Ander Crenshaw

Mr. CRENSHAW

Mr. CRENSHAW. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time both sides have remaining?

Mr. CRENSHAW. At this time, Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I don't have any further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRENSHAW. I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I don't think anybody in this Chamber wanted to see the government shut down. Nobody wanted to see it down. As has been pointed out, we passed a continuing resolution, funded the government, sent it to the United States Senate, and they said ``no.'' So we sent another resolution that kept the government open. The Senate said ``no.'' A third time we sent a resolution to the United States Senate to keep the government open. The Senate said ``no.'' Then we said, Why don't we just sit down and talk? Why don't we have a conference committee--one of those committees that we have all the time in this body when the House and the Senate disagree. We call it a conference committee. We appoint a group from the House. They appoint a group from the Senate. We work out the differences. That's the way you resolve conflict. That's the way you move ahead. So the House appointed eight conferees. We went to a meeting, ready to meet with the Senate. They didn't show up. So we decided they don't really want to have any negotiations about how we continue to fund the Federal Government. Then we said, If they won't pass a continuing resolution to fund the entire Federal Government, maybe we should just take certain parts of the Federal Government and see if the United States Senate or our friends on the other side would vote in favor of doing that. Of course, everyone has voted to say we ought to keep the government running as it relates to the military--both the defense and civilian employees. So our friends on the other side decided that was a good idea, and they voted for that. Then we said, Since the District of Columbia is being penalized by our inaction, why don't we pass a bill that says we'll appropriate the money--it's their own money--and let them spend it the way they want to spend it. We had that on a suspension vote, and our friends on the other side didn't want to do that, so they voted ``no.'' Then we had a bill on Saturday that talked about folks that are on furlough, and our friends on the other side said, That's a good idea. We ought to pay them retroactively. So they've been picking and choosing, picking and choosing, and some of these bills passed. In fact, if you add up all the bills we've passed, there have been 10 bills now that keep the government running in different ways shapes, and forms--that's almost one-third of all the discretionary spending--and we passed all that. Where are those bills? They're sitting down in the Senate, waiting for the Senate to do something. So we find ourselves in a situation that we didn't want to be in. We're all frustrated--people are angry--but we'll keep going. We're going to try to get the government running again. We're going to try to keep things open. But for goodness sake, this bill before us today simply says the folks that are coming to work are doing the things that are important to our Federal Government, and they ought to get paid. If you work, you get paid, and you get paid on time. I think everybody agrees with that. So let's not penalize them. A lot of people are being penalized because of our inaction, but let's not penalize the people who come to work every day to meet the critical needs of our country. Let's make sure that they get paid. Sooner or later, Mr. Speaker, we'll open this government back up. We've tried to do almost a third of it now. Still, people say no. We'll move ahead. With that, I simply urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation to make sure that the people who are working get paid on time. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. CRENSHAW

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 370, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 71) making continuing appropriations of local funds of the District of Columbia for fiscal year 2014, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.J. Res. 71, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the House, I bring before the House today a continuing resolution that's very limited in scope. It simply allows the District of Columbia to spend their locally raised revenues. That's all it does. I brought this same resolution before the House yesterday, under the suspension of the rules. The vote was 265-163, a majority, but not the two-thirds majority required by the suspension of the rules. So the bill that is back before us today will require a majority for passage. Quite frankly, I don't understand why so many of our friends on the other side of the aisle voted ``no'' yesterday, because all it does is allow the District of Columbia to spend their own money. But, be that as it may, that's what happened. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who represents the District of Columbia, made a very eloquent, very impassioned plea as to why we should pass this continuing resolution. But apparently that didn't convince enough of her Democratic colleagues for it to reach the two-thirds majority. So here we are today. I think most of the Members recognize that the District of Columbia is unique. It's a unique city among all the cities in our great country. It's called a Federal city. And because of that unique relationship, Congress must appropriate the locally raised funds before they can be spent. We do that every year, on a routine basis, as part of the Financial Services appropriations bill. We've done that from time to time, and things always seem to work out. But this time, we're back with the same resolution that we had yesterday. The way it works is simply this: the District of Columbia has passed the 2014 budget. The mayor makes his proposal, the city council receives the proposal, it considers the budget, and this year it has approved the budget. There's an independent chief financial officer that has certified the budget. It's balanced. And there we are. So now we're faced with a situation, unless Congress appropriates the money, they're not able to spend the money. I don't think that, after they passed their budget, that just because the United States Congress is arguing back and forth between the House and the Senate as to how we should fund the government, I don't think that should stop the District of Columbia, this unique city, from spending the money that they've raised locally. For instance, you have people that work for the District of Columbia, like any other city. You have schoolteachers that go to work every day, and they teach kids. You've got policemen that get up every day, that work night shifts, day shifts, to make sure that the streets in the District of Columbia are safe. You've got firemen that go to work every day. They're there on call in case there's an emergency. Other first responders, they're working every day. People keep the streets clean. They pick up the garbage. People go to work as librarians, and they do the work to make sure that people have access to reading material. Now, there's no reason in the world why these people should be furloughed or not paid simply because Congress can't get its act together as to how to fund the Federal Government. That doesn't make any sense. And if you live in the District of Columbia, you shouldn't have your quality of life degraded because of what goes on in Congress. You ought to have the police and fire protection. You have all the services that other cities have. You ought to have those. Despite the fact that we tried to get together, the House and the Senate, to figure out a way to keep our government running, to keep it open, we haven't been able to do that. And so we shouldn't penalize the people in the District of Columbia for that. So this simple resolution takes care of that. It authorizes, it appropriates the money, under the law, that needs to be spent on the local level by the locally raised funds. That's what it does. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just find it ironic that the other side always likes to complain that Republicans meddle too much in the affairs of the District of Columbia. And yet yesterday, so many of them voted not to even let the District of Columbia access their own local funds. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I still don't understand why it's so hard for my friends on the other side to vote in favor of allowing the District of Columbia to spend their own locally raised funds. Back in 1996, as they may recall, there was a shutdown of the government; and there was a standalone provision, pretty much just like this, and it was signed into law by the President of the United States. It was Bill Clinton, a Democrat. I just don't understand why it's so hard for Democrats to accept that today. With that, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California, Darrell Issa, the distinguished chairman of the Government Oversight and Reform Committee.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, could I inquire as to how much time is remaining on each side.

