't wait.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule, allow us to bring up a standalone Dream Act or an amendment that would allow the Dream Act to be made in order, and I hope that we can get back to regular order.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I have a lot of concerns about the way this process is unfolding.

And, yes, the gentleman is right. I am exorcised. I am exorcised that we have gone through all of these gyrations, including being on hold trying to figure out what we were going to bring to the floor all night last night, and we end up with this: basically kicking the can down the road for a few weeks and not dealing with some essential emergency priorities that are a concern to most people in this country.

Again, going back to this tax bill, that is an example of where bipartisanship might have been helpful. I don't recall a tax reform package--I don't even want to call it reform because, basically, it is a giveaway to big corporations and to wealthy special interests--that has been rammed through Congress purely on a partisan basis.

But maybe it had something to do with the fact that Democrats weren't welcome to the table.

Maybe it had to do with the fact that Democrats were locked out.

Maybe it had something to do with the fact that this so-called conference committee was a sham and, when Democrats showed up, a deal had already been struck.

That is not bipartisanship.

And maybe we are a little bit exorcised because, time and time again, when people go before the Rules Committee looking to offer legitimate, germane amendments to try to improve legislation, rather than being able to have the opportunity to offer those amendments on the floor and have a debate, we are shut out all the time.

Again, this Congress, this Republican Congress, this session, has the distinction of being the most closed session in the history of our country. That is the distinction.

So, yes, we are exorcised. And we are exorcised over the fact that, as we are about to adjourn for Christmas, hundreds of thousands of people, DREAMers in this country, their lives have been thrown into turmoil. These are people who have served in our military. They have led rescue efforts during these recent hurricanes. They contribute greatly to our community. A majority of people in this country want them to remain here, and we can't even get a vote on the House floor, notwithstanding the fact that we all know that, if we brought it to the floor, we would pass it.

Mr. Speaker, the Republican majority has prioritized their tax scam bill over reauthorizing the Children's Health Insurance Program, community health centers, helping DREAMers, and even funding our government, which brings us to where we are now, days before Christmas, scrambling to fulfill our most basic responsibilities.

But we should be doing more here than just trying to keep the lights on. We also have a responsibility toward the hundreds of thousands of young Americans--they are Americans in every way except on paper--who have been betrayed by this administration. We need to pass the Dream Act, and we need to do it now. Thirty-four of my Republican colleagues have already spoken up and urged Speaker Ryan to help these young people. The majority of this House is ready to do the right thing.

Mr. Speaker, here is our chance to do just that. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 3440, the Dream Act. The bipartisan, bicameral legislation has the support of the majority of this House and would pass if it were brought up for a vote.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my 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 gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), my colleague on the Rules Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), who spent 2\1/2\ hours today in the Rules Committee fighting on behalf of the DREAMers.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Barragan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. Speaker, I would inquire if the gentleman has any time to share.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

I yield the gentlewoman from Texas an additional 30 seconds.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is the Christmas season, so I do want to begin by thanking the gentleman from Georgia and the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee, Mr. Sessions, for always being so polite to me and to other Democrats on the committee.

But I want to say, in all candor, that, in spite of that, we are disrespected each and every day when our ideas are shut out and, in turn, our constituents are disrespected. I represent the same number of people as the Speaker of the House, as any Republican and any other Democrat in this Chamber, and yet, routinely, we are told that our ideas are not welcome.

I believe, Mr. Speaker, that every Member of this House, Democrats and Republicans alike, are entitled to basic respect. We have just gone through the most closed session in the history of our country, more than 58 closed rules in this session. Over 1,500 amendments, both Democratic and Republican amendments, were blocked. That is not what we were promised by the leadership of this House.

We are disappointed with what we are dealing with today. We are disappointed with the inaction and lack of support for the CHIP program and the community health centers funding. We think that is inadequate. We are disappointed that more funding isn't provided to deal with the opioid crisis.

I could go on and on and on, but today, we are asking the Speaker to allow a vote to help the DREAMers, men and women who came here as children, who have served in our military, who have been first responders saving lives in these disaster relief efforts, 91 percent who work and pay taxes. They are important. They are valuable. We should celebrate them.

I would say to my colleagues this is a matter of decency. The right and decent thing to do is to help them, not rationalize inaction.

