Tom Cole

Mr. COLE

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I don't doubt my friend's sincerity and compassion and concern for these young people for one minute. I know him well as a person and value him as a friend. Although, I must say, this would have been much nicer 8 weeks ago when the administration first asked for it. While my friend lays out some of the changes in the House bill, he neglected to mention that the House bill cuts the administration's request for reimbursement to the military by $124 million. It cuts the administration's request for money to the Border Patrol, which is probably where the most difficult part is, by, I think, $89 million. So we have substantive disagreements. Again, we have a bill that has passed overwhelmingly. Many of the items my friends want to add have already been considered by the Senate and rejected by the Senate. So it seems to me, when we have a bipartisan product that has got substantial support on both sides and that the White House has signaled it would accept, that is the way we should go. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack), my good friend and the ranking Republican member of the Committee on the Budget.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stivers), who is my good friend.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Brooks), my good friend, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield to my very good friend from the great State of Kentucky (Mr. Comer) for a unanimous consent request.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, in closing, I urge opposition to this rule. Once again, the majority is making the exact same mistake it made earlier this week. We have a bipartisan bill already approved by the Senate. The House should simply take it up and work its will on that bill. Frankly, we all know, if that bill were allowed to come to the floor, it would pass overwhelmingly with a majority of each side voting in favor of it. Then it wouldn't have to go back to the Senate. It would go immediately to the President of the United States. He could sign it, and these resources would begin to flow. Now, again, we have had a robust debate today, and I respect the passions on both sides and every point of view about this. Actually, I see a great deal of common agreement. We agree, which we did not 8 weeks ago, that there is an emergency on the southern border. We agree it is a humanitarian crisis. We agree there need to be resources that go there immediately. We agree that time is short. We are also all elected officials who are privileged to be in this Chamber, and my experience with my friends on both sides of the aisle is that they are basically pretty practical people. They came here to solve problems. They have different viewpoints, but they are almost always very practical and try to get something done. We know the Senate bill is not everything that my side would want. We certainly know it is not everything that my friend's side would want. But we know it is bipartisan. We know three-quarters of the Democrats in the other Chamber voted for it. We know it will pass. With all due respect to my friends, they have clung so tightly to their bill, which I know they believe in. It will pass here, but it won't pass the Senate, and it certainly won't be signed by the President. Where will we be if we continue down the road that they are laying out in front of us? I know they are sincerely concerned about children on the border, but we are better off with a bill that passes so we have billions of dollars moving to where they are supposed to go, and a bill, by the way, that the entire Democratic leadership thought was appropriate and good enough. Let's not sit here and make the perfect the enemy of the good. Let's be practical and deliver to the American people what they want, which is a solution, a solution that both parties will vote for and a solution that the President will sign. How many times do we go home and hear that from our own constituents: Can't you guys get together and do anything? Can't you work together? Can't you put aside your differences and put the American people first? It pains me as a House Member to admit it, I suppose, but the United States Senate did that in this case before we did. We can accept that and move on, and my friends can continue to fight for the things they believe. It is not as if, for these things that are in this bill that the administration won't accept, they can't wrap them up again and put them back in another bill and start the process. If we do not act, the resources will not get to the border where they are needed, and these conditions that concern us all will continue. I urge us to step back a little bit, accept that in this case the Senate has a bipartisan solution that will work, and for goodness' sake, just put it on the floor to see what happens. We know what will happen. My friends will vote for it in overwhelming numbers. My friends on my side of the aisle will vote for it in overwhelming numbers. It will go straight to the President of the United States. That isn't going to solve the problem, but it is going to ease the problem, and that is going to move us in the right direction and provide our very hard-pressed people--who are working this problem by caring for the migrants, trying to protect our borders, and trying to provide justice--the resources they need to continue to work on this problem while, frankly, we continue to try to arrive at a legislative solution. Madam Speaker, I want to end with a point I made just a little bit earlier. I thank the Chair for the patient and professional manner in which she has allowed us to conduct this debate. I thank her very much for making sure that when we had an outside disturbance, it was quickly dealt with. I urge my friends to reconsider and, hopefully, come together around a bill that neither of us thinks is perfect but both of us could probably vote for and the President could sign. Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend, the chairman of the Rules Committee, for his participation in debate. It is always helpful and always enlightening. He is a good friend and a person I admire a great deal, even when we differ on a particular issue. