Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. In closing, Madam Speaker, let me simply observe that this is somewhat ironic because the gentleman has repeatedly said he doesn't like the Senate bill. I hear that. He then says, we need to consider a more thoughtful way of doing this. I get that. I have then pointed out that the committee, which is headed by Mr. Goodlatte, Republican leader of the Judiciary Committee, has passed a number of bills, presumably, in that quest for a more thoughtful consideration to fix a broken system. The gentleman has not said he is going to bring any of those bills to the floor, so he knows what he is against, Madam Speaker. He knows what his party is against, Madam Speaker, but he cannot tell us what he is going to do to fix a broken system because, apparently, the four bills that I have asked about are not being brought to the floor, are not part of the solution of which the gentleman speaks, and that is regrettable. Let me say, in closing, Madam Speaker, I hope we can work in a bipartisan fashion. It didn't occur after the election, where the very issue was whether or not we ought to extend affordable health care to millions of people, some 30 to 40 to 50 million people who did not have health care security. They continue to be scared. They continue to be presented with a message that this is a failed program, frankly, before it even starts. Now, it has started. In terms of access, it doesn't start, as the gentleman knows, until January 1. But for some people, for some people it has started. For some parents with children with a preexisting condition, who could not get insurance, it is working. For young people who couldn't find a job but needed insurance and were less than 26 years of age, they could stay on their parents' policy. It was working. For seniors who were confronted with a doughnut hole that put them deeply in debt for prescription drugs they needed for lifesaving and life quality, it is working. It is working for those people who did not go bankrupt and won't go bankrupt in the future because there are not the limits that can be imposed upon them when they get really sick. So, yes, we will have a debate on that, but it ought not to simply divert us from all of the other issues that we need to deal with. The budget--we need to get this country on a fiscally sustainable path. I know the leader agrees on that. We need to fix a broken immigration system. I know the leader believes that as well. We need to invest in growing our country, to get rid of the sequester because the sequester is going to hurt our country. And, frankly, I think the leader agrees on that. We may not agree on how to do it, but I think he agrees on the objective. So, Madam Speaker, on all of those, we ought to be giving our best efforts, not in a partisan way, but in a bipartisan way, as Americans, not as Democrats and Republicans. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Melwood, Maryland's second-largest non-profit agency focusing on people with differing abilities, as it marks its fiftieth anniversary. In 1963, a small group of parents and supporters decided to teach plant care to young adults who were considered by most to be unemployable. It was then that Melwood was launched as a place where people with differing abilities learned new skills with the goal of employment. For 50 years, Melwood has been advocating on behalf of individuals with differing abilities by providing support services, helping them with critical skills, and placing them in jobs that provide independence and dignity. Today, Melwood continues to provide job opportunities and support services to nearly 1,900 individuals with differing abilities. With 38 AbilityOne contracts at 43 locations, Melwood is the second-largest agency of its kind in Maryland and the largest AbilityOne employer in the Eastern Region. Additionally, it operates the Melwood Recreation Center for nearly 900 adults and children with and without special needs. Melwood's great work has even earned it an international reputation, and Melwood's ``social entrepreneurial'' model has been copied elsewhere in America and in other countries as well. Every American who wants to contribute to building our country and strengthening our communities ought not to be held back because of a differing ability, and for a half a century Melwood has empowered people with differing abilities to transform their own lives through opportunities of employment, job training, life-skill improvement, and supportive and recreational services. Much of Melwood's work helped lay the foundation for the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act, bipartisan legislation I was proud to lead to passage in the House in 1990 and witness signed into law by President George H.W. Bush. As advocates for people with differing abilities celebrate this milestone anniversary, let us recommit ourselves to Melwood's mission to empower and inspire. I look forward to continuing to work with Melwood for many years to come, and I am confident that it will continue to carry out its mission for another fifty years and beyond. I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating co-founder, President, and CEO emeritus, Earl Copus, Jr., current President and CEO, Cari DeSantis, and the rest of the outstanding Melwood staff, who will continue carrying this outstanding organization into the future.