Please, please, for the sake of all that is good about our country, join us in

defeating the previous question so we can have an up-or-down vote on the Dream Act, so we can actually help these 800,000 people, these young individuals who are giving so much to our country. It is the right thing to do.

This is the Christmas season. I hope you are all moved to joining us and to helping these people because, as we have learned, each and every day that we wait, more and more of them lose their status. They lose their jobs. Their lives are thrown into deeper turmoil.

It is wrong for us to go home and not deal with this. The decent thing to do is to vote on the Dream Act.

Vote ``no'' on the previous question.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, this has been a painful season for so many of us, from California to Texas to Florida, Louisiana, to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and so I am still here begging my colleagues for those who are begging in Texas.

Right now, my local officials are letting my constituents from Kashmere Gardens share in the public view how desperate they are for housing money. So this CR and this emergency supplemental should be separated. But the CR, on the other hand, should be funding CHIP completely. And DACA, the DREAMers, should be protected completely.

I introduced a bill when Hurricane Harvey came for $164 billion. That is where we should be, and I know that because of the sacrifice and loss and devastation. But also, a DREAMer lost his life trying to rescue my constituents, so, you see, we have a situation that should be corrected across the board. Fix the DREAMers, but provide for the hurricane victims.

I will say that we are going to keep on pushing beyond the $81 billion. I am glad the $1 billion that I pushed for for small businesses is in this bill.

Mr. Speaker, we have 300,000 homes underwater. Puerto Rico has no lights in homes; U.S. Virgin Islands, none, no homes. Key West still needs debris picked up.

What my constituents are saying is, because the lights are out, we are forgotten; because DREAMers don't have rights, they are forgotten.

So I am not going to stand here and ignore our children, 9 million of them who need CHIP, or our DREAMers. But I am also going to say that, whatever is in this for us, which is not a lot, I am going to keep pushing and fighting for my constituents. And the money that we are getting, get it to us now--now.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on the Rule, and H.R. 4667, one of the two underlying bills made in order.

H.R. 4667 provides $81 billion in aid to respond to the damage caused by Hurricanes Irma and Maria, and the wildfires in California.

I thank the Speaker and Rules Committee Chairman Sessions for acting favorably upon my request to bring this emergency disaster supplemental to the floor for debate and vote as a stand-alone measure.

Ever since the widespread and catastrophic destruction of Hurricane Harvey, I have been working closely with the Texas Governor and the Hurricane Harvey Taskforce to secure the help necessary for the region to rebuild.

I have witnessed firsthand the pain of storm-weary Houstonians who lost their homes, their belongings, and in many cases their jobs.

They are struggling and hurting.

So this is personal to me.

The amount of funding provided in the disaster relief package is very disappointing because it is not nearly sufficient to ameliorate the suffering still being experienced by the people of the communities in the areas affected by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria.

Congress has had more than three months to develop an aid package that is commensurate to the challenge faced by the affected states and territories in rebuilding their devastated communities.

Much of this time has been squandered by the Republican congressional leadership's all-consuming focus on ramming through the Republican Tax Scam legislation that gives 83 percent of its benefits to the top 1 percent, raises taxes on working and middle-class families, takes away health insurance from 13 million Americans, explodes the deficit by $1.5 trillion and the national debt by $1.7 trillion, and will be paid for by 5.4 trillion in cuts to vital programs Americans depend on, including an imminent $25 billion reduction in Medicare funding.

Mr. Speaker, on September 6, 2017, ten days after Hurricane Harvey struck and joined by 44 of our colleagues, I introduced H.R. 3686, the ``Hurricane Harvey Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2017,'' which provides $174 billion in disaster relief for the areas affected by Hurricane Harvey, the worst superstorm ever to strike the mainland United States.

