Floor Statements

I thank my good friend from North Carolina.

Let me first address the issue that we just heard about on the floor and I seem to hear about every time I turn on the news when a Member of the other party is speaking about it. It's this suggestion that Members of Congress want to keep some special treatment for themselves in terms of health insurance.

The fact is that the vast majority of large employers pay for most of their employees' health insurance costs. Members of Congress are part of what is called the Federal Employees Health Benefits plan. On average, about 72 percent of our insurance is paid for by our employer.

I know in my case, since I have a family and had a daughter that had a massive malignant brain tumor, I'm not going to go without insurance. But I pay $6,000 a year, which I suspect a lot of my colleagues do. And then I pay another few thousand in terms of copayments and deductibles. And yet mine is one of the best plans that you can get with Blue Cross Blue Shield. So that's not out of the mainstream in terms of health insurance.

The fact is that the President only delayed a reporting requirement with regard to large employers.

Now, let me get back to this case in point with regard to FEMA. When we have a natural disaster, such as this hurricane that's bearing down on the coast of Louisiana, the Federal Government comes in as a team. We know that. I know Mr. Carter knows that. I know my good friend from Kentucky knows that the Federal agencies all get together as a team.

And they know how important, for example, the Army Corps of Engineers is. The Army Corps of Engineers works hand-in-glove with FEMA. The Interior Department provides firefighter and emergency response before and after a disaster. We just had these large fires in California and Idaho. The fire is out so now they're furloughed. Is that really what we want to do?

I greatly thank my close friend from North Carolina.

The U.S. Geological Survey has to activate stream gauges and storm surge measurements. It's technical, but it's important. But 99 percent of the USGS is furloughed.

The Small Business Administration Office of Disaster Assistance comes in in an emergency and tries to help small businesses that have been wiped out, which invariably happens and will happen with this storm, unfortunately. But they're all furloughed. They're not going to be able to be there.

The Natural Resources Conservation Service, they play a critical role. Ninety-nine percent of those employees are furloughed. The Farm Services Agency, 99 percent of those employees are furloughed.

That's the problem. They need to work as a team, and here we are with these bits and pieces of the government, and we think we're going to patch this up. We're not. The fact is that the whole of government needs to be put back to work. That's our argument.

Let's do this the right way, not in this kind of piecemeal fashion. That's

why we're forced to vote against these things. The fact is we voted to keep them open. The side that's proposing this piecemeal approach voted to shut down the government.

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

Mr. Speaker, the public has been witness to extraordinary divisiveness between the Republicans and Democrats in this House. But I think it's important that the public bear in mind that we have a law that was passed, passed substantially in the House and the Senate-- granted, it was primarily by Democrats, of course. But it was signed by the President. And then we had a Presidential election. A major issue was the Affordable Care Act. That's why it was called ObamaCare. And President Obama won by 5 million votes, Mr. Speaker.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the issue is the funding of the Federal Government. Virtually all the Democrats voted to fund the government. Virtually all of the other side, Mr. Speaker, voted not to.

So now, for the Republican majority to come up and try to open up different agencies, suggesting that we don't want to do that--they're the ones that closed them, Mr. Speaker. We're the ones that voted to keep them open. What we want to do is to open up the government. And if we do it in bits and pieces, we create more dissension within the Federal workforce. We shouldn't do that. The American public deserves better from us.

Mr. Speaker, this Republican shutdown is an outrageous abdication of Congress' responsibility. It didn't need to be this way.

In fact, if the House leadership were to call up a clean continuing resolution appropriations bill today it would pass. There are a sufficient number of votes from both sides of the political aisle to pass the measure. So far, however, the House Republican leadership has refused to do so, afraid of extremists within its own caucus--the so- called Ted Cruz Tea Party faction--whose demand is to shut down the government until the Affordable Care Act is either repealed or delayed.