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, budget conferees are now meeting--or will be meeting shortly--to negotiate a budget for the remainder of this fiscal year, and they have a real opportunity to look beyond that mission and to lay the groundwork for a long-term solution to our deficits that is balanced and restores certainty to our economy. What we do not need are more gimmicks and partisan games like we will have today, frankly. We are going to have a vote on the resolution which is disapproving of the raising of the debt limit. Everybody knows that is not a real vote, and almost everybody on this floor knows that, if we pursued that policy, it would be damaging to America, to the military, as was just brought up, and to our Nation. Every Republican leader has said that not increasing the debt limit is an alternative that ought to be pursued. Yet, we have this vote. That resolution has already been rejected by the Senate, and it stands no chance of surviving a Presidential veto. It is, frankly, simply political cover and a waste of our time. The keys to any budget solution, Mr. Speaker, must be compromise and a seriousness of purpose. Americans want to see that seriousness, and they want to see much, much, much less of the political gamesmanship, some of which we will practice today, unfortunately. Republicans and Democrats, I believe, in looking beyond a small fix and toward negotiating a long-term solution, will find that we actually agree on many things. We agree that gradual reforms are better than sudden ones. We agree that sequestration is not a sensible approach to achieving deficit savings. Let me say as an aside: no matter how many times it is said on this floor that the sequester is President Obama's policy, it will not make it fact. It is dead, flat wrong. The sequester is incorporated in the Republican budget that was passed in this House just some months ago. No Democrat voted for that budget, because they believed the sequester--as the previous speaker said, but he voted for the budget which implemented the sequester--is harming our national security and harming our domestic security and harming our economy and harming the growth of jobs. In fact, sequestration--which I point out to people starts with ``s,'' which stands for ``stupid''--is a terrible approach that was never meant to come into practice. Many of us all agree that, in replacing the sequester, we will need to find savings through revenue policies and reforms to mandatory spending that could pay dividends for the budget and the economy in the future. The key to compromise, of course, is balance. Every American understands that. Every husband, every wife, every parent understands that compromise is essential within a family, within a business, within a community, and, yes, within a country. The key to compromise is balance, which is what both the Domenici-Rivlin and Bowles-Simpson bipartisan commissions embraced as a framework for agreement. A balanced compromise is critical because Democrats and Republicans are going to have to work together to pass any agreement through both Chambers and have it signed into law. Democrats are ready to make the tough decisions necessary to set our fiscal house in order, but we have made it clear that we will not allow the most vulnerable Americans to carry the burden of deficit reduction, and it is not necessary that they do so. Our goal remains a balanced approach to deficit reduction and an agreement that restores certainty to our economy. My Republican colleagues and friends said much about restoring certainty, particularly in the 2010 election. Unfortunately, for our economy, for our businesses, for our people, we have done anything but restore certainty. In fact, we have governed by crisis--30 days, 90 days, 180 days, a year. Arbitrary deadlines were put in place, which brought the country to the brink of default and to the brink of closing down government. In fact, of course, just recently, we did, in fact, shut down the government. Now, my Republican colleagues say we wanted that to happen on our side of the aisle. Ironically, 198 Democrats voted to open the government. That is to say, every Democrat who was voting on this floor voted to open government. Of my colleagues who say they didn't want to shut down government, 144 of them voted to keep the government shut down, Mr. Speaker, and 87 of them voted to open up the government. So the American public is not fooled as to who wanted to shut down government, but it was a bad policy, and it led to uncertainty in our economy. Reaching an agreement only for this fiscal year, in addition, will mean more left to do, more of sequester left to replace, and more confidence to instill. I hope the conferees will take a broader view and will send us a budget worthy of this Nation, worthy of the Nation it will serve--one that reflects our priorities to grow our economy, creates jobs, gives opportunity to our people, ensures that our national security is protected and that our Nation's long-term competitiveness is enhanced. Mr. Speaker, that is what we ought to do. That is what the American people expect us to do. That is what the American people hope we will do. Let's warrant the faith and confidence of the American people by keeping faith with them and with our country.