The $174 billion in funding provided by H.R. 3686 represents a comprehensive response commensurate to the challenge; specifically, my legislation provides relief in the following amounts:

1. Housing and Community Development Fund: $50 billion

2. FEMA Disaster Relief Fund: $35 billion

3. Army Corps of Engineers--Construction: $15 billion

4. Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies: $13 billion

5. Public Transportation Emergency Relief Program: $33 billion

6. Small Business Disaster Loans Program: $2 billion

7. Emergency Conservation Activities: $650 million

8. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: $321 million

9. National Aeronautics and Space Administration: $50 million

10. Legal Services Corporation: $10 million

11. Army National Guard: $10 million

12. Army Corps of Engineers--Civil Investigations: $150 million

13. Coast Guard: $450 million

14. National Park Service Historic Preservation Fund: $800 million

15. EPA Environmental Programs and Management: $2.5 billion

16. EPA Hazardous Substance Superfund: $7 million

17. Leaking Underground Storage Tank Fund: $15 million

18. State and Tribal Assistance Grants: $600 million

19. Employment and Training Services: $100 million

20. Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund: $2.5 billion

21. Airport and Airway Trust Fund: $90 million

22. Federal-Aid Highways Emergency Relief Program: $6.5 billion

And that is just for Texas and the areas affected by Hurricane Harvey; the damage wrought by Hurricane Irma in Florida, and Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands was nearly as great in dollar terms and equal in the level of misery and suffering inflicted on the residents.

Mr. Speaker, on September 20, 2017, Hurricane Maria made landfall in Puerto Rico, along the southeastern coast, near the small town of Yabucoa.

The devastation wrought on that beautiful Caribbean oasis and its 3.5 million inhabitants, our fellow citizens of the United States, is unimaginable, except perhaps to those of us who have lived through and survived similar natural disasters, like Hurricanes Harvey and Katrina.

At least 48 people have died as a result of the storm as rescue and recovery operations proceed, a number likely to rise, especially with so many elderly, sick, and very young persons at risk.

Much of Puerto Rico's population is still without potable drinking water and large swaths of the population still lack electrical power.

Hurricane Maria destroyed 80 percent of Puerto Rico's agricultural industry, including banana, plantain and coffee crops, which translates into lost income of approximately $780 million.

On August 30, 2017, Hurricane Irma struck, inflicting horrific damage on the U.S. Virgin Islands of St. Thomas, St. Croix, and St. John, the Caribbean nations of Barbuda, St. Maarten, Cuba, and Anguilla, before making landfall in the Florida Keys.

In Florida alone, 6.4 million people were told to evacuate to safety, leading to days of jammed highways and frantic searches for gasoline amid one of the nation's largest ever emergency evacuations.

At least 124 persons are known to have lost their lives in Hurricane Irma, more than

200,000 Floridians took refuge in shelters, and nearly 6.5 million homes and businesses were without power.

Mr. Speaker, we do not yet know the full extent of the damage and devastation suffered by our fellows Americans in Florida, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico in the wake of Hurricanes Irma and Maria.

But what we do know is that the costs of recovery and reconstruction will be extensive, best estimates place the cost in the range of $50- $100 billion.

This puts in perspective the inadequacy of the amount of disaster relief provided under H.R. 4667 and why more, much more, must be done.

Mr. Speaker, right now, at this very moment, approximately 300,000 Texans--in Port Arthur, in Port Aransas, in Houston and Harris County-- remain homeless or are living in substandard homes with blue tarp roofs and infected with mold.

Today, residents of the Cashmere Gardens community are meeting with local government officials to highlight their plight and those of other residents in the northeastern part of Houston.

They are angry and frustrated and anxious, and who can blame them?

Mr. Speaker, this is personal to them; and it is personal to me.

That is why right now my highest priority is to ensure that funding that has been made available expeditiously gets in the hands of local governments so that relief can deliver the resources and services so desperately needed.

And I will be working with the Texas General Land Office and HUD Secretary Carson to relieve the emergency housing crisis in my congressional district and state.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to commend the bipartisan leadership of both Chambers, and my colleagues in the Texas congressional delegation for their diligence and commitment in bringing this package to the floor for debate and vote.

I thank Chairman Frelinghuysen and Ranking Member Lowey, and Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi, and their Senate counterparts for the work that has been done thus far and for their assistance in the work that lies ahead.

I also thank Chairman Frelinghuysen and Ranking Member Lowey, and T- HUD Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Diaz-Balart, and Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee Chair Simpson and Ranking Member Kaptur for including in the legislation before us the following beneficial measures that I requested, including:

1. Authority to establish and implement a $1 billion pilot program to provide small business disaster recovery grants, modeled on H.R. 3930, the ``Hurricane Harvey Small Business Recovery Grants Act,'' legislation I introduced on October 3, 2017 and co-sponsored by 16 of our colleagues.