So the American people's government has shut down. Ninety percent of the employees of the Environmental Protection Agency have been furloughed. Eighty-four percent of the employees of the Department of Interior all over the country, but mostly in the Western States, have all been furloughed. Seventy percent of the employees of our essential intelligence agencies have now been furloughed. Recipients of the Women, Infants, and Children program, the most vulnerable mothers and children, have had their livelihoods jeopardized. The National Institutes of Health have had to turn away 30 children with cancer from clinical trials.

We in this House must end this shutdown. This debate isn't even about the budget. The President and the Senate have already agreed to trillions of dollars of cuts set by the so-called Ryan Republican budget even though this draconian budget will endanger basic government operations, it will disinvest in our children's future, and it will trigger even more Federal employee furloughs and possible RIFs.

Rather, this shutdown is about a measure that strengthens insurance

coverage for the roughly 260 million Americans who have insurance. It will also eliminate preexisting conditions and lifetime limits and makes health insurance available and affordable to roughly 40 million uninsured Americans through State exchanges where insurance companies compete to provide coverage, and through expansion of the Medicaid program.

The Affordable Care Act is the law of the land. It has been affirmed as constitutional by the Republican-dominated Supreme Court and by a 5 million vote majority of the American people with the defeat of the Presidential candidate who promised to repeal it less than a year ago.

Regardless of where one may stand on the issue of the Affordable Care Act--aka ObamaCare--our Democratic process for enacting laws and setting policy should not be held hostage to the threat of a government shutdown. It sets a terrible precedent for the future.

My Republican colleagues continue to demand concessions with serious long-term consequences in exchange for funding a spending bill for just a relatively few more days, another 45 days or so. They want long-term concessions at their preferred inadequate spending levels.

What unreasonable demands will be made when this latest CR expires in 2 months or 1 month? These attempts to overturn the democratic results of the last election by threat-making and hostage-taking must end now. We should do our job, fund the government, and we should remove the looming threat to the global economy in the form of the expiration of the debt ceiling, which will occur in just a couple of weeks.

Not content with the economic destruction and hardship brought by their government shutdown and their refusal to let the Federal Government play its historic role to stimulate a strong economic recovery, House Republicans continue to threaten the full faith and credit of the United States.

As President Obama noted, if the tables were turned and you had a Republican President and a Democratic Speaker, as you did during the Reagan administration, neither Speaker O'Neill nor the American people would tolerate what is going on today.

In fact, that is the situation that we have today--a broken Congress, a situation where the American people's voices aren't heard or represented. It is time for us to heed the American people, to let the majority of this Congress determine public policy.

Let's stop the extremism. Let's be responsible. Let's pass this continuing resolution clean and go on with the business of the government.

Mr. Speaker, this is unbelievable. All we need is less than 20 Republicans and we can open up the government today. You will have the Democrats voting to open up the government. Just give us 20 Republican votes and we can open it today.

Instead, because of the Ted Cruz Tea Party faction within your caucus that somehow has managed to intimidate the Republican leadership, you are willing to bring this country to its knees--to furlough 800,000 Federal employees, to cause suffering around the country, and to cause billions of dollars in economic damage to our economy.

How can you do this? This is so wrong.

Today, open it, give us 20 Republican votes. Get our country functioning again. Let us do our job. This is an outrageous abdication of responsibility.

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank my friend from Georgia.

The problem is that we are creating, really, a politics of divisiveness here because we are exempting some agencies at the expense of others. Even in the Department of the Interior, we still have 84 percent of Interior Department employees who will be furloughed even when we open up the national parks. The vast majority of Federal employees are without jobs. They may not be as visible to the public, but it doesn't mean they aren't performing essential services. That's the problem--picking and choosing. Tomorrow, we will be back with another agency. That's what we are trying to avoid. We are trying to do it appropriately.

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

Mr. Speaker, as Yogi Berra would say, it's deja vu all over again.

Yesterday, the majority rushed to the floor this very bill to partially open the National Park Service, the Smithsonian, the Holocaust Museum, and the National Gallery of Art. We had a spirited debate, and the House failed to pass this bill.

But now, here we are back again, debating the very same bill. It was a bad idea yesterday, and it certainly hasn't improved over the last 24 hours.