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

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, can I inquire of the gentleman from New York how many speakers he has remaining?

Mr. CRENSHAW. We don't have any additional speakers, so I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRENSHAW. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. There has been a lot of talk about political games. To watch people parade up and down and make speeches under the guise of a unanimous consent, I am not sure how serious that is. I am not sure how much that complies with the rules of the House. But be that as it may. You have folks on the other side that say they really believe the District of Columbia ought to be able to spend its own money, but yet they vote ``no'' on the authorization to do that. We are in the second day of a shutdown in the Federal Government. A lot of people are upset. I am upset, I am disappointed, because it doesn't have to be this way. On three separate occasions, this House sent to the Senate a continuing resolution that would have kept the government open, kept the government running--three times. Yet three times the Democratic- controlled Senate said no--not once, not twice, but three times. Then this House sent to the Senate a continuing resolution that also said: let's appoint a conference committee. That is a group of individuals from the House and a group of individuals from the Senate. They would sit down and they would try to resolve these differences to try to keep the government open. Because how are you going to solve a problem unless you sit down--that is what we call a conference committee--and then you try to move forward? But the Senate once again said no. Now, we all know that we have conference committees from time to time. The gentleman from New York and I--he is the ranking member of the Financial Services Subcommittee of Appropriations. We have jurisdiction over lots of different agencies--the IRS, the Department of Treasury, the Federal Court system, the Supreme Court, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Communications Commission. We drafted a spending bill this year. I assumed the Senate was working on their own spending bill somewhere, somehow, some way. Usually, when it all ends up there is a conference committee and you try to work out your differences. For instance, we oversee the IRS. Members might remember the scandal that took place. As we were appropriating money to the IRS, we found out that they had been singling out individuals and groups of individuals based on their political philosophy and they had intimidated them, they bullied them, and it held them up. We thought that was wrong. So when we drafted our appropriations bill we didn't give the IRS all the money they asked for. But the Senate might have done something different. If that was the case, then we would come together and have a conference committee, and we would talk about that. That is all we are saying here. Why don't we sit down and have a conference committee about how we are going to fund the Federal Government? That is the way to get started, that is the way to figure out a final way, that is a way to stop this shutdown. Again, we don't have to be here. It is disappointing. I wish we could move ahead. But at least--at least--let's pass this continuing resolution. Let's say to the District of Columbia we have met our legal responsibility and we have appropriated their own local funds so they can move on with their lives. Let's don't punish the citizens of the District of Columbia, let's don't punish the people that work in the District of Columbia to try to keep the city open, keep it running, keep it safe, keep it clean. Let's pass this resolution and move ahead. With that, I urge the adoption of this joint resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CRENSHAW

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 71) making continuing appropriations of local funds of the District of Columbia for fiscal year 2014.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on House Joint Resolution 71, District of Columbia Continuing Appropriations Resolution, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I bring to the floor today a continuing resolution which is narrow in scope and allows the District of Columbia to spend their own funds. As some of the Members may be aware, some may not be aware, due to the city's unique status as a Federal city, Congress must appropriate their locally raised funds before the city can spend them. And despite the multiple attempts by the House of Representatives to fund the Federal Government, we're here in day one of a government shutdown. This continuing resolution provides that the District of Columbia, it gives them their funds through December 15, under the same terms and conditions that they have under the spending bill in 2013. So passing this bill today will allow the Appropriations Committee time to negotiate a full year's funding bill with the Senate. Now, the District of Columbia has passed their own fiscal year 2014 budget. The Mayor presented a budget to the city council. The city council debated that. The city council approved, and the city's independent chief financial officer certified the budget as balanced. So, therefore, the District's locally raised funds should not be withheld from them during this current Federal shutdown. This disagreement that the Republicans and the Democrats are having over Federal spending shouldn't stop the District from using its own locally raised funds like any other city in America. The District is currently using reserve balances to stay open. However, we can't expect the District of Columbia to deplete all of its cash reserves to make up for the Federal Government's inability to pass a Federal budget. We've got school teachers out there, we've got policemen, we've got firemen, we've got garbage collectors, we've got librarians, we've got all these city employees, and they're paid with D.C. local funds, and they should expect to be paid for their services. The citizens of the District of Columbia, they shouldn't suffer because Congress and the administration can't agree on a budget. So this continuing resolution fulfills our responsibility under the law to appropriate the District of Columbia their local funds. Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of this resolution, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I'm just surprised to hear my friend say it's okay that the citizens of the District of Columbia suffer just because Congress can't figure out how to fund the government. With that, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to remind folks that we could have avoided this shutdown if the Senate had passed the first resolution we passed them. That would have avoided a shutdown. If they had passed the second continuing resolution, that would have avoided a shutdown. If they had passed the third continuing resolution we passed to them, that would have avoided the shutdown. If they would agree to sit down and talk, we might even find a way to end this shutdown. But I just hope everybody remembers that for Republicans, the last thing we want to do is be shut down. We go it. We would like to sit down and talk. But the arrogance of the United States Senate says we can't even talk. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa), the distinguished chairman of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee.

Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining?

Mr. CRENSHAW. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRENSHAW. I reserve the balance of my time.