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, we have just observed a moment of silence for Isaac Skelton. My good friend, Emanuel Cleaver, Ike's good friend, Senator McCaskill, Lacy Clay, and others who are here from the Missouri delegation, I want to rise with them, not in a moment of silence, but in a moment of tribute. We will perhaps have an opportunity to speak a longer time. Yesterday, many of us had the opportunity to participate in a memorial service for Tom Foley. Tom Foley was the Speaker of this House. A gentleman spoke who is, I think, one of the most revered members that has served in this body, Robert Michel. Bob Michel was Tom Foley's friend. Bob Michel was the leader of the Republican side of the aisle. They were friends, colleagues, and cooperated with one another to the benefit of this institution and its Members, and the Dean of the House adds, correctly, to the benefit of our country and all its citizens. Bob Michel observed the civility that each one of them displayed and the willingness to reach out across the aisle and to make things happen positively for our country and for our citizens. We lost another individual within the last weeks, Bill Young, who was a similar personality, and added luster to this Congress by his service and his civility. Major Owens was another whom we lost. Four people who made this institution a better place. Ike Skelton was my brother. He and I were Sigma Chi's. His son was a Sigma Chi. His father was a Sigma Chi. So we had a very special bond to start out with. In addition, his first wife, Susan, who died too early, as mine did, came out and knocked on doors for me, Mr. Speaker, in Bowie, Maryland, just down the road here a piece. So I had a special bond with Ike, but also an extraordinary great respect for the way he conducted himself as a representative of the people of his district in Missouri, and the respect that he gave to each of us and the respect that he received in return. How sad it is that these giants, Tom Foley, Bill Young, Ike Skelton, and, yes, Major Owens, passed from this body, passed from this life, but how joyful it is the extraordinary contributions each of them made to this House, which we should revere and love, the people's House. Ike Skelton was of the people, for the people, and certainly by the people.

Mr. HOYER. I would be glad to yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comments.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, this is how Congress ought to work with one another, all 435 of us. I don't mean that 435 are going to vote for the bill, but we have worked together on this bill. And I want to congratulate the chairman, Mr. Shuster, whose father would be proud of him and would have acted in the same way, working together to make things happen for America in a bipartisan way. So I congratulate Mr. Shuster, Congressman Shuster, brother Shuster. I also want to congratulate Nick Joe Rahall from West Virginia, who has been such an expert on the areas of building America and growing our economy. I want to thank also Dr. Tim Bishop, Tim Bishop from Long Island, who has worked so hard on this particular piece of legislation. As I have said many times, Mr. Chairman, from this floor, Congress has a responsibility to take bipartisan action to boost our economic competitiveness in a way that will create jobs. This bill has the potential and, in my opinion, will do exactly that. While the bill is not perfect--none of them are--by investing in our Nation's infrastructure, including ports and waterways, as this bill does, we can lay the groundwork for a more efficient delivery system for American-made products to reach markets in our country and overseas. Promoting and increasing U.S. exports is a core component of the House Democrats and, I might say, a bipartisan Make It in America plan for jobs and competitiveness. I hope Democrats and Republicans can work together in a bipartisan way, as Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member Rahall have done with this bill, to move additional pieces of Make It in America legislation to the floor so we can further promote exports, pursue a national manufacturing strategy, encourage the return of innovation and jobs from overseas, and secure a skilled workforce for the 21st century. Mr. Chairman, I will support this bill today for what it does to create jobs and improve our waterborne transportation; but I hope that, as the House and Senate develop a final bill, the conferees will look closely at the environmental review provisions to make certain that we can strike an appropriate balance between expediting projects, while understanding their impact on the environment.

