Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, many of my colleagues on either side of the aisle have stated their preference for, as the gentlelady from North Carolina said, opening the government. They want to open the government as soon as possible and would vote for a clean bill.

Mr. Speaker, we can have that vote right now. I would like to give my colleagues the opportunity to be heard right now in this Chamber and show the American people whether they want to reopen the government today or not.

Mr. Speaker, as a result, I request that this vote be conducted by a rollcall under clause 2 of House rule XX.

Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

Does that mean if you ruled that we would take the vote in the manner in which I requested, that we would do so?

Mr. Speaker, the previous speaker said that the shutdown should be unacceptable. I agree with that. We could all, within the next half an hour, vote to make the unacceptable not the policy that we are pursuing.

Mr. Speaker, our government has now been shut down for over a week

and the American people are looking to Congress for solutions, not spin. Thousands of dedicated Federal employees here, but more profusely around this country, continue to be furloughed without pay, all because a faction of Republicans insist on keeping government closed until we repeal the Affordable Care Act, a demand that has nothing to do with keeping our government open.

Debate about the Affordable Care Act is legitimate. There are people who disagree with it and people who agree with it. But holding ransom the people's government is and should be, as the previous speaker said, unacceptable.

Americans are tired, I am tired, I think most Members are tired of hearing the same rhetoric from politicians over and over. Instead, they want real solutions that can restore fiscal sanity, end the irrational sequester which Hal Rogers, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, a conservative Republican from Kentucky, says does not work and cannot work, and break the cycle of manufactured crises that do nothing to help our economy and, in fact, are doing it great harm. So the question, Mr. Speaker, we must ask ourselves is: How do we reach a solution? How can this Congress achieve the big, balanced deal that our constituents expect from us?

First and foremost we must end the shutdown. Mr. Speaker, 200 Democrats--we have a vacancy--200 Democrats will vote this very day, this very hour, to open the government. That means, Mr. Speaker, we only need 18 Republicans. The previous speaker said it is unacceptable where we are. We can change it, and we can change it within the hour, with only 18 Republicans joining 200 Democrats to say let the people's government be open; let the people's government be serving them.

First and foremost, Mr. Speaker, we must end this shutdown and take action to prevent the United States from defaulting on its bills for the first time in history. A solvent nation should not be taken hostage to accomplish an objective. Once these immediate threats are removed, Congress should then vote to go to conference on the differences which are legitimate between our two budgets. Republicans have refused, for the last six months in the House and in the Senate, to go to conference.

The Speaker talks about negotiation. That is where you do it. That is the mechanism that is set up under our democracy to resolve differences. Go to conference. There we can have the opportunity to agree on a comprehensive, balanced plan to put our country on a fiscally sustainable path, not for the next week, the next month, the next 180 days, but for decades to come; and if we do that, our economy will explode, jobs will be created, and Americans will again feel good, not only about their country, but about their Congress.

The shutdown and the threat of default are standing in the way of a real negotiation process for a long-term solution. Democrats, I say, Mr. Speaker, are ready to sit down and talk with our Republican colleagues about a long-term agreement. We know that will require tough decisions, but Republicans should not demand their own policies as ransom required to reopen the government and make sure America pays its bills.

Democrats have already made the difficult choice to accept the Republican's preferred budget level for the short-term funding bill. How do I know it is their preferred funding bill? Because they voted on it and sent it to the Senate, Mr. Speaker, and the Senate said, We will accept your number, and they sent it back here; and my Republican colleagues will not say ``yes'' to their own number.

A big and balanced agreement on a budget. After we take the Republican number to open up government, go to conference, have discussions, a big and balanced agreement on the budget and on getting our debt under control will require real compromise and difficult decisions. My colleagues, we should have the wisdom and, yes, the courage to make them; and if we do, future generations will thank us.

I continue to believe, Mr. Speaker, that there is a bipartisan majority of Members in this House who are ready to work in good faith towards achieving such an agreement. My observation, however, is, after 33 years in this body, that there is a small faction on the Republican side of the aisle--it may be 50, it may be 60--that is holding captive the 170 of their colleagues who want to make sense and move forward.

I hope that Speaker Boehner will take the important steps necessary to enable those negotiations to begin by allowing a vote on the Senate's bill at the House number to reopen government and another one on a clean measure to prevent an unthinkable and economically catastrophic default. Once those occur, Mr. Speaker, we will be able to resume work on achieving real and lasting results for the American people when it comes to our long-term fiscal health.

Mr. Speaker, I would hope that the majority leader, Mr. Cantor, would bring the bill to open our government, the people's government, to the floor this day.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman pointed out, the morale is low for approximately 315 million people who call America home; low because they see a dysfunctional board of directors of their country; low because they are anguished about the inability to come to grips with reality.