2. $75 million for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Investigations account, which is to be used in areas affected by Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria, and can be used to finance the $3 million Houston-Area Watershed Assessment Study I have worked to secure and previously approved by the House.

3. The bill also includes helpful legislative language to ensure that in awarding CDBG-Disaster Relief funds to states, the Secretary of HUD should to the maximum extent practicable award grants to units of local government and public housing authorities that have the financial and administrative capacity to manage a grant awarded under the program.

Let me describe briefly some of the major provisions contained in the Disaster Relief Supplemental:

1. FEMA Disaster Relief Fund: $27.5 billion to provide critical funding to assist the ongoing federal disaster response. Allows up to $4 billion to be provided for Community Disaster Loans (CDLs).

2. Community Development Block Grants Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR): $26.1 billion for housing and infrastructure needs, $13.56 billion for grants to states, tribes, and territories for unmet housing needs and business losses.

3. $12.5 billion for mitigation efforts to help communities protect against future disasters.

4. This funding can provide for housing elevation, buyouts in the flood plain, water/sewer infrastructure enhancements, public infrastructure hardening (e.g. stormproofing public buildings).

5. Federal Highway Administration's Emergency Relief: $1.4 billion to address all current damages to federal highways caused by designated disasters.

6. $12.11 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers to repair existing damages by natural disasters and for studies and projects to reduce the risk of future natural disasters, $75 million to expedite studies to help mitigate future disaster damage.

7. 2.9 billion to help displaced students get back to school. Funding can be used for both public and private schools.

8. $3.8 billion for agriculture assistance.

9. $1.66 billion for Small Business Administration Disaster Loans to assist small businesses and homeowners repair or replace real estate, personal property, machinery and equipment, and inventory and business assets.

Mr. Speaker, there is much more work to be done in my city of Houston, and across the areas affected by the terrible, awesome storm that will be forever known simply as Hurricane Harvey, and by Hurricanes Irma and Maria.

That is why I am disappointed that only $81 billion is being provided at this time.

That is why it must be emphasized and understood that this can only be understood as a partial response because much more funding will be needed to provide our fellow Americans in Texas, Florida, Louisiana, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands the help and support they need to restore their communities to their previous greatness.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I also thank all of the members of the Rules Committee for the exceptional service they provide to the House in reviewing legislation that will come to the floor.

I particularly want to thank my colleagues on the Democratic side for honoring the values of our country by advocating for an amendment to include the Dream Act as we go forward. I would hope that most of our Members would vote ``no'' on this rule and not allow for the previous question to come forward so that it will allow for the Dream Act to be considered.

I want to thank the chairman of the committee and the distinguished Members on the Republican side, as well as the Democratic side, for the hospitality extended to the Democratic whip, Mr. Hoyer; the chair of the Hispanic Caucus, Congresswoman Michelle Lujan Grisham; and to me.

At that meeting, Mr. Speaker, I told the colleagues that we are in a tradition of having great Democratic and Republican Presidents who have been supportive of newcomers to our country and who recognize that immigration is the constant reinvigoration of America.

When people come to our country with their hopes and dreams and aspirations to make the future better for their families, they are identifying with an American ideal: all of us having the responsibility to make the future better for the next generation. And their commitment, their courage, their optimism, their determination for a better future makes America more American. Every newcomer who comes here with that determination makes America more American.

Among those people are our DREAMers. This is a very discrete group that we are hoping to protect in the Dream Act. Certainly, as our colleagues acknowledged this morning, we have important work to do on comprehensive immigration reform. We have a responsibility to protect our borders, North and South, and anything that flies in, East Coast, West Coast, and through the Gulf. But the fact is that--as was pointed out by our colleague, Congresswoman Lujan Grisham, the chair of the Hispanic Caucus: think of the DREAMers as a discrete piece that needs protection now and not wait for the entire comprehensive immigration reform to be resolved before we deal with this emergency.