Mr. HOYER. I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work with us to make sure that our efforts to provide certainty account for the size and complexity of some WRRDA projects. If we can continue to act in a bipartisan way, as I know Mr. Shuster and Mr. Rahall will do, we can send a message that Congress is ready to move forward and help more of our people make it in America. I hope we can tap into the spirit of cooperation by scheduling consideration of a comprehensive immigration reform legislation which, like this bill, has support from both sides of the aisle, from business, from labor, from religions groups, and from leading non- profits. That is a challenge I think that we can meet this year. Again, I want to congratulate the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), who has worked hard in a focused and bipartisan way to bring this day to fruition, and I congratulate him. I thank Mr. Rahall, my good friend, who has worked so diligently over so many years to make sure that people can make it in America, and that America invests in itself.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the majority leader, Mr. Cantor, for the purpose of informing us of the schedule for the week to come.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman, and I appreciate that information. I would simply observe, Mr. Speaker, and then I will have a couple of questions of the majority leader, but last week we did something that was, I think, critically important, and we did it in a bipartisan fashion: we made sure that the government was open, and we made sure that America pays its bills. Today, in an overwhelming bipartisan fashion, we passed the Water Resources Reform and Development Act, which will, as I heard the majority leader saying and I said as well, be helpful in growing our economy, growing jobs, and investing in America's growth. I would simply observe that there are other things, Mr. Speaker, that I think we can act on in a bipartisan fashion as well and be successful in seeing enacted, which would make a real difference on behalf of our country. I would therefore, Mr. Speaker, ask the majority leader whether or not there is any thought about bringing to the floor before the end of the year the immigration bill, and I will yield to my friend for the purpose of a response.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that information, Mr. Speaker, and I would say of course the Senate has passed a bill in an overwhelming bipartisan fashion, an immigration bill, and if in fact we bring an immigration bill to the floor, whether I vote for it or not, and we move that bill through the House, that will give us an opportunity to do what my Republican friends, Mr. Speaker, have been talking about--negotiating, sitting down, talking, going to conference. I think that will be a step forward. We are on this side of the aisle very, very strongly in favor of moving immigration reform. We are obviously hopeful that the budget conference that has been convened will reach an agreement. We hope it will reach an agreement, frankly, before Thanksgiving so we will not again have to address on a crisis basis either the keeping of government open and funding of government for the balance of the fiscal year, but also ensuring that we do not have another time when we come very close to not approving the payment of our bills by what ought to be the most creditworthy nation on Earth, and I think it is the most creditworthy nation on Earth, so I am pleased to hear that information. Mr. Speaker, let me ask the majority leader whether or not he has any information which might lead us to having some confidence that we might have progress on the conference on the farm bill. I yield to my friend, the majority leader.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I think Mr. Cantor and I are in absolute agreement. If both sides take that attitude, then we can make some progress. Hopefully, that will be the case. Mr. Speaker, the majority leader has said, I said, Hal Rogers of the Appropriations Committee has said, and others have said that the sequester will not work, that the sequester will, in fact, undermine the ability of America to invest in its growth and its opportunities and its ability to compete globally so that we can create jobs here in America. The majority leader has made an observation, Mr. Speaker, that he didn't think the sequester was the way to go. I share that view, and I share very strongly the view of Mr. Rogers that, in fact, the sequester could not be implemented in a way that was consistent with the interests of our country. I want to ask the majority leader, Mr. Speaker, focusing on what we can agree on and not what we disagree on, whether or not he shares my view that one of the conference's objectives should be replacing the sequester with a formula that gets us to a place where we are bringing down our expenditures and at the same time making sure that we protect the mandatory expenditures that Mr. Ryan talks about and others talk about to make sure that our most vulnerable in America are protected and that we do so, frankly, before Thanksgiving, Mr. Speaker. I am urging the majority leader to hopefully take that course so that we do not once again confront a crisis prior to Christmas when we are scheduled to adjourn for the Christmas and Hanukkah holidays, but also to preclude coming into the first of January with a deadline confronting us and disrupting the confidence of our people and, frankly, the people around the world. I yield to my friend.