Jim McGovern

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Chair, I want to thank Representatives Velazquez, Hastings, Torres, Jackson Lee, Jayapal, Pocan, and Escobar for cosponsoring this amendment with me. This is not about whether or not you believe a border wall is necessary or not. I don't believe it is. Some of my friends on the other side believe it is. But when the President said he was going to declare an emergency and dip into emergency funds, disaster funds, that are dedicated to helping people deal with real disasters to pay for this wall, that set off alarm bells here. So no matter what side you are on on this border wall issue, you should support this amendment, because this President, and no President, should dip into disaster relief money to use it for something different than what Congress intended. The people who this money is aimed at helping are not interested in building a wall; they are interested in rebuilding their homes. Let us not put these moneys in jeopardy. Let's have a bipartisan moment when we all can agree that the disaster money ought to be disaster money, period. Madam Chair, I urge a strong vote in favor of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Chair, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Chair, I would inquire how many more speakers the gentlewoman has.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Escobar).

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Chair, I include in the Record a letter to the President from the Texas delegation objecting to using disaster money for the border wall. These individuals support the wall, I assume most of them do, but they don't support the President's promise that he might use executive powers to go into disaster money to pay for the border wall. U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, January 15, 2019. Hon. Donald Trump, President of the United States, The White House, Washington, DC. Mr. President: The widespread flooding, storm surges and high winds that resulted from Hurricane Harvey's landfall (DR-4332) left many parts of the Texas coast paralyzed for months. Harvey leveled thousands of homes and businesses, altering many Texas communities forever. This disaster required a massive, coordinated response at the state, local and federal levels to help individuals restore their lives to normal as quickly as possible. Texas continues to rebuild through coordinated efforts at all levels of government and important work is underway to mitigate against future storms. We--and the millions of Texas citizens we represent--remain thankful to the numerous federal agencies and first responders who coordinated and contributed resources and personnel. Shortly after the rains subsided, Congress swiftly acted by passing three separate disaster supplemental bills, including the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-123), which contained over $15 billion dollars for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers civil works projects. Recent reports have indicated that your Administration is considering the use of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers funds, appropriated by Congress and intended for Hurricane Harvey recovery and mitigation efforts, in an effort to secure our southern border. We strongly support securing the border with additional federal resources including tactical infrastructure, technology, ports of entry improvements and personnel. However, we are strongly opposed to using funds appropriated by Congress for disaster relief and mitigation for Texas for any unintended purpose. As Texans continue to rebuild and prepare for future disasters, these funds, appropriated by Congress to be spent directly on rebuilding and mitigation, are critical to helping our communities recover, preventing future flooding and protecting our constituents. Thank you for your commitment to help Texas respond to Hurricane Harvey and to secure the southern border. We ask that you ensure necessary efforts on border security do not jeopardize long-term hurricane recovery and mitigation in Texas. Sincerely, Greg Abbott, Governor, State of Texas; John Cornyn, U.S. Senator; Ted Cruz, U.S. Senator; Michael McCaul, Member of Congress; Randy Weber, Member of Congress; Will Hurd, Member of Congress; Kevin Brady, Member of Congress; Pete Olson, Member of Congress; Lance Gooden, Member of Congress; Brian Babin, Member of Congress; Kenny Marchant, Member of Congress, Bill Flores, Member of Congress; Dan Crenshaw, Member of Congress; Lizzie Fletcher, Member of Congress; K. Michael Conaway, Member of Congress; Roger Williams, Member of Congress, Kay Granger, Member of Congress; John Carter, Member of Congress; Sheila Jackson Lee, Member of Congress; Filemon Vela, Member of Congress; Vicente Gonzalez, Member of Congress, Henry Cuellar, Member of Congress; Sylvia Garcia, Member of Congress.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I don't get to say this often, but I agree with Senator Ted Cruz. Yesterday, along with members of the Texas congressional delegation, he wrote to President Trump. Part of his letter read: `` . . . we are strongly opposed to using funds appropriated by Congress for disaster relief and mitigation for Texas for any unintended purpose.'' I agree. Disaster funding should go where Congress intended: to the sites of actual disasters, to communities dealing with things like hurricanes, mudslides, wildfires and floods. That is what my amendment is all about. It states that none of the funds in this disaster supplemental for the Army Corps of Engineers or Department of Homeland Security may be used to plan, develop, or construct the President's border wall. It is that simple. If someone like me, a progressive Member of the House, can see eye to eye with Senator Ted Cruz on this, one of the biggest cheerleaders for the President's border wall, then this amendment should pass with broad bipartisan support. It isn't about whether or not you support building a border wall; it is about whether we support a President moving disaster funding away from where Congress said it should go, away from communities that are rebuilding. These people aren't interested in building a wall. They need to rebuild their homes. So today, we are talking about President Trump and the wall. But, Mr. Chairman, if we don't take a strong stand against subverting the will of Congress this time, then it opens the door for the next President, Democrat or Republican, to use disaster funding as a piggy bank for their priority, whatever it may be. I think the border wall would be ineffective and a waste of taxpayer dollars, but you can disagree with me and still support my amendment, because we all should agree that no President should be redirecting funding away from where Congress said it should go. The supplemental provides $12 billion in disaster relief for communities trying to rebuild. Let's make sure every penny actually goes to disaster relief. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, and I ask for its consideration.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Paula and Jim Buonomo for their distinguished careers and continued dedication to making their community a better place to live and raise a family. Over the past 30 years, Paula has held many prominent roles and has served with distinction on the Shrewsbury School Committee, as a member Shrewsbury Town Meeting, on the Board of Directors for the Worcester County Food Bank, and as Chair of the Shrewsbury Democratic Town Committee. I would also like to thank Paula for her time spent as a District Representative in my office--where I saw her affinity for helping others first hand. Jim has also consistently proven his devotion to improving the lives of others through his time serving on the Board of Directors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and playing a crucial role in many other initiatives aimed at improving the lives of students in Shrewsbury. On January 26th, the Shrewsbury Education Foundation will present Paula and Jim with the Community Service Award, recognizing the couple for consistently going above and beyond in their service to their community, and particularly the Shrewsbury Public Schools. Throughout the years, they have stepped up and worked together at critical times to improve the lives of students, including the campaigns for the Floral Street School and Shrewsbury High School. They also played a significant role in making the Shrewsbury Public Library and new athletic complex a reality--which will benefit the residents of Shrewsbury for generations to come. Madam Speaker, on behalf of the United States Congress and the people of Massachusetts, I would like to thank and recognize Paula and Jim for their work in improving the Shrewsbury School District and the Massachusetts education system. Their tireless efforts have forever changed Shrewsbury and the Commonwealth for the better.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I hope the President will start paying attention to the negative impacts of his pointless government shutdown when, in coming weeks, his actions deliver a devastating blow to some of America's most vulnerable families. In 2018, over 40 million Americans participated in SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps, or about 12 percent of the population. When the President and Senate Republicans let USDA's funding expire, the problem didn't just affect Federal employees; it extended to low- income families, farmers, and businesses. If this shutdown continues, 40 million Americans will be at even greater risk of food insecurity as soon as March 2019, not to mention the millions of Americans who participate in child nutrition programs like school meals and other programs like WIC, the Women Infants and Children Food and Nutrition Service. Last week, Secretary Perdue announced that USDA only has enough money to fund SNAP until the end of February. This means that in a few short weeks, millions of American families won't know where their next meal is coming from simply because the President wanted to throw a temper tantrum over building a wall. Now, some may ask, why panic over something that won't happen for another month? Our timing on this is crucial. Just because we have time before SNAP, child nutrition programs, or