I want to tell my friend, Mr. Speaker, the chairman of the Rules Committee, we said ``yes.'' You sent us a bill to the United States Senate, which we control, and you said, Let us open government, and we will open it on the condition that we cap spending at $986 billion.

Now, you also put another piece on that bill which said we ought to defund ObamaCare--the Affordable Care Act, as we call it. I venture to say that close to 90, maybe even 100 percent, on your side of the aisle, Mr. Chairman--I say to him, Mr. Speaker--didn't think that was going to happen. They said it because they feel strongly, Mr. Speaker, about that. I understand that. I have strong feelings myself.

Now, the gentleman, my colleague from Maryland, I hope is going to use the analogy about ``vetoing'' the debt limit because it is a good one. But I will tell my friend the Senate said ``yes'' and sent it back here.

We could open the government this evening if only you would accept what you suggested, if only you would say, ``Yes, you agreed with our number.''

There was no negotiation, there was no compromise on our side. There was a saying to you: We want to keep the government open, so yes. Our Republican colleagues in the House of Representatives and the Senate said, Mr. Speaker, we will take your number. America needs to know that we have said ``yes'' to the number that you suggested.

I don't like your number. I think it is not good for America, Mr. Speaker. I think it is not good for our national security, for our economy, or for the morale of the American people long term.

Having said that, I want government open, so we have said ``yes'' to your number. We didn't negotiate. We said, ``We will take what you propose.''

Mr. Speaker, I hope every American understands that when one side says, ``We'll take your number,'' that there ought to be an agreement.

Now, I rise in opposition to this bill that has been put on the floor, which is another way to distract from the business at hand-- opening up our government. Eight days from now our government will be in a position for the first time in history where we won't be able to pay our bills. The wealthiest Nation on the face of the Earth, the most creditworthy Nation on the face of the Earth, will be in a position not that we don't have the resources, not that we don't have the credit to borrow to make sure that we continue to be able to pay our bills--that won't be the case. It will be the case that we don't have the authority to do so because this Congress has not acted.

I tell my friend, Mr. Speaker, who chairs the Rules Committee and whose father served with such distinction as the head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation----

The present head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Mr. Comey, says that this sequester and budget number will deeply hurt law enforcement in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I talked to my colleagues, let's defeat this bill, and let's move to the business that is real, that will make a difference, not make a political point. Let us move to doing the business of America and put the people's government back to work, not pretend that we are going to do it by some supercommittee. We tried that. It didn't work very well. I am sorry about that. I urged them to stay in business and do their job.

I ask my colleagues, defeat this, move to the business of America, put the people's government back to work.

Mr. Speaker, this House has a responsibility to reopen government.

We can vote on a bill within the hour that would reopen the entire government--and we know the votes are there to pass it.

Two hundred Democrats are on record that we will vote to reopen the government, and there are media reports that twenty-five Republicans will do so as well.

So let's find out: put a bill on the floor to reopen government, and let the House work its will.

Democrats are also ready to work with republicans to prevent a default.

Once we end the shutdown and remove the threat of default, Democrats want to sit down and talk in a bipartisan way--as we have asked to do for months--and work out a long-term solution to our nation's fiscal challenges.

But the plan on the floor today won't do that.

It is a pretense, not a substantive action.

It does not reopen government, nor does it ensure America pays its bills.

And it is not a real mechanism to reach a broader agreement on fiscal issues.

It does not have a deadline for action--nor does it require a vote on any recommendations the committee would produce.

And, it is not a balanced approach, as it precludes the consideration of any new revenue whatsoever.

This is just more of the same from the Tea Party-driven Republican conference that isn't serious about reducing the deficit in a balanced and sustainable way.

Instead of wasting more time on these reckless and irresponsible gimmicks, we ought to be taking responsible steps to end the shutdown, prevent a default, and then work together to achieve real, long-term fiscal solutions.

I urge my colleagues to defeat this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding.

I want to thank my colleague, Frank Wolf. There's no harder advocate or effective advocate for Federal employees than Frank Wolf. He and I have worked together for over 32 years on behalf of the interest of those people who work for the American people every day to make them safer, healthier, more informed. I want to thank the majority leader; I want to thank the ranking member; I want to thank the gentleman who offers his support of this bill; and I want to thank my colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, we're 5 days into a government shutdown caused by--well, I'm not sure what it's caused by. As a result, approximately 800,000 middle class workers who serve the American people are furloughed without pay. All of us talk about working Americans, how we want to make sure they have the jobs that they need to support themselves and their family.