I'll explain why. Because, instead of reopening the entire Federal Government, or even the entire Interior Department, the majority has resorted to singling out publicly visible programs for action, while leaving thousands of important functions of government shut down and hundreds of thousands of Federal employees furloughed.

It's time to stop using Federal employees as pawns in this cynical game.

Mr. Speaker, this GOP act of desperation is evidence of how politically

bankrupt this position has become. It's degenerating down to picking winners and losers among Federal workers. The American public is getting burned, and some of the political heat is finally getting to the Republican majority.

So now they would allow workers at the Smithsonian, the Holocaust Museum, and the Gallery of Art, and a few of the employees directly involved in the operation of our National Park System, to return to work.

Do they really think that this is going to save them from the public's wrath?

Under this bill, thousands of National Park Service employees involved in historic preservation and national recreation programs and maintenance and construction still remain furloughed.

And what about the 10,200 furloughed employees of the Bureau of Land Management, the 7,751 furloughed employees at the Fish and Wildlife Service, the 18,800 furloughed employees of the Forest Service, the 16,000 furloughed employees of the Social Security Administration?

Doesn't the majority value their work or support the important programs that they carry out?

We should value all of our Federal employees. We should value the scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey and the health professionals at the Infectious Disease Control and Immunization Program at the Centers for Disease Control just as much as the park ranger and museum workers.

How do you explain to the Library of Congress workers that they are less important than their Smithsonian counterparts?

I want to see our national parks and museums reopened, as do all of the Democrats on this side of the aisle. We want to open the government, and we would vote today to do so if you'd let the bill come to the floor, because we want to see all 561 units of the National Wildlife Refuge System opened, 155 national forests, the 866 areas of the National Landscape Conservation System reopened. But you're keeping all those closed.

Does the majority really believe that those are not important, that they don't deserve to be opened, that the public doesn't deserve to be able to use those national assets?

This bill is a bandaid, and it won't stanch the open rage that the public is beginning to feel. This shutdown is disrupting the work of all Federal workers and the American public that depend on the work that they do. It's an attempt at a quick fix to deflect the political heat the majority is facing.

This idea that we'll pick and choose among Federal activities, which ones are allowed to operate and what has to remain shut down, is politically bankrupt, and it's morally bankrupt as well, Mr. Speaker.

I implore my Republican colleagues to abandon the junior Senator from Texas' plan to play politics with the economy for a dead-on-arrival idea from an extremist ideologue.

The President has reaffirmed that he would veto these cherry-picked bills. We know that the Senate will reject them. So this is a waste of time. People are out of work, and we're wasting our time on this.

If we could just have 20 Republicans, less than that, vote on a clean CR, it would pass. The government would open today. And you won't do it because you're afraid of this ideological extremist faction within your party. You don't want to get them upset.

It's time to stop these games. The House GOP needs to let our hostages go and get on with the real business of governing.

Let's vote on a clean CR. Reopen the whole government.

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

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the very distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I'm honored to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the very distinguished Democratic whip of the House.

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

It is my great pleasure to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlelady from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum) on the Interior Appropriations Committee.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining on this side?

At this point I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the ranking member of the National Resources Committee.

It is my great pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the ranking member on the Education and Workforce Committee and former chair of the Natural Resources Committee.

(Mr. GEORGE E. MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) on the Appropriations Committee.

I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).

Mr. Speaker, I would now like to yield 30 seconds to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the distinguished gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Ben Ray Lujan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to share with the House the fact that the National Wildlife Federation, America's largest conservation organization, said it best. They just sent us a letter:

House Members from both sides of the aisle say the votes

are there to pass a clean continuing resolution. Speaker

Boehner should do the right thing and allow an up-or-down

vote on that bill.

Now, the problem with these votes, Mr. Speaker, is that they shouldn't be necessary. If in fact we were going to open the government and not keep it shut for weeks on end, you wouldn't be doing this. This would all be moot. The reason you're doing this is to have some excuse to continue the shutdown. That's the problem with these votes.