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield to my good friend from the great State of Ohio, (Mr. Balderson) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close and will yield back the balance of my time at the conclusion of my remarks. Madam Speaker, we don't think the House bill is a better bill. We don't think reducing the amount the Senate gave to the military by $124 million is a good idea. We don't think reducing the amount of money that is going to Border Patrol, which is one of the areas that is a problem, by $89 million is a good idea. We don't think a lot of this effort to micromanage a crisis that is thousands of miles away from us by this body here has good suggestions. We want some flexibility. We think the Senate bill does take care of the needs on the border in terms of unaccompanied minors who have crossed over into our territory. So we just don't think this does it, and we think this prolongs the process. We have a bipartisan bill--a perfect bill? No. Is our bill a perfect bill? No. As a matter of fact, we like the Senate bill on our side better than this bill. Regardless, that one can pass. That one can pass on this floor. That one can be signed into law. This one that my friends are embarking on, they think it is an improvement. I will just tell them, politically, not passing the Senate, not likely to be signed by the President. So if we want to get help there immediately, we have a way to do it in the Senate bill. We think this leads us to a political dead-end. Madam Speaker, I would press for my motion, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to begin by thanking my good friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Chairman McGovern) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. Mr. Speaker, well, we are here for the third time this week and the second time on a supplemental appropriations bill for the southern border. Earlier this week, I spoke on this floor and expressed my concerns about the House bill. Make no mistake, we need emergency funding for the crisis on the southern border. We needed it 2 months ago, and we need it even more desperately today. Two days ago, I warned that the bill the House was considering would not pass the Senate and would not become law, and I was proven correct. The House bill failed in the Senate. In fact, it only received 37 votes in support. In contrast, the Senate amendment passed in a bipartisan vote of 84-8. If the Democratic leadership would allow a vote on the Senate text, I believe it would pass this Chamber today and be on its way to the President's desk--today. But, instead, we are here considering a rule that would further amend the bill, bringing back in provisions that have already failed to garner support in the Senate. If this bill fails to pass the Senate, as I expect will happen, then we will be leaving town for a week without actually having passed anything to deal with the crisis. And I do remind my friends on the other side we have attempted on our side, 16 times, to bring up legislation to deal with this, and the President asked for this money 2 months ago. So, I am glad they have a sense of urgency now, because we have not seen it in the past. My sense is that this is more about maintaining the unity of the Democratic Caucus than it is about pressing legislation that can be enacted into law. But that has been true for this entire Congress, and it is why my friends have, so far, failed to enact any significant legislation during their tenure in the majority. Mr. Speaker, we are out of time. We desperately need to get these emergency funds to the Federal agencies responsible for managing this crisis. They are out of money and need additional resources to take care of people, many of them innocent children, who are affected by this crisis. We do not have the luxury of time in responding to this emergency. My friends on the other side of the aisle are about to make the exact same mistake that they made on Tuesday when they pushed forward a partisan bill that would not pass the Senate and that the President would not sign into law. What I don't understand, Mr. Speaker, is why the majority is so resistant to acting in a bipartisan manner here. Both Republicans and Democrats agree that we need additional funding to address the crisis on the southern border. There is a real chance to send a bipartisan bill to the President that will become law. And, instead of doing what will immediately help children and families at the border, the majority is attempting to cut the needed funding from the Senate bill, add partisan riders back into it, and then send it back to the Senate, where it can fail again. Madam Speaker, we do not have time to waste on purely political exercises. There is still an opportunity to correct that mistake, Madam Speaker, and I would urge the majority to take that opportunity seriously. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the distinguished Republican leader.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko), my very good friend and distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from Arizona an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Granger) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, let me just say again, we can solve this problem now. I respect that my friends have strong feelings about their legislation. We all do. The reality is that that legislation is not going to get through the Senate; it is not going to be signed by the President. We have a vehicle that has already gotten through the Senate, that 75 percent of the Democrats in the Chamber voted for, including the entire Democratic leadership, and that could go, if this House would act on it, straight to the President's desk and be signed into law. Now, my friends are, I know, concerned about resources. And, again, it is nice that they are. It would have been nice if, in the 18 previous times we have tried to bring this matter up before the House, they would have helped. It would have been nice if, 2 months ago, we had actually seen them respond. We share their concern for these young people. That is why we asked for extra resources. The administration asked for extra resources 58 days ago. So I think, again, this ought to be pretty easy to resolve here. My friends, with all due respect, have a partisan bill that will pass along partisan lines in this House, that will not be enacted by the Senate, and that will not be signed by the President. The Senate has a bill they have already passed in a bipartisan fashion. It, frankly, has more money to help the people who are being paid overtime in the Border Patrol to-- Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the Speaker personally for taking control of a difficult situation. So, Madam Speaker, just to resume my point, we have a vehicle. It could literally pass on this floor in less than an hour. It could head to the President. It satisfies almost all--not all, but almost all--of my friends' concerns. I would just ask them, in all seriousness, to just consider political reality here and let's get this done and get these resources to where they are needed. We can do that. We can do it in a bipartisan fashion. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from the great State of Louisiana (Mr. Johnson), my very good friend, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Armstrong), my very good friend, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I think you will be delighted to hear that I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from the great State of Michigan (Mr. Mitchell).