Our Federal employees have already been asked to accept COLA freezes for the past 4 years, and they've endured changes to retirement benefits as well as the furloughs imposed by the irrational policy of sequester. I'm glad to see the chairman of the Appropriations Committee on the floor. There's been no more stronger voice on the irrationality of the sequester than my friend from Kentucky.

Only my colleagues on the other side of the aisle can say with certainty, if they can, when our Federal Government will be able to go back to work, but the American people are already noticing their absence, whether safeguarding our national parks, performing groundbreaking medical research at NIH, overseeing disaster relief efforts after a storm or wildfire, making sure nutrition assistance gets to the children and seniors who need it, or enforcing the laws that keep our community safe. Federal employees make a critical contribution to the country and communities and the American people they serve.

We saw their selfless nature and devotion of country on display this Thursday when, as the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) said, U.S. Capitol Police personnel, Federal employees who are deemed essential for security and are currently on the job without the promise of pay, protected all of us who work in the Capitol complex during a security incident.

I am proud to represent 62,000 hardworking Federal employees in my district, yet most of the Federal employees are not in the Washington metropolitan area. Eighty percent of them are dispersed throughout this country, serving in every area, every community of our great land, many of whom serve in civilian defense roles at critical military institutions like Pax River, Indian Head, and Webster Field in my district. Each one of you could name a facility in your district.

One of them wrote to me to express his frustration of those who are preventing the government from reopening. He writes:

I'm quite tired of being punished when my only crime is

supporting our great Nation with my labor.

I want to thank my Republican colleagues for recognizing that pain and unfairness and bringing this bill to the floor. I hope all of us will support this bill.

Another constituent of mine who works at Pax River said this: ``Please continue to work toward a solution that ends the furloughs for all Federal employees affected by the shutdown, not just a select few,'' as we're doing.

Mr. Speaker, we must reopen our government, and we could do so today, this hour. But until the majority allows a vote on the bill to reopen the government, let us at least provide the dedicated, patriotic Federal employees who want nothing more than to go back to work with the peace of mind that they will still be paid for their service.

I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran). Mr. Moran, like the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), has been an extraordinary leader on behalf of Federal employees, as well as Congressmen Gerald Connolly and Steve Lynch who sit here and others on the Republican side who have been aligned on that effort as well. Surely, surely we, the board of directors of the greatest enterprise on Earth, can take care of our employees and give them the confidence that they deserve.

I thank the gentleman from Maryland for the additional time.

Mr. Speaker, the government has now been shut down for 3 days, the people's government that is formed to serve it and promote the general welfare and the national defense. That government has been shut down. Entirely? No, not entirely. There are some sporadic incidents where, for the public safety, we have people working.

I read the papers every morning, clips, as so many Americans do, so many Members do. I start discussion of where we are today because surely the public must be confused.

The Republicans say that they don't want to shut down the government. They say that President Obama wants to shut down government and that we Democrats want to shut down government for political advantage.

Having said that, 99 percent of us are prepared to vote for a resolution at 12:01 this day to open the government, because that is the rational, common sense, and right thing to do. I tell Speaker Boehner, Mr. Speaker, that we're prepared to vote on that today, as soon as this House opens.

Now, the Governor of Virginia is a Republican. The Governor of Virginia wrote an article today that said:

Budgets are documents born of many compromises. A

government shutdown represents the antithesis of that

approach.

We agree.

He went on to say:

In a shutdown, planning and forethought go out the window.

Instead of rational governing, we get speeches and inaction.

That's not how government should work.

So we stand ready on this side of the aisle, I will say as one of the leaders of my party, to vote now to open government and, yes, to do what, in a democracy, we ought to do--sit down and discuss compromises.

Now, the American people, Mr. Speaker, need to know where we are and how we got here.

The process is that the House adopts a budget for the spending which keeps government open, and the Senate passes a budget that funds the government and keeps it open and serving the American people.

Now, often there are differences between the House and the Senate, as there are now. And so what our process is is to go to conference, as the Speaker has talked about so often, to sit down at a table and discuss, as reasonable people, as Governor McDonnell says government ought to work, resolving our differences.

But for 6 months my Republican colleagues, Mr. Speaker, as you know, have refused to go to conference and sit down at the table. They have refused to try to bridge the gap. They have refused to do what Governor McDonnell says is necessary to do, compromise. And we are far apart.

Now, interestingly enough, we have only passed three appropriations bills out of the 12. All three of the appropriations bills that we passed through this House are at the Senate number--not the House- adopted number--at the Senate number. And so they have to slash the other nine bills very deeply. As a result, they have not brought them to the floor.