The other problem is that you voted to shut down the national parks. You did it last week. You voted to shut down the National Institutes of Health. You did it last weekend. You voted to shut down the Veterans Administration, and now you want to reopen just them.

We voted against shutting down those agencies. We voted against shutting down the government. That's what you should be doing. Give us a clean vote. Let's get on about our business. Stop this nonsense.

I yield back the balance of my time.

House Plan to Reopen Only National Parks Falls Short

Washington, DC.--The House of Representatives is

considering several bills that would provide continuing

resolution funding for select parts of the federal

government, including one that would re-open National Parks.

Larry Schweiger, president and CEO of the National Wildlife

Federation, said today:

``This bill fails to address the concerns of sportsmen.

While re-opening the National Parks is an element of our

displeasure over the government shutdown, there are a wide

range of public lands that this bill would leave shuttered,

including National Forests, National Monuments and National

Wildlife Refuges.

``House members from both sides of the aisle say the votes

are there to pass a clean continuing resolution. Speaker

Boehner should do the right thing and allow an up or down

vote on that bill.''

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

I trust everyone in this body can imagine how much affection and respect I have for the national parks, that which I share with my very good friend from Idaho. We love the National Park System. I love the Smithsonian. When we have that family night, there is nothing more wonderful than taking our children to the Museums of American History and Natural History. I am so proud of what the Smithsonian offers the American people. The Holocaust Museum as well. You can't describe what happens to you emotionally when you walk through the Holocaust Museum.

But notwithstanding how immensely valuable these institutions are to this country and how proud this Congress is of those institutions, I have to rise to oppose this legislation because it is not the way to do business. By that I mean, the idea of shutting down the whole government, and then when we get an adverse reaction from our constituents, we pick and choose and we open up a few.

What happens tomorrow when the Social Security Administration comes to us and says, What about the 16,000 employees we just furloughed? These other folks got an exemption. How about us? It's going to happen every day with every agency until the Republican majority in the House realizes

that every Federal agency is there for a purpose, and it's a purpose that serves the needs of the American people.

But here we are. It hasn't even been 24 hours, and the House majority is feeling the heat from the government shutdown. We on this side warned the majority that you were playing with fire to shut down our government, but it is the American people who are going to get burned. Now, apparently, the heat has spread to the people responsible.

Instead of reopening the entire Federal Government, which is exactly what we should be doing, the majority rushes to the floor a bill, under expedited procedures and with no opportunity for amendment, to reopen just four entities: the National Park System, the Smithsonian, the Holocaust Museum, and the National Gallery of Art. Of course, the National Gallery of Art should be open because it just so goes without having been said that, I think, we all share experiences of walking through the National Gallery. I mean, you can't find, really, anything comparable throughout the world except, perhaps, in the Louvre and in very few museums--but, my gosh, are we proud of it. Of course, the Smithsonian should be open. Of course, the Holocaust Museum should be open. Of course, our national parks should be open to serve the American people.

Now, if we open these, at least our Federal employees will have a place to visit while the rest of the Federal Government is shut down, but it is so unfair to the rest of the government to pick and choose a very few agencies, which has no real impact on the budget, which is the issue here we are supposed to be dealing with. It's a marginal amount of money.

This is an act of desperation. It's evidence, really, of how politically bankrupt this position of shutting down the government has become--degenerating down to picking winners and losers among Federal workers, just so as to dissipate the political heat, it will allow workers at the Smithsonian, at the Holocaust Museum, at the National Gallery of Art, and only those employees directly involved in the operation of our National Park System, to return to work. Even in the case of the national parks, thousands of National Park Service employees who are involved in historic preservation and in national recreation programs and in construction remain furloughed.

What about the 10,200 furloughed employees in the Bureau of Land Management? I don't have many of them. I have one, but I don't have anywhere near as much of a presence of the Bureau of Land Management as my good friend from Idaho has.

Can you justify the 7,750 furloughed employees of the Fish and Wildlife Service? This is hunting season, but you've got to close down these fish and wildlife refuges.

There are 16,000 furloughed employees at the Social Security Administration who want to be serving the elderly and disabled.

