Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all Members of the Republican conference be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions from November 11 through November 18.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 497, which is at the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following resolutions, which are at the desk: S. Res. 494, S. Res. 495, S. Res. 496, and S. Res. 498.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn to then convene for pro forma session only, with no business being conducted, on the following dates and times: Thursday, November 13, at 6:30 p.m., and Monday, November 17, at 3 p.m.; further, that when the Senate adjourns on Monday, November 17, it stand adjourned until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, November 18; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each; finally, that notwithstanding rule XXII, the cloture motions filed today ripen at 5:30 p.m.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate recess until 8 p.m.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be allowed to speak for up to 5 minutes each: Senator Collins, Senator Schumer, Senator Sanders, and I.

Mr. President, after 40 long days, I am hopeful we can finally bring this shutdown to an end. I don't need to go over all the reasons why it is imperative to get the government open as soon as possible. From the truly precarious situation we are in with regard to air travel, the fact that our staffs have been working without pay for a full 40 days now, all of us, Republicans and Democrats, who support this bill know that the time to act is now.

So in just a few minutes, I will call up the vehicle for a clean continuing resolution, packaged with three bipartisan, yearlong appropriations bills: Agriculture appropriations, Military Construction, VA appropriations, and Legislative Branch appropriations. These bills will fund SNAP for the entire fiscal year, they will fund WIC for the entire fiscal year, and they will fund our veterans for the entire fiscal year.

After 40 days of uncertainty, I am profoundly glad to be able to announce nutrition programs, our veterans, and other critical priorities will have their full-year funding, and my goal is to quickly move to other full-year appropriations bills.

As I have said many times, I firmly believe that the way to fund the government is by passing appropriations bills through regular order--a process that gives Senators from both parties the fullest chance to make their voices heard.

Healthcare

Mr. President, I also want to mention healthcare. There has been a lot of talk over the last several weeks on both sides of the aisle about the healthcare crisis in this country, and I am thankful to be able to say that we have Senators, both Democrat and Republican, who are eager to get to work to address that crisis in a bipartisan way. These Senators are not interested in political games; they are interested in finding real ways to address healthcare costs for American families. We also have a President who is willing to sit down and get to work on this issue. So I am looking forward to seeing what solutions might be brought forward.

Regardless, as I have said for weeks to my Democrat friends, I will schedule a vote on their proposal, and I have committed to having that vote no later than the second week in December.

Again, I am optimistic that after almost 6 weeks of this shutdown, we will finally be able to end it.

I will call up that bill in a matter of minutes, and I look forward to passing the clean continuing resolution and appropriations bill package in the very near future.

Motion to Proceed to the Motion to Reconsider

Now, Mr. President, I move to proceed to the motion to reconsider the cloture vote on October 16 on the motion to proceed to H.R. 5371.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the cloture vote on the motion to proceed to H.R. 5371.

Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. President, I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 11 a.m. on Monday, November 10; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371, postcloture; finally, that all time during recess, adjournment, morning business, and leader remarks count postcloture on the motion to proceed.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk that is due for a second reading.

Mr. President, in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I would object to further proceeding.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 168, H.R. 5371.

Mr. President, yesterday, we finally heard Democrats entertain the notion of reopening the government. It only took them 38 days. Why? In the days before, progressives were urging Democrats to prolong the shutdown in perpetuity.

One House Democrat said:

There would be hell to pay if Senate Democrats don't let

events play out.

And so I am glad to see Democrats, after 38 days, back down from the maximalist and, frankly, insane position they have held since September.

The Democrat leader's proposal is a nonstarter for the Republican majority. The Democrat leader wants to believe that this is a ``simple'' proposal; that it is some sort of compromise, but it is not. He is talking about throwing tens of billions more taxpayer dollars at a program that even Democrats admit has failed to lower healthcare costs.

The American people are tired of Washington taking their hard-earned money and spending it on costly government programs that fail to follow through on their promises. Of course, that is what Democrats have been doing for years with ObamaCare. They passed ObamaCare 15 years ago without a single Republican vote, and in that time, Democrats' signature healthcare law has failed to do what Democrats promised: If you like your health insurance, you can keep it--not true. If you like your doctor, you can keep him or her--not true. Premium costs will go down--not true. Actually, the opposite is true. They keep going up. ObamaCare drove premium prices higher.