Just as we treat CHIP, 9 million children are depending on CHIP, but we are not waiting until we revise the whole healthcare system in order to pass CHIP, nor did we. When we passed CHIP, it was before the Affordable Care Act had passed.

But let me say why it is really important for this to happen now. Unfortunately--and, really, I was pleased that our Speaker registered his disagreement with President Trump when he took the action he did in regard to DACA in September. When he did that and said, ``I will give Congress until March to pass a law,'' what he didn't understand is that he was putting these DREAMers at a distinct disadvantage.

Every day, over 100, 120-some DACA recipients, DACA-eligible recipients, lose their status. That means, if they are working or whatever they are doing, they lose their status to do that in our country. Over 10,000 have lost status since the President's announcement--well over 10,000.

So we can't wait until March to do this because it had consequences known to us but unforeseen by the White House and by the President. And I don't think, in his heart, that the President intended to hurt these people in the very cruel way that they are being hurt by the actions that are being taken.

We can't wait until March. We need action. We need it soon. We need it to be bipartisan. That is what we have been working on--not me; Members, Member-driven bipartisan cooperation in trying to find a path that addresses the concerns that some have about the border--and we all do--and also addresses the Dream Act.

As the President said: Let's call it DACA.

Okay. We will call it DACA.

So here we are. I said at the beginning of my remarks that we have been blessed in our country by Presidents who have recognized the value of immigration; that our country would be in stagnation if we didn't have this constant reinvigoration of visitors to our country.

When President Obama acted because Congress had not acted to protect the DREAMers and their parents, that was really important for him to do because Congress had not acted. However, it is important to note that President Reagan, when he was President and President George Herbert Walker Bush was at that time Vice President, Congress did act through the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. They did act. And President Reagan's observation was they didn't go far enough.

So he took further executive action called Family Fairness to protect people in our country, immigrants in our country. Actually, President Reagan and President George Herbert Walker Bush protected a higher percentage of newcomers to our country than President Obama did with his DACA and DAPA action, a higher percentage because they understood the value to our country of newcomers.

President Clinton continued all of that. President George W. Bush was a champion and continues to be a champion on recognizing the value of immigration. He has spoken about it intellectually, with respect, from the heart for people coming to our country, and he has urged us to do so.

He couldn't get the cooperation of his own party when he was President to cooperate for comprehensive immigration reform, even though when we had the power as Democrats, we supported it. But he could not get the 60 votes in the Senate. But, nonetheless, he continues to be a champion, really, for immigration reform.

And here we have a new President who campaigned on the backs of newcomers to our country and who made immigrants villains. It is a complete change from the Republican Party, from a commitment to valuing newcomers and diversity in our country. It is a complete departure from President Reagan, President George Herbert Walker Bush, President George W. Bush, just to name the Republican Presidents.

So we find ourselves in this situation, but that doesn't change the fact that we have a responsibility to all of God's children to treat them with respect, and when we can do something to be helpful, we should.

There is harm that is coming to the DREAMers every day, because they are losing status. Regardless of what some may say, some are being deported. This may be unknown to the President, but it is not unknown to us in this Congress.

I want to thank Congresswoman Lujan Grisham, the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and her members. I want to thank Congresswoman Judy Chu, the chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus; Congresswoman Yvette Clarke,

who, working with the Congressional Black Caucus, has been a champion in that caucus; and all of the Members on both sides of the aisle who are striving to find a path.

One path that we have open to us is to defeat this rule, to allow the Dream Act to come up, and to put that in the mix as we go forward.

Again, this isn't an issue, this isn't a bill. It is a value, and that is the conversation we had with President Trump. This isn't an issue, but it is a value. This is about who we are as a nation and how we respect who we are as a nation. That is why, I believe, that President Trump will be receptive to signing a bill. He does want--and we are all concerned for--border security. We will work with him on that, but let's start by putting on the Record the support of this House for a recognition that we are immigrants, by and large. Unless some of you are Native Americans--and how proud we are of our Native American community in our country and how blessed we are--most of us come from immigrant families.

It was interesting to me in doing some reading on some of this. I am very proud of my own Italian-American heritage. My grandmother was born in Baltimore, Maryland. Her parents were from Venice and Genoa. My father's family from Abruzzo. We are very proud of all of that, which makes us respect the pride that other people take in their heritage.