How about the medical researchers at the National Institutes of Health? When NIH comes to us and tells us what they're doing in terms of cancer research, in terms of the research on Alzheimer's and the like, what do we tell them? Are you going to tell them, ``We'll expedite under special procedures, and we'll pick you up? we'll take care of you next?'' Is that any way to run this government?

How about the Centers for Disease Control and the immunization program workers? Shouldn't they be valued as much as the park rangers and museum workers, who, obviously, have earned their value as well?

This bill is a bandaid on a shutdown that is disrupting the work of all Federal workers and the American people who rely upon the Federal Government to do its job. But for them to do their jobs, we have to do our job, and these exemptions aren't doing our job--picking and choosing what Federal activities we are going to allow to operate and which ones are going to remain shut down. It's going to prove itself to be a politically bankrupt as well as a morally bankrupt position. It is not fair to send 800,000 people home not knowing whether they're going to be able to pay their mortgages, take care of their children--sitting at home when they want to be serving the American people.

It is time to stop the games. The Republican leadership needs to let its hostages go and get on with the real business of governing. Let us vote on a clean CR and reopen the government. If we could vote on a clean CR--and if a majority were all we needed, which is what the Founding Fathers anticipated--that democracy would rule--it would pass in the Senate and it would pass in the House, and we would be done with this Kabuki exercise. This stuff is beneath us.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I say to my very good friend from Kentucky that that's a wonderful analogy, because this bill is an orphan that you're separating from the parent bill, where it belongs.

Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the very distinguished ranking member of the Labor, Health, and Human Services Appropriations Committee, as well as the chair of our Steering and Policy Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to Mr. Levin from Michigan, the very distinguished ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to Mr. DeFazio from Oregon, the ranking member of the Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

It is with great pleasure that I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the very distinguished minority leader.

Mr. Speaker, today 30 child cancer patients were turned away from NIH's clinical center because three-quarters of the staff was furloughed.

With that, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) on the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, there are millions of visitors every year to the Bureau of Land Management. And yet the entire BLM is closed down because of the shutdown.

I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), the distinguished ranking member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, even after we exempt national parks, 81 percent of the entire Interior Department will be furloughed.

I yield the remaining 30 seconds to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter).

Will the gentleman yield?

I thank my very good friend.

As my friend understands, the reason why the World War II Memorial was closed down was for security reasons so that no one can damage it because there are no employees able to protect it.

But I really ask sincerely, because you know better than I, about the revenue, $1 billion that's raised from the Bureau of Land Management. You talked about the hundreds of millions that come in from national parks. BLM raises even more, and yet BLM is being completely furloughed. So we are losing revenue.

Wouldn't my good friend agree that this is not the way to run the government's business or to operate the Interior Department?

I suspect we have an agreement that what we need to do is to pass a clean CR, and that fixes the whole problem so we don't have to do these little bills one after the other. That's what we need, a clean CR.

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

I thank my good friend.

Mr. Speaker, apparently we're here, largely, because a bunch of folks on the Republican side--Tea Party folks--fancy themselves strict constructionists. But I would remind them that the Founders set up the Senate to ensure that the House would act rationally and responsibly on a consistent basis.

George Washington warned us against factualism. They expected us to fund the government, to pay our debts, and they underscored the fact that when you have a disagreement, it ought to be resolved democratically.

So here we have a bill that passed the House and the Senate. The conference report passed the House and Senate. It was signed by the President. We had two national referenda, called Presidential elections. President Obama wins by 5 million votes.

We don't have the right to repeal ObamaCare. Call it what you want, it's the law of the land.

But now I understand that we are being told that unless you gut this legislation for an entire year, the Republican majority will not even fund the government for 45 days. Really? What kind of a deal is that? That's not reasonable.

The idea that you would send 800,000 people home tomorrow, not knowing when they can come back to work, not even allowing them back to their offices, and take billions of dollars out of this economy, erode the confidence that people in the United States and around the world ought to be able to have in the United States, and you are going to do all this because you want to repeal a bill that is the law of the land, just because you have the leverage that you can hold up the government from being able to operate for 45 days? That's nuts.