I have no power. I used to be the majority leader. I could bring a bill to the floor, as my colleagues know. I can't bring a bill to the floor now. One of those bills was brought to the floor and it was defeated. Actually, it was pulled from the floor because they couldn't pass it. So we are at a place where we are now, have shut down government.

The reasonable, rational, responsible thing to do is simply say we have enough votes to open government at the number that the Republican Party sent to the Senate. Not a compromise. We are telling them we will take your number. I don't like their number. But I like even less having government shut down, because it costs the economy money, it puts at risk our national security, and it undermines the confidence of the American people, not to mention the international community.

But we will take your number, I say to the Republicans, Mr. Speaker. We will take your number. The Senate has said we will take your number. But unfortunately, they haven't yet taken ``yes'' for an answer.

Now, earlier this week--and I don't know him--but Representative Marlin Stutzman, who is a Republican from Indiana, said this: ``We're not going to be disrespected.'' Now, by that I presume he means that the President and the Democratic Senate is not going to agree to undermining or repealing the Affordable Care Act that millions of Americans already are trying to access to get coverage and get health security in their families. He says, ``We're not going to be disrespected.'' Then he goes on to say this, ladies and gentlemen of the House and Mr. Speaker: ``We have to get something out of this. And I don't know what that even is.''

Let me repeat that. He says, We have got to get something out of this, but I just don't know what it is. How are you going to negotiate in that context? I see Mr. McDermott here chuckling. I'm chuckling. We need to get something out of this, but I just don't know what it is.

Now, after being asked about the GOP leadership putting a clean government funding bill on the floor for a vote, Representative Tom Cole, one of the leaders, close to Speaker Boehner, former chairman of their campaign committee, said this. When asked about putting a clean government funding bill on the floor for a vote, he said this: ``Why in the world would we do that?'' Now, they've said they don't want to shut down government--that's why they'd do it. Why does he ask such a question, ``Why would we do that?'' To open government so it can serve the people. That's why you would do it. How confusing can that be?

He went on to say this, however. ``You know, that doesn't encourage anything. That's basically at this point a surrender to the Democratic position.'' Now, remember, ladies and gentlemen, I just told you that we took their number, their number that they passed through here. I don't like that number.

Hal Rogers, the Republican chairman of the Appropriations Committee, doesn't like that number. The subcommittee chairmen don't like that number. But we're saying, okay, yes, we'll take your number, let's keep government working for our people.

Now, the House majority leader, I used to be majority leader, or as I refer to it, the good old days, he said this: ``We're trying to get the government open as quickly as possible.'' That's 12:05 p.m. today, ladies and gentlemen of this House.

Mr. Speaker, it's 12:05 p.m., 5 minutes after noontime, right now, you can get it open as quickly as possible. If that's what the majority leader wants to do, Mr. Cantor, bring that bill to the floor and our side will overwhelmingly help you pass it and get government open for the people.

Now, the chairman of the Republican Policy Committee said this. He echoed Cantor in an interview with the National Journal Daily, and he said this: ``I don't think anyone wants to stretch this out for 2 weeks.'' But what we'll see today is little tiny slices of bills. It will take weeks and perhaps months to open at the rate they're going. ``I don't think anyone,'' Lankford says, ``wants to stretch this out for 2 weeks.'' Now, this is the chairman of the Republican Policy Committee. Here's what he said: ``I'd like to resolve this this afternoon.'' We're ready. The American people are ready. It's the responsible thing to do. Get the government working for its people.

If Mr. Lankford and Mr. Cantor want to get this done as soon as possible, I tell them as a leader on my side of the aisle, I will help get them the votes to pass it this afternoon, early this afternoon, by 1 o'clock this afternoon. Let's get this government open.

Mr. Lankford goes on to say, ``I don't believe there's any argument for stretching this out for 2 weeks.'' This is their policy committee chair. ``I don't believe there's any argument for stretching it out.'' Why are we stretching it out if there's no argument to do so?

I close with this, Mr. Speaker. I also read the American people are angry. Let me tell the American people, Mr. Speaker, I share their anger. I am angry too. As Governor McDonnell said, this makes no sense, this is no way to run a government. We've taken the Republican number. Mr. Cantor says he wants to act quickly. Mr. Lankford says he wants to act quickly. We will support acting quickly. Let's do it. Let's just do it.

Open the people's government today, not slice by slice by slice by slice over the coming weeks and months, but today for the people, of the people, by the people. Open the government today.

I thank the ranking member of the Rules Committee for yielding, and I thank Ms. Slaughter for the extraordinary leadership she has shown and the work she has been doing.