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to simply concur in the Senate amendment without further amendment. This will immediately send the bill to the President and deliver the necessary resources needed to respond to this humanitarian crisis. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I know my friends are aware of this, but the Senate bill is actually--well, I certainly would vote for it. I think it would have overwhelming support on our side. The President, in the past, has expressed some concerns, and that is an important thing, but the Senate has really worked through a lot of these differences. The bill that we would like to see put on this floor and that we know would pass with overwhelming, bipartisan support is a product of compromise, so much compromise that the entire Democratic leadership felt comfortable voting for it. With all due respect to my friends, their bill is not the product of compromise. It is not going to get very many Republican votes here, if any. I would be surprised, frankly, if it did. It is not going to get accepted by the United States Senate. It absolutely won't be signed by the President of the United States. We are all concerned about the conditions. We have been expressing that concern for 8 weeks. We never called this a manufactured crisis. We never said that this was made up for political purposes. The administration recognized it 8 weeks ago. We have tried multiple times to get this House to focus on it. I am very pleased that we finally reached a point that both sides are focusing on it. But we also ought to focus on what is possible to achieve in a limited timeframe. We know we are running out of money. We know there are real-life consequences to that. They are starting to unfold right now. There are services being cut back. For a lot of these conditions, frankly, we ought to look in the mirror, as Congress, and ask why we didn't get these resources there a long time ago. Frankly, the House rule that we are discussing on the House bill, that bill actually reduces resources at the border. It doesn't expand them. It reduces them. It reduces them also for the American military. That is part of it. The Senate bill, in my view, frankly, is much superior to my friends' product, but it has one virtue above all: All we have to do is put it on the floor and pass it, and it goes to the President of the United States to be signed immediately. Resources begin to move to where they are desperately needed immediately. That is not true with my friends' bill. All it does is reopen the dialogue with the Senate, where it has very little prospect of passing. Then, frankly, if it did pass--not likely--it would be vetoed. I am befuddled, Madam Speaker, that they are pursuing a goal that they know will not work, but we have seen this time and time again. It is more important to get a bill across the floor in a partisan fashion than it is to put something on the floor that is bipartisan, that can pass the Senate and come into law. Now, my friends know we live in an era of divided government, and we have wasted 6 months, in my view, dealing with a lot of things that we knew would never pass. But I respect my friends' right to bring their agenda to the floor. This is different. This is a national emergency. It has to pass. We have one vehicle where it can be passed and be signed so that help can go immediately. We have my friends' vehicle, which I know they believe in passionately, and I respect that, but it can't pass. It is pretty simple. Sooner or later, I hope we get to the obvious answer and pass the Senate bill and send it to the President. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I personally thank my good friend, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), for the professional and very patient manner in which she handled the Chair and presided over this body. I wanted to recognize that. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Katko), my very good friend.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, actually, on that, we have a great deal in common with one another. We, too, think we ought to address this matter quickly. As I am sure my friend recalls, we have tried on 16 different occasions over the last 8 weeks to bring legislation that would alleviate this problem to the floor. Our friends rejected that every single time. We also have a bill that has been passed by the Senate 84-7: a bill where 35 Democrats--about three-quarters of the number of Democrats-- supported, a bill that we know would solve, a bill that if we would bring to this floor we can pass immediately and it would go to the President's desk; it wouldn't have to go back to the Senate. So my friends, by not accepting an overwhelmingly bipartisan bill by the Senate and simply moving it on, are the ones who are actually imposing a delay here. What they have got in front of us that we will consider later today, if they are successful, frankly, is something we know the Senate is unlikely to accept. I have not heard from the President, but given the scope of the changes inside the bill, these are all changes that, in some cases, failed yesterday in the Senate--reductions in spending for the military and for the Border Patrol--that the administration has already signaled they will reject. There is a simple solution here. We could simply take the Senate bill up that has passed 84-7--overwhelming support on both sides of the aisle--get that bill down to the President, and the money could start flowing immediately. If we proceed as my friends want to proceed, we are simply going to be playing ping-pong back and forth. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from the great State of Florida (Mr. Dunn), my very good friend, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. COLE

Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to begin by thanking my friend. I think this is a wise decision. I know it was a difficult decision, but I think it is the right thing because I know we have a common objective here. We know we need resources at the border right away. We know, by the action my friend is taking, we now have the possibility of making that happen and doing it in a very bipartisan way; that is, taking a bill that passed the Senate 87-8, moving it here with a very substantial bipartisan majority, and, frankly, getting resources to exactly where I know my friend and his colleagues want them to go, which is to help folks at the border deal with this ever-mounting crisis. Mr. Speaker, I urge that we accept the amendment. I thank my friend. I thank our friends on the other side for making what I know is a tough but, I think, a very wise decision. I think the country will be better off for it. I appreciate the fact that we will pass this legislation in a bipartisan manner. As the Senate did, we will here. The President will sign it, and the resources that we all want to arrive and help alleviate the difficult situation at the border will start moving immediately. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, and I yield back the balance of my time.