Our Founders would be ashamed of what this Congress has become. We're dysfunctional. We ought to be ashamed of ourselves. This ought to be defeated.

Mr. Speaker, so it's after 1 a.m. on October 1 and the government has shut down. And what's the best that we could get from the House Republican majority? A proposal to invite conferees to sit down and talk about resolving our differences.

The fact is that we've known what our responsibility was--it is to fund the government. It's not to allow 800,000 Federal employees to be told they can't go into work, they can't get paid. It's not to close down our national parks and monuments. It's not to take hundreds of millions--potentially billions--of dollars out of our economy needlessly. It's not to disrupt the stock markets. It's not to create these financial crises. These are crises of our own doing.

We've got a great country, a strong economy, a terrific society, and all we can do is to erode trust and confidence in our government. We should be ashamed of ourselves.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to address this bill in general.

This bill is an act of political theater. It attempts to cover up the underlying problem of a government shutdown with what in essence is a rhetorical gimmick. The bill claims to support our troops, which the majority knows that the minority party wants to do at least as much as they do. There's no disagreement in terms of the desire to make sure that all of our noble men and women in uniform and the civilians who work for the Defense Department and the contractors that contribute to our national security are all paid. We all want to do that. So why do we have this bill?

Well, this bill attempts to reassure the public, who might be confused, as to what the adverse impacts of a government shutdown might be.

Mr. Speaker, it's important that the public understand that even with this bill, what we will do tonight, what the majority will do tonight will, nevertheless, fail to provide the materials essential to support and maintain the readiness of our U.S. forces.

I'll list any number of activities that will, notwithstanding this bill, go unfunded if the government is shut down. And because of the action that really the majority will take tonight, it looks increasingly likely that will happen at the beginning of next week.

Mr. Speaker, when we finish tonight, we will set in motion a situation where military medical treatment facilities will have to scale back operations. They will try not to impact inpatient care or acute and emergency outpatient care; but routine medical and dental procedures, elective surgery is likely to be stopped. Most maintenance activities would stop. Military members would continue to receive private sector care under TRICARE, but medical provider bills are going to go unpaid until appropriations are enacted.

New contracts, including contract renewals and extensions and the issuance of task orders, those are not likely to be executed. Any new contract will not be paid until appropriations are enacted. Death benefits to the family members of military personnel killed in the line of duty are not likely to be paid until appropriations are enacted; in other words, they won't be if the government is shut down.

Almost all travel for temporary duty and some permanent change of station moves would be delayed, canceled, or cut short. Many professional training and educational activities would be stopped.

The bill fails to fund the materiel support needed to conduct training and ensure the readiness of our forces at home. Regular training exercises, including large-scale training rotations that are absolutely essential, depend on equipment that is in proper working order, facilities that have been properly maintained, and the supplies needed to support soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines.

The bill fails to fund the procurement and research accounts that maintain the technological advantage of U.S. forces. It fails to fund the ships, the aircraft, ground equipment, sensors, and ammunition that our troops rely upon in combat. My friend from Georgia knows that about 40 percent of the DOD appropriations bill goes to acquire and enhance this equipment. Failure to fund these accounts hurts the readiness of U.S. forces and degrades our defense industrial base.

Now let me mention some of the other activities that will not be exempted, notwithstanding the fact that this bill will be passed virtually overwhelmingly. The Department of Veterans Affairs personnel charged with claims processing for veterans, including those returning from the last 12 years of combat, will not be paid. This legislation will nullify the progress that has been made by the VA on reducing the unacceptably high claims backlog.

A shutdown cuts foreign military financing to Israel, a vital partner and ally that depends upon $3.1 billion being provided at the beginning of the fiscal year; and, thus, it undermines our national security in an ever-changing and unstable region by degrading Israel's ability to maintain a qualitative military advantage.