So, in 2021, in the Democrats' American Rescue Plan Act--a bill best known for setting off a yearslong inflation crisis--Democrats created these Biden bonuses, further papering over the higher premium costs under ObamaCare, with bigger taxpayer subsidies. Again, they did that without a single Republican vote.

Then, in another partisan bill in 2022, they extended the subsidies through the end of this year. The Democrats chose the expiration date; they created this cliff; and now they want to blame Republicans for their mess. Give me a break. Republicans are not about to further burden taxpayers by blindly extending a flawed program.

The Democrats' proposal is just more of the same--masking rising premiums and padding insurance companies' profits with more taxpayer dollars. The Democrat leader's proposal is a nonstarter.

There is still only one path out. It is a clean funding extension. The House has already passed a clean funding extension. The President supports one and would sign it into law immediately. We are only a handful of votes away from passing one right here in the Senate--a bill that has been sitting at the desk now for 38 days. We reopen, and then we can start talking about addressing the healthcare mess that Democrats created.

I know that Democrats know this. Just yesterday, the Democrat whip came to the floor to say something that I have been waiting for a Democrat to say for a long time. He said that the first thing we need to do is reopen the government, then address the cost of healthcare and advance appropriations bills.

I have been saying that for about 6 weeks now, and I think that is exactly what we need to do today. So I hope the Democrat whip and others in his caucus will join the three Democrats who have been supporting a clean continuing resolution--the only bill that can actually end the shutdown.

I am glad to see that, after 38 days, Democrats are finally warming up to the idea that their shutdown can't go on forever. I urge my colleagues to support a clean continuing resolution so we can start a real discussion to address their healthcare mess, get back to the regular appropriations process, and, above all, finally provide relief to the American people.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, the junior Senator from Connecticut certainly believes in saying the quiet part out loud.

This is what he said:

I think there will be some pretty substantial damage done

to a Democratic brand that has been rehabilitated, if on the

heels of an election in which the people told us to keep

fighting, we immediately stop fighting.

He said that on a podcast yesterday.

He went on to say:

The 2026 election is just 12 months away. And if we

surrender without having gotten anything, and we cause a lot

of folks in this country who had started to believe in the

Democratic Party to retreat again, I worry that it will be

hard to sort of get them back up off the mat in time for next

fall's election cycle.

Let me repeat that.

This is what he said:

I worry that it will be hard to sort of get them back up

off the mat in time for next fall's election cycle.

Let that sink in for a minute.

I don't think it is a secret to anybody that Democrats shut down the government for political reasons. There has been plenty of news coverage of the incredible pressure their far-left base has been exerting, but in case anyone was still under the impression that Democrats were driving this shutdown toward its 40th day out of concern for the

American people, well, the junior Democrat from Connecticut pretty handily dispelled that notion.

Again, this is what he said:

I worry that it will be hard to sort of get them back up

off the mat in time for next fall's election cycle.

Just in case anyone needed any additional testimony, Axios reported on Wednesday:

A set of post-election talking points circulated among

Democratic congressional offices warned: ``Caving without

concessions would sap Democrats' momentum and undercut the

party's support from its base.''. . . . `'Democrats throwing

[Republicans] a rope in exchange for nothing would be

political self-sabotage,'' it added.

``Political self-sabotage.''

Now, there are two very striking things about these quotes. One, of course, is the focus not on the American people but on how to ensure Democrats win the next election. Two is the fact that progressive Democrats apparently want to keep this shutdown going forever.

We are on day 38 of Democrats' shutdown--day 38. Federal workers have gone more than a month now without pay. They don't know how they are going to pay their mortgages or buy food, thanks to Democrats. A lot of them are supposed to get another paycheck today. Instead, they will see a deposit of exactly zero dollars in their bank accounts. And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Head Start preschools have closed. Veterans programs have shuttered. Many Medicare recipients can't get access to telehealth. National Guard troops aren't training. SNAP benefits are in profound jeopardy. There are people going hungry right now because Democrats refuse to agree to a clean, nonpartisan funding extension.