What was interesting to me in recent days, because I remember--I didn't suffer this, but I know my father and others did: Italians were called ``wops.''

Do you know what wops means?

It means ``without papers.'' That is what they were called: without papers.

These people are without papers, but in every way they are American.

I just want to tell you a couple of stories. One is Fernando Meza Gutierrez. Fernando lives in my district. Fernando's family came to the U.S. Fernando came to the U.S. when he was 9 years old. In high school, Fernando was an AP scholar and received the International Baccalaureate Diploma and the Achievement Award in Foreign Language for French.

Fernando continued to excel academically at Santa Clara University, where he graduated cum laude with a double major in biology and French.

Now a third-year doctoral student at UC San Francisco, Fernando also works at UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, where he is working hard to provide new insights into many diseases and disorders.

I just want to tell you one other story. Lisette Diaz was just 6 years old when her family brought her to the U.S. from Chile. Growing up in Long Island, Lisette excelled in school and was involved in her community. She went on to attend Harvard, where she received numerous awards and participated in a variety of extracurricular activities. Lisette recently graduated from Harvard with honors.

Lisette and other DREAMers have so much to contribute to our country, but Donald Trump and other Republicans have made their agenda clear. They want to shut down DACA and DAPA and deport hundreds of thousands of DREAMers and parents of Americans.

That is what DREAMers think. We don't want them to think that. We want them to think that the President understands their value, the value of our DREAMers, and the challenges that they face.

If we don't do something soon, Lisette will be deported back to Chile, a country where she hasn't lived since she was 6 years old.

There are just thousands and thousands and thousands of stories of success, of those serving in our military, attending our schools, teaching our children, working in high-level positions, because they all have that immigrant attitude of hard work, hard work ethic, a work ethic, a faith ethic, a family ethic, a sense of community.

In the sense and spirit of community, let's defeat this rule and allow the Dream Act to come forward.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak about H.R. 1370, ``Department of Homeland Security Blue Campaign Authorization Act of 2017'' [Further Continuing Resolution].

This resolution is an imperfect vehicle for appropriations for FY 2018, because it does not reflect an effort to include bipartisan solutions to remaining Democratic priorities.

H.R. 1370 not only fails to address remaining unsolved issues, but it also fails to fund the government through the end of FY 2018.

Republicans have not consulted Democrats on anything that is included in this year-end legislation, accordingly the majority should not expect Democrats to vote on a bill that does not include the following priorities:

A bipartisan, long-term reauthorization of the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP):

CHIP, which provides health coverage to 9 million children, expired nearly three months ago.

Republicans have only put forward legislation that cuts other critical health programs, an unacceptable trade-off.

States have already begun taking steps to shut down their CHIP programs, and I will not vote for a Continuing Resolution (CR) that prevents children from obtaining health coverage.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program:

According to a report by the Center for American Progress, 122 DREAMers are losing their protection every single day that Congress fails to act.

Disaster aid:

My district--Houston, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are short-changed in the supplemental proposed by the majority.

Among other glaring omissions, the Republican supplemental fails to include funding for their Medicaid programs, which are facing unprecedented demands following these ruinous hurricanes.

An agreement to lift the Budget Control Act (BCA) spending caps:

In the three months since a CR was passed in September, Republicans have not worked on a budget agreement that ensures Congress can adequately fund defense and nondefense priorities and adhere to the principle of parity between defense and non-defense spending.

H.R. 1370 would provide $4.5 billion in emergency funding for the Department of Defense, as requested by the Trump administration on November 6.

Most of that money is allocated for missile defense programs primarily targeting North Korea, an area that President Trump has failed to approach diplomatically and instead, has resorted to inflammatory threats, tweets, and other non-presidential approaches typical of this administration.

In contrast, H.R. 1370 would provide a mere four-week extension of current funding for domestic needs.

This continuing resolution would force both parties to revisit the domestic programs in January.

Mr. Speaker, I will not accept this scheme and I highlight the importance of parity between defense and domestic programs in order to provide adequate funds for veterans' health, a pension bailout, opioid- fighting programs, and medical research.