These cuts will also have a direct impact on the industrial base throughout the United States, costing countless jobs that are funded through Israel's purchase of goods and services. Additionally, a shutdown will have a direct impact on our counterterrorism efforts, will halt programs that combat transnational crime, terrorism, and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. This could severely impact activities supporting our homeland security. It will stop counterdrug, anticrime, and border security efforts in Mexico and Central America that secure our own borders, as well as programs that advance democracy, including civil society and the rule of law.

When the government shuts down, overseas operations are heavily affected. It would put at risk the physical protection for diplomatic personnel and facilities overseas and severely limit the ability of the State Department to provide for and maintain missions in increasingly dangerous locations. With all the rhetoric about Benghazi--and we share the concern about what happened--this, again, puts people at risk overseas.

It would stop commercial export sales. A shutdown would force the State Department to impose indiscriminate cuts to embassy security and protection of personnel, thereby eroding the security of the United States Government diplomatic facilities and making it all but impossible to meet the requirements to provide safe and secure embassies overseas.

All national parks would be closed, memorials and museums. There are 401 of these locations throughout the country. Cumberland Island National Seashore would be closed. The Martin Luther King National Historic Site would be closed. The Chattahoochee River National Recreational Area would be closed. Fort Frederica National Monument on St. Simmons Island would be closed. And that's just to mention a few Federal facilities that I suspect the gentleman who is managing this bill is fully familiar with.

We'll let go of 4,000 weather forecasters. We could go on and on. The Smithsonian will be closed. The Lincoln Memorial will be shut down. The National Zoo, Yellowstone.

What are we doing this for? This doesn't make sense. All the wildlife refuges will be closed for hunting. This is hunting season.

You know, this may not seem like a big deal; but I think the American people, when this is done, are going to realize the same thing they did back in 1995: wait a minute, we want these Federal activities. We need these Federal facilities. We need these jobs. Open up our government. And any Congress that acts to close it down is disserving the American public.

We are not fulfilling our responsibilities if we allow this government to

shut down, but that's exactly what we are doing with the action that the majority will be taking tonight.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to associate myself with the comments of my good friend from Virginia (Mr. Wolf). I completely agree with him that we want both DOD personnel and the personnel of our other Federal agencies to be able to continue to come to work. I appreciate his comments.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the very distinguished minority whip of the Congress who not only has substantial military activity within his district but very ably represents tens of thousands of Federal employees.

I yield the gentleman an additional 2 minutes.

Does my friend from Georgia have many other speakers?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi), who has real-life practical experience in knowing what it's like to administer an agency--in this case, the Interior Department--during a shutdown.

I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the very distinguished gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee.

Mr. Speaker, since I have only 1\1/2\ minutes, I think I'll let the gentleman from Georgia yield to further speakers, but I do want to ask if the gentleman would yield some time, though, if he has time available, to engage in a colloquy. But on his time.

Let me ask my very good friend from Georgia if he knows why over in the Senate the minority has insisted upon the cloture rule; in other words, filibustering the appropriation rules, and why they have not appointed conferees to the budget conference?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to my good friend from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the ranking member of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee.

I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, the problem with this bill is that it assumes a government shutdown. If it didn't assume a government shutdown, then it wouldn't separate Department of Defense personnel from non-Department of Defense personnel. Why would you need it if we were assuming that we're going to be able to fund the government? That's the underlying problem with this bill.

We're going to vote for it because we feel that Department of Defense personnel ought to be paid. Of course, we do. Of course, we're going to vote for this. But why are you doing it? You're only doing it because you assume that you're going to shut the government down. That's the problem with this bill. There's no other purpose for this bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, this vote is about more than these two throwaway provisions, which we know are not going to be taken seriously--and should not--by the Senate or by the country, but I am going to oppose it for another reason: because I used to be very proud of this institution.

I used to be able to go through my community--and many of those who have served as long as I have know what it was like--and be proud to be a Member of Congress, to know that we had improved the lives of our constituents, that we had helped them build bridges and buildings and roads, that we could walk through the NIH campus being proud of what we had done for biomedical research, knowing we were improving lives in curing illnesses.