Mr. Speaker, the people want their government open. A government of the people and for the people and by the people ought to be open. They want their dedicated Federal employees, who have been unfairly furloughed, to go back to work. They want to end the shutdown that is having negative consequences for our economy and for our national security and for the confidence of Americans that their government can work.

The only way to do so is by passing a clean, get-the-government-open funding bill to keep the government open while we discuss, negotiate, put forward our positions, a longer term agreement on the budget.

The Senate has acted, and acted responsibly, by passing a bill that will keep the government operating. They passed that bill with a number that was suggested by the Republican Party, Mr. Speaker. Now we have the opportunity to do the same thing right now and end this shutdown. Get the people's government back to work.

There are a growing number of Republicans who say they would vote for a bill which is so-called ``clean,'' not with any of the poison pills that have been on it time after time after time. I tell them that this is your opportunity to back up your words with actions. Don't just say, ``Let's end the shutdown.'' Vote with us in just a few minutes to end the shutdown.

On Wednesday, Majority Leader Cantor said this:

We're trying to get this government open as quickly as

possible.

``As quickly as possible'' is in about 5, 10, 15, or 20 minutes. That's ``as quickly as possible.'' I don't know if it's as quickly as probable, because I'm not sure that the majority leader means those words or that his party means those words, but we're going to have an opportunity to vote on it.

I say to my friend from Virginia, here is our chance to do so. To the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lankford), Mr. Cole's colleague, who said about the shutdown that he and his Republican colleagues have imposed: I would like to end it this afternoon; I say we can do it--he's right. In just a few minutes, Mr. Lankford is going to have the opportunity to vote that way. It's either empty rhetoric, or he means what he says.

Let's do it. Let's open government. Let's get the people's public servants back to work for them. Right here, right now, we can end this shutdown today, this afternoon, in just a few minutes.

We don't differ. As I understand it, everybody on both sides of the aisle says they don't want to shut down government. Mr. Cole says that. Ms. Slaughter says that. I say that. We have the power, in a few minutes, to put people back to work for all of our constituents.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this motion--the previous question, we call it, jargon for saying ``let's move on.'' If we vote ``no'' on the previous question, we can put a bill on the floor which will put the government back to work this afternoon. Mr. Cole knows we can do that. I don't know that Mr. Cole will vote to do that. I think Ms. Slaughter will vote to do that. I will vote to do that. Mr. Andrews will vote to do that. Others will vote to do that. If they do, if they match their actions with their talk, then we can open this government in just a matter of minutes.

The gentleman used my name. Will the gentleman yield?

Will the gentleman now yield?

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Does the gentleman believe that we should shut down the government?

I thank the gentleman for continuing to yield.

Then we agree not only on the small slices of which the gentleman has spoken and would draw on the floor today but on the whole. And we could put every employee back to work for the American people today because, as you say, we agree.

At the outset, I know that I join the majority leader in expressing our gratitude to the Capitol Police.

Mr. Speaker, all too often we take for granted the folks who are prepared to put their own lives and safety at risk to save others from harm's way, not only those of us who work on Capitol Hill, but those who visit their Capitol. So I know that round of applause was heartfelt and deeply meant, and we thank them.

I yield to the majority leader before I ask him a question on the schedule.

Mr. Speaker--and I know, again, as did the majority leader--Mr. Sanford Bishop, himself, gave such a tribute to the Capitol Police at the beginning of the last bill; but also we want to thank the Sergeant at Arms, Paul Irving, and all of those who work with the Sergeant at Arms.

Mr. Speaker, I know he may want to say a word on that as well, but I will yield to him now for the purposes of informing the Members of the majority leader's view of the schedule for the days to come.

I thank the gentleman for that information.

The gentleman, does he know how likely it is we will be in? Obviously, every Member has a schedule, and they are trying to deal with that and inform their staffs of that. I know it's very difficult for the leader. I've been there; I know how difficult it is to anticipate. I've heard some comments that Saturday is a probability but that, perhaps, Sunday is not.

Can the gentleman give any clarification on that?

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

My friends on this side say they want to keep the government open. We say we want to keep the government open.

My friends on this side sent a bill over to the Senate that had $986 billion in funding. We agreed to $986 billion in funding.

What's the problem?

We need to open all of the government, as the gentleman from Virginia said.

We have a responsibility to reopen all of our government, not just a little here and a little there. House Republicans shut the government down, and now they're worried about having to answer for it.

These piecemeal bills are on this floor because Republicans are realizing, yes, there are real-world consequences to a shutdown. Now they're engaged in a gimmick to fund only those pieces of government that the media or their constituents notice immediately. But by picking winners and losers, Republicans are ignoring critical agencies and functions across our Nation.