Another major concern of this bill includes the unrevised extension of government surveillance powers; Congress has yet to agree on a proper revision of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Section 702 of FISA was intended to be revised this month; however, the majority has failed to address that issue, adding one more unresolved priority to the list of neglected legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that we have again been placed in the position of having to fund the government through the device of a continuing resolution rather than through the normal appropriations process of considering and voting on separate spending bills usually reported by the Committee on Appropriations.

The reason for this last minute resolution is due to the Republican leadership being solely focused on cutting taxes on the wealthy rather than coming up with a plan to keep the government open and serving its citizens.

Republicans control the House, Senate, and the White House--they should have the votes to pass a CR on their own if they refuse to compromise with Democrats.

The government shutdown of 2013, which was manufactured by the Republican majority lasted 16 days and cost taxpayers $24 billion.

The enormous harm and disruption of the lives of federal employees and the people they serve, however, was irreparable.

As I stated, Mr. Speaker, this Continuing Resolution is not perfect and it only funds the government until January 19, 2018.

As seasoned Members of Congress, we have been in this challenging position before.

But working together in a spirit of goodwill, bipartisanship, and realism, I believe we can reach a long-term agreement that will avert a shutdown of government operations and the disruption a shutdown causes to the lives of millions of Americans who depend upon federal programs to do their jobs, educate their kids, care for their parents, and contribute to their communities.

Our constituents look to the Congress and the President to make responsible choices and decisions to keep the nation safe, the economy prosperous, and to make necessary and prudent investments in education, healthcare and research, transportation and infrastructure, economic development, science, the arts and humanities, and the environment.

This is, after all, just another way of saying that the American people expect their leaders in Washington be guided by the Constitution's Preamble and pursue policies and provide the resources that will:

establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for

the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure

the blessings of liberty.

The funding priorities that have been floated by the Trump Administration fail this essential test of leadership because they are irresponsible, impracticable, unrealistic, and, in many respects, insensitive or indifferent to the deleterious impact they will have on the lives of real people living in the real world.

They do not command majority support in the Congress or of the public.

To win such support, I believe that it is essential that any subsequent continuing resolution or omnibus appropriations bill achieves the following goals and objectives:

``To establish justice'' and ``To promote the general welfare'':

1. Full funding for the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division and the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights so that they have funds needed to enforce laws protecting civil rights, voting rights, and prosecuting hate crimes.

2. Fully funds community development block grants and low income housing programs in urban and rural communities.

3. Fully funds the Legal Services Corporation so that working and low-income persons who lack an army of lobbyists to represent them in Washington will at least have the assistance of counsel to defend their legal rights in courts of law.

4. Fully funds programs providing food assistance to housebound seniors, such as Meals on Wheels.

5. Fully funds programs that provide students from low and moderate- income families access to affordable access to higher education and provides students with special needs the support needed to receive the free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE) guaranteed by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA Act).

6. Fully funds before and after school programs and other student enrichment programs that help students succeed.

7. Fully funds programs that make federal housing safer through energy efficient heating and cooling systems.

8. Preserves tax credit programs that help revitalize low income communities.

9. Fully funds the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy programs developing the next generation of clean energy and transportation technologies.

``Provide for the common defense'':

1. Provides robust funding for the Department of State and USAID to advance national security interests in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and to end violent conflicts in trouble spots which could threaten the security interests of the United States.

2. Provides adequate funding for United Nations peacekeeping missions throughout the world and distribution of food aid to people in developing and famine stricken countries, such as South Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, and Nigeria.

``To ensure domestic tranquility'':

1. Fully funds cost-sharing reduction subsidies, or CSRs, to compensate insurers for reducing deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums for low-income customers on the Affordable Care Act exchanges.

2. Protects the adequacy, solvency, and integrity of the Medicare and Medicaid programs, which provide health sustaining support for 70 million Americans.

3. Fully funds the National Institutes of Health research programs so that patient access to lifesaving treatments is not delayed.

4. Does not convert funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention into block grants which would hindering the nation's ability to respond swiftly and effectively to public health crises like Ebola, Zika, and HIV/AIDS.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that if all members of the House and Senate work together, we can reach agreement on an appropriate budget framework that that invests in the American

people, preserves our national security, and keeps faith with the values that have served our nation well and made the United States the leading nation on earth.