We know what the government can do. This bill doesn't allow the government to do what it can to improve the lives of our people. We need to believe in this government again. We need to do what this Congress was meant to do. We need to fund the government adequately to be a first-class society with a first-class economy that can compete and beat anyone. We can't do that on the cheap, and that's why we ought to vote against this.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, just about a mile from here, once again, our Nation experienced a horrific incidence of mass gun violence. Our sympathies obviously go out to the friends and the families who lost loved ones in the shooting at the Washington Navy Yard.

But as this chart shows, this mass shooting is only the latest in a long line that includes Columbine and Virginia Tech and Tucson and Aurora and Newtown. But even these horrendous mass killings don't fully reflect our Nation's problem with gun violence.

Each year, 100,000 people in America are shot by a gun, 30,000 die from a gun-related injury, 10,000 are murdered by a firearm. By 2015, gun-related deaths will surpass auto-related deaths for the first time.

And while it's too early to know what might have prevented this week's mass shooting, we do know what will ensure that it will happen again--doing nothing, business as usual.

The chief medical officer at MedStar Hospital expressed the sentiments of many when she pleaded:

There's something evil in our society that we, as

Americans, all have to work to try and eradicate.

If we don't do all we can to reduce gun violence through stronger laws and improved services, all we'll have to offer our constituents are only more condolences.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the work and community impact of Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Inc. Founded in 1920 on the campus of Howard University, Zeta Phi Beta has been at the forefront of social change since its founding. As advocates of the people, members of Zeta from across the world are dedicated to serving their communities.

Specifically, Zetas are committed to:

Elder Care--Zeta manages a comprehensive program that focuses on elder abuse awareness, financial peace, supporting the caregiver and volunteering at senior care facilities.

Stork's Nest--A 40-year-old partnership between Zeta Phi Beta and March of Dimes, Stork's Nest is a community-based, prenatal, health promotion program for low-income pregnant women.

Prematurity Awareness Sundays occur every year in the month of November. More than 300 churches across the country are sites for distributing information on prematurity awareness, causes of prematurity and the importance of seeking prenatal care in an effort to decrease infant mortality and decrease the number of low birth weight babies.

Adopt-A-School allows members of Zeta Phi Beta to identify low performing schools and provide assistance in a number of ways to enhance the educational experience, increase test scores and grades.

Triple Negative Breast Cancer--Breast cancers found in African American women are more likely to be triple negative. Zeta chapters have begun adding information about triple negative breast cancer to existing projects and programs on breast cancer to build awareness and support efforts of health care professionals and organizations recommending earlier breast health testing.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take this opportunity to recognize Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Inc. as it marks 93 years of dedicated service by coming to Capitol Hill, and continuing to advocate for communities across the world.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 35th anniversary of the founding of Doorways for Women and Families. Northern Virginia is home to four of the top ten wealthiest counties in the United States. Yet amidst this wealth are numerous homeless families.

Every year, hundreds of thousands of Americans become homeless, including thousands of families. A typical family who is homeless is comprised of a mother in her late twenties with two children. Over 1.6 million children in the United States are homeless, putting them at increased risk for moderate to severe health conditions. Nearly 50 percent of the homeless in Arlington County are families.

In 1978, a group of concerned community-minded residents set out to build Arlington's first shelter for homeless families and those fleeing domestic violence. Four years later, the group purchased a 1957 Cape Cod-style home that would become Arlington's first domestic violence shelter, and eventually Doorways for Women and Families. Since then, Doorways has gone on to assist thousands of families in need.

From its humble beginnings, Doorways has grown considerably. Last year, 120 families benefited from the group's host of services-- including 162 children, who received physical, emotional and social support in order to help them heal from the traumatic effects of homelessness and domestic violence.

Doorways piloted the Virginia Address Confidentiality Program in Arlington, paving the way for 26 more counties to adopt the program. In 2009, the Washington Post awarded Doorways their Excellence in Nonprofit Management award for financial health and organization efficiency.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take this opportunity to honor Doorways for Women and Families as it marks 35 years of dedicated service to the residents of Northern Virginia.