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comments. Mr. Speaker, we have two bills: the Senate bill, which was passed some 6 months ago, and the House bill, which was passed about 6 months ago. We have been hoping to go to conference during those past 6 months. That hasn't happened. We are now going to conference. That is a positive step forward. My belief is that the conference will discuss both the Senate bill and its priorities and the House bill and its priorities, and we will come to a resolution, hopefully, on a compromise so that we can get from where we are to where we need to be. I am not going to get into a debate at this point in time. At some point in time that will be appropriate with the gentleman. We seem to hoe this road a lot, but the fact of the matter is we ought to look at those who have made recommendations, worked on this to figure out how we can get from where we are to where we need to be. Without going further into the specifics, as we talk about next week, let me ask the gentleman if he can give our Members some view of his thoughts on scheduling and subject matters for consideration for the balance of the year. I know we talked about a couple of items, and I know Members are interested in what their planning should be for the balance of the year, which is coming up pretty soon. I yield to the majority leader.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comments. He is going to find out, I am sure, over the next few weeks the overwhelming interest that Americans are displaying in getting health care opportunities and access to an affordable, quality health care. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding. Bill Young was my friend. Bill Young was a gentleman in every sense of the word. Bill Young was an example for us all. I will have the privilege of speaking on Thursday, at his request, at his funeral. Bill and I served on the Appropriations Committee for 23 years together; then I left when I became majority leader. Bill Young was, as I said, a gentleman who cared about each and every individual in this House. More than that, he cared for each and every person who served in uniform in our Armed Forces; and he and Beverly displayed that, as Congressman Miller has said, on a weekly, daily basis. I am a Democrat; Bill was a Republican. It didn't make any difference. He was an American, I was an American, and we served our country together. No one served it better than Bill Young. He chose to see our differences as slight and our common purpose as great. He always chose civility over partisanship. He was a skilled legislator on behalf of the people of Pinellas County, Florida, on behalf of Florida, on behalf of his country, on behalf of the members of the Armed Forces and the defense of this country. He was a champion of our men and women in uniform, veterans and their families, all of whom, wherever they lived, he viewed as his constituents. This bill to rename the VA Hospital in Bay Pines, Florida, which I am proud to cosponsor, is a fitting tribute to his devotion to our veterans and our troops. Though he represented Florida longer than any Member of this House in history, Bill was originally from a hard-scrabble coal mining town in Pennsylvania. It was there he learned many lessons about the hardships facing working families and the need to ensure that opportunities would be within their reach, and he never forgot that. He was a great Member of this body, a very powerful Member of this body, an extraordinary, influential American. But to all of us, he was Bill; to all those he came in contact with, he was Bill. He was a person who understood the needs, the fears, the aspirations, the hopes of his people and the people of our country. My thoughts are with Beverly, with Bill Young's family, and with the people of Florida's 13th District. This House has lost a great Member.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I heard from my friend, former Congressman Norm Dicks, today, and he asked me to submit this statement on his behalf. He had the privilege of serving with Chairman Bill Young for over thirty years on the Defense Appropriation Subcommittee, and said this about him: Chairman Young did more for the men and women in the armed forces than anyone in Congress. Bill and Beverly made weekly trips to Bethesda and Walter Reed to see our wounded warriors and offered personal help to their families. Bill Young believed in bi-partisanship; the Defense Subcommittee almost always reported the Defense Appropriation bill with all Members, Democrats and Republicans, in full support. Bill was a great American, a great leader, and a great friend and he will be truly missed.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the House bring up the Senate amendment to H.J. Res. 59, to open the government and go to conference on a budget so that we end this Republican government shutdown.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker.

Mr. HOYER. 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.

Mr. HOYER. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. HOYER. 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. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. 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.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. 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----

Mr. HOYER. 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. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. 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.