We need a full reopening of government in order to provide Head Start for our children. Are Head Start children less important than somebody visiting our parks? Perhaps those are your priorities. Nutrition assistance to women and families, training for law enforcement agents who keep us safe. Seventy percent of the CIA are on furlough today-- now--right now.

We need to put people back to work to ensure that our food is safe and small businesses can get the loans they need.

Mr. Speaker, put the Senate's clean compromise bill that gets our government open--the government of the people of the United States--and then let's go to conference on the budget, as Democrats have long called for, to resolve our differences and achieve a long- term solution.

A shutdown is not a political strategy; it is a failure for our country. We need a government that is open and that works for all of our people. Let us have a vote on the Senate's bill to reopen our government--at the number you put in your bill and that you sent to the Senate, on which we will now agree.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, there is not a Member of this House who does not respect and support the veterans of this country.

The gentleman who just spoke talked about preventing pain. What we want to do is prevent pain not only to veterans, but to children, to families, to teachers, to medical professionals, to farmers, to all those who every day rely on the Federal Government to be in operation-- not piecemeal, not choosing between this and that, between the winners and the losers.

Why are we at this place? Why, as the gentlelady, the ranking member of this committee said, are we at a place where we're presenting a bill that cuts $6 billion from the bill you talked about, that I voted for and you voted for? I speak, of course, of the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, we are here because of the pain that has been visited not by the Senate. The Senate passed the only CR that didn't have a poison pill, the CR--we talk in this jargon--keeping government operating for the American people, the only body that's passed a bill that will do that that didn't include a poison pill that you knew the other side could not take and would not take and the President said he would not sign. You continue to not come to grips with the loss of the election.

You need a compromise. You would not go to conference. You talked about going to conference at 5 minutes of 12 a.m. last night. You've had 6 months to go to conference. For 6 months, Mr. Speaker, the Republicans have had the opportunity of going to conference. Mr. Van Hollen, I'm sure, will talk about that.

It's been 6 months and no action. That's why we have had this gridlock, because you have refused to go, as you talk about the regular order, to work out an agreement between the Senate and the House. So we find ourselves where we need more time.

We have tried to provide for 6 weeks, between now and November 15, to try to work together to get to compromise and pass appropriation bills--and not in piecemeal. I don't know that I've seen an appropriation bill on a suspension before.

Mr. Speaker, this is the wrong process, it's the wrong time, and we ought to pass a CR and keep government operating for the American people.

Mr. Speaker, tonight is about the continuing destructive obsession that our Republican friends have and their refusal to recognize that there was an election just some months ago. You made the argument to the American people, and they rejected that argument and reelected President Obama. You have not gotten over that to this minute; and as a result, you are about to shut down the government. You can get up here and say over and over and over and over again, We don't want to shut down the government; but, Mr. Speaker, their actions belie their words.

Mr. Speaker, Democrats--as will surprise no one--are against shutting down this government. It's bad for our people, it's bad for our security, it's bad for our economy, it's bad for jobs. And you all know that.

And you don't have the votes because the people elected Democrats as the majority in the Senate and the President of the United States, and they don't agree with you. Newt Gingrich said when that was the case, you had to compromise.

What compromise are we talking about? We're taking your number--your number--and you will not take ``yes'' for an answer. How sad. What a shameful day this is in the history of the House of Representatives.

A shutdown would be harmful to our economy, our national security, and the creation of jobs, as I just said. That's why we have compromised and said we'll take your number to keep government open while we negotiate over the next 6 weeks.

Nobody in your party rationally believed that you were going to succeed in your objective--nobody. It's a political ploy. It's a message, Mr. Speaker, to their most radical contingent. We are willing to take the next 6 weeks to discuss how we get from where we are to where we need to be.

We could do that, Mr. Speaker, if only Republicans would take ``yes'' for an answer.

Their Tea Party faction has made clear where it stands. They don't like the Affordable Care Act--I don't think anybody doubts that--but the Affordable Care Act has been upheld by the Supreme Court and remains the law of our land.

Mr. Speaker, the Senate has now voted twice to send us a clean CR. Now it's time for the Speaker and the majority leader to put the Senate's clean compromise CR on this floor and, in their words, let the House work its will. Have the courage, Mr. Speaker, to have the majority party put on this floor a bill which will keep the government open and which the Senate will pass.

Mr. Speaker, have the Republican Party have the courage of its rhetoric and let the House work its will. I dare you to do that.

Let democracy work. Don't be dictating to America that they're going to shut down the government. Let's vote on it. Put a clean CR on this floor.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Georgia said that this health care was about one-sixth of the economy; he's right. This continuing resolution is about 100 percent of the economy.