Of course, then there is air travel. Because of staffing shortages caused by Democrats' shutdown, the Department of Transportation had to issue a mandatory reduction in air travel beginning today. Hundreds of thousands of people will be affected every day, to say nothing of disruptions to the movement of packages and goods. But nothing seems to move Democrats--nothing--not hungry Americans, not massive disruptions to our economy--nothing.

If I were a Democrat, I would be embarrassed--I mean, flatout embarrassed--to walk into this building every day; to walk past the men and women of the Capitol Police, who are not getting paid thanks to Democrats; to walk past junior staffers, many of whom are, undoubtedly, frantic, by this point, as they wonder how they are going to pay their rent and continue to buy food.

How can Democrats look any of these people in the eyes?

And please don't tell me they are fighting for some greater good for the American people. If Democrats can be said to be fighting for anyone at all besides themselves, they are fighting for a fraction of a fraction, for a tiny percentage of a small percentage of Americans who are on ObamaCare. The number of people they are supposedly fighting for is dwarfed--and I say dwarfed--by the number of people whose lives and livelihoods they are damaging.

And as for the claim that Democrats got some kind of mandate from the American people, on Tuesday, to continue jeopardizing food stamps for 40 million Americans in need, give me a break. Democrats performed well in three States where Democrats often perform well.

Congratulations.

I really don't think that means that the American people have all signed up to be democratic socialists, and it sure as heck doesn't provide a good reason for making 40 million Americans go hungry.

I would like to think that the junior Senator from Connecticut doesn't represent all Senate Democrats, but if there are Senate Democrats out there who do still care about hard-working Americans and not just Democrats' election prospects, the time to act is now, not when the far left decides this exercise can be over, not when Federal workers are lining up at food banks for their Thanksgiving meals--now, today. I hope--I hope--there are at least five more Democrats out there with a backbone who will vote with us to reopen the government and end these weeks of misery for the American people.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Will the Senator from Wisconsin yield?

Madam President, I am trying to understand what is going on here. Perhaps the Senator from Michigan can clarify.

So every public sector employees' union is supporting the Senator from Wisconsin's bill, but you are objecting because you think it grants too much power to the President. Now, if that is--I don't know how every public sector employees' union would be in support of this bill.

My understanding is that the modification proposed by the Senator from Michigan would essentially cover backpay but wouldn't do anything to address it going forward. In other words, we are going to keep Federal employees hostage. So they might get paid for backpay, but starting tomorrow, they are not going to get paid again, and that means that in the future, they will continue to be pawns, they will continue to be held hostage.

This is a straightforward approach that addresses that issue and everybody in this Chamber who isn't getting paid.

I can't believe people come down here and look these people in the eye when he is saying right here: We will pay them not only for today but for tomorrow and for the entire year, and we won't allow them to be held hostage and be pawns in a political game in the future.

My understanding is that the Senator from Michigan, on behalf of, I suppose, other Democrats, is objecting to that.

Please, please help me understand. This is a straightforward proposal which addresses the concern that millions of Americans have who are heading to food banks and can't pay their rent, and you are coming down here and saying you are going to object because you just want to pay them for yesterday, not for tomorrow or for the next day after that?

It is about leverage, isn't it? Isn't that what you all have been saying--it is about leverage? This isn't leverage; this is the lives of the American people.

The Senator from Wisconsin has put forward a straightforward proposal to pay people--Federal employees--today, tomorrow, and in the future. And what you are essentially saying: Well, I am fine with paying them for yesterday, but we are not going to pay them for tomorrow or the day after that or for the future, and we don't seem to care that there are men and women in uniform who are frequenting food banks, who are not making rent payments, or who are trying to borrow to get by, because it is leverage.

So I would hope--we are going to vote on this. So the Senator from Michigan can object to the unanimous consent request the Senator from Wisconsin made, but everybody in this Chamber is going to be put on the record as to whether or not they want to pay Federal employees not yesterday but today and tomorrow and into the future.

I am tired of political games. I really am. So feel free to object to something that--I don't know how anybody in their right mind could walk into this Chamber, look these people in the eye, and say: We are not going to pay you.

So we are going to vote on it. You can object to it right now, but everybody in this Chamber is going to vote on whether or not they want to pay Federal employees--something that every single public employees' union has said they support.

I yield to the Senator from Wisconsin.