Why are we here, Mr. Speaker? The American people are asking themselves: What is this debate about? We passed a budget in this House setting spending at $967 billion. The Senate passed a budget at $1.058 trillion. There's a $91 billion difference between the Senate and the House. This House, which talks about negotiations, has refused to go to conference.

So we have not reached an agreement on a number; that's why we are here. Nor have we passed two-thirds of the appropriations bills through this House. In fact, one was brought to the floor and pulled off the floor because at the $967 billion Republican budget, you cannot pass those appropriations bills if there were no Democrat in the House. My friend, Mr. Rogers, knows that.

My friend, Mr. Rogers, talked about responsibility. We ought to be responsible. I believe that on the Republican side of the aisle there are at least 150 Members who believe that we ought to be responsible, who believe this constant harping on the Affordable Care Act, which was the central part of the last election, and you want to deny the fact that elections make a difference.

One of the speakers got up and said this mandate is unconstitutional, so he also wants to deny the fact that the Supreme Court of the United States has specifically said it is constitutional. But it doesn't comport with your view; and, therefore, you reject it as you have rejected the results of the election.

Mr. Speaker, as the Representatives of 316 million Americans, we have a special obligation to see past the politics of the moment and embrace the spirit of cooperation for the sake of the public good, not our good, not our politics. Not a single one of us is here because we were thought to be the best at doing nothing or saying no. Each of us was sent here because our neighbors believe we have something positive to contribute, that we could do what is right for our country.

Not for our politics, but for our country and for our people.

We have not a matter of days, but hours left to prevent our government from shutting down. A shutdown is not a tactic; it is not a strategy. It is a failure for this country. Let us not be the country whose representatives cannot work together to fulfill the most basic function of government.

My friends across the aisle voted over 40 times to derail the Affordable Care Act without success. When do you say enough is enough, let us move on responsibly to make government work--at, by the way, your level? The President has said he would sign a bill at your level, not a negotiated level, at your level. You've won, but you can't take yes for an answer. The Senate rejected it, as they will reject this new attempt.

Instead, now is the time to try a different approach.

Mr. Speaker, it is time to let this House and not just a small faction of the House, which I tell my responsible friends on the Republican side of the aisle, you ought to reject, you ought to say enough is enough, you ought to say let's move on, you've had your votes, we lost.

Let us live up to the responsibility that our Founders instilled in this great people's House and continue to be the democracy that is the envy of the world. Let us make sure that when people look at America they look at America as a country that works, at an America that can be united, at an America that believes ``e pluribus unum'' still is our motto.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Virginia (Mr. Moran) for yielding.

For 33 years, the gentleman from Virginia who just spoke and I have sought equity and fairness for our Federal employees, whether they be in uniform or in civilian clothes.

I refer to this bill as ``selective responsibility.'' They know that the shutdown of government is irresponsible; and they know that neither the President nor the Senate is to agree, as they have not over and over and over again, to the proposal they have made. They know that they don't want to be so irresponsible as to put the men and women who defend our country at risk.

And I might say, I believe every one of us in this House is going to vote for this bill. But my friend from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), who is my good friend and with whom I have worked side by side in a bipartisan way effectively for many, many interests--he's right.

Now let me say that on the 16th of September, 10 people were struck down working for the defense of this country. I understand you will say, Oh, your bill covers them. I have attended two funerals, one on Wednesday and one today. I have spoken at both. With Mr. Wolf, I went to the marine barracks this past Sunday. The Commander in Chief, President Obama, spoke. Secretary Hagel, the Secretary of the Department of Defense, spoke. Secretary Mabus, the Secretary of the Navy, spoke. CNO Admiral Greenert spoke. And NAVSEA commander, which is located, of course, at the Navy Yard, Vice Admiral Bill Hilarides, spoke. They spoke about one Navy--uniform, civilian--working as a team. But they spoke more broadly than that in that all Federal employees are one team, joined together to make our government work as effectively as it can.

We are the board of directors of that government; and I can't believe there is one of us, Mr. Speaker, that would serve on a board of directors and treat a large portion of our employees with such disrespect, with such lack of consideration, with such contempt at times as we treat our civilian employees.

This bill does not cover the FBI. It doesn't cover CIA. Now you will argue, Oh, well, they're in the defense, and they'll be critical employees. But only some. It doesn't cover the National Institutes of Health to try to make America a healthier Nation. You want to defund ObamaCare; you want to defund NIH. And you will say, Of course not, Mr. Hoyer. This isn't a shutdown of government. It's a continuing resolution.

Well, we know it has some poison pills in it. We know the Senate won't buy it. We know that time is running out, but we're going to do it anyway.

This bill won't help the Food and Drug Administration. It won't help the Centers for Disease Control. It won't help Homeland Security, except in certain narrow instances.

It won't affect the Border Patrol. It won't affect the FAA, except in certain limited instances.

What do you think the morale of the people who work for us, the board of directors, is at this point in time? I will tell you: it's on the floor. That's not good for our country.

This is selective responsibility. Responsibility would be, let's fund government, and then let's debate these issues. We have debated this issue; and by the way, we won the debate in the election--not on this floor, in the election. But you refuse to accept the results of the election.

We are all going to vote for this bill; but I will tell my friends on both sides of the aisle, it is time for us to give respect to our nonuniformed Federal personnel because they are critical to the success of this country, to the success of our people. And we can argue about how large or how small our government is, but we should not argue about the quality of people that we want in the government. We should not argue about the fact that we want their morale to be high because they feel respected, because they feel wanted and worthwhile and that the missions they perform, whatever their role, are appreciated as important for the American people.

Any corporate head that you talk of and talk to and talk about will tell you you want to make sure your people understand that you believe in their worth. Because if you do not, you will not get what you want. We will all support this bill, but it is selective responsibility and will not excuse your rampant irresponsibility.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend, the majority leader, for purposes of inquiring of the majority leader the schedule for the coming day and weekend.

I thank the gentleman for his comments.

Would it be safe to tell the Members there will be no votes before 1 o'clock tomorrow, do you think?

I thank the gentleman.

Does the gentleman intend to meet on Sunday if we have acted on the CR tomorrow?

I thank the gentleman for his response, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, there are 435 of us that have been asked by our fellow citizens to come to Washington, D.C., to have the extraordinary privilege of sitting on this floor and making--they hope--responsible decisions for their country.

I regret that the House is not full at this point in time.

I have a reputation for working across the aisle. I cherish that reputation because I believe that all of us have been given an honor, and each of us ought to respect that.

Mr. Speaker, we are days away from shutting down the government. We are a few more days from defaulting on the

credit of the United States of America. I believe there are a small number of this House who are holding us captive and rendering, apparently, this House unable to reach compromise. The American people surely will not reward any one of us.

There is, in my opinion, Mr. Speaker, a working majority for responsibility in this House. I choose to believe that, I do believe it, and I pray that it is the case. And I ask my colleagues to come together on behalf of the American people and our great country to act responsibly.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

Madam Speaker, today we are considering a measure to fund government only if the Democratic Senate and Democratic President will agree to dismantle the health care reform law that will help millions of Americans access quality, affordable care.

That isn't going to happen, and it is a blatant act of hostage- taking.

This Republican CR also lays the groundwork for a default on our debt--an unthinkable act--by instituting a ``pay China first'' provision, and it fully embraces the dangerous and irrational policy of sequester. This bill enshrines and confirms the descent into an economy-destroying, national security-undermining, and ineffective rendering of the government that our country and our people need.

The majority party, with its destructive obsession with the repeal of the Affordable Care Act and its unrestrained hostility towards government, has offered this bill notwithstanding Republicans' hollow claims of the irrationality of the sequester policy their party adopts. The majority does so notwithstanding their chairman's accurate description of their policy of sequester as ``unrealistic and ill- conceived''--his words, not mine--a policy which Chairman Rogers, himself, says ``must be brought to an end.'' His words, not mine.

Chairman Rogers' vote today and the votes of his colleagues will, I expect, do just the opposite. They will vote to continue a policy that will inevitably lead to an American decline and retreat.

I will not be party to the disinvestment in America's greatness.

Today's bill undermines the education of our children, the security of our seniors, the present and future health of our people, the strength, training, and readiness of our Armed Forces, the growth of our economy and the creation of jobs, the quality and viability of our infrastructure, the health of our environment, the proper compensation and respect for those who labor in the public sector, and most certainly, the honoring of America's debts and obligations.

Today's bill undermines all of those priorities and more. I will not support it, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it. It continues us on the path so aptly described by Chairman Rogers--again, his words, not mine--as ``this lurching path from fiscal crisis to fiscal crisis.''

I urge my colleagues, with wisdom and courage on your side of the aisle, to oppose this bill.

Madam Speaker, I am for a comprehensive, balanced, and responsible policy that will put this Nation on a fiscally sustainable, stable path. I have been and continue to be willing to work with all of my colleagues to adopt such a bill. I take nothing off the table. I believe it will take both reason and political courage to achieve such an objective. Americans are hoping and, yes, praying that

we will have such wisdom and such courage.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill and to commit themselves to adopting a bipartisan and effective alternative to this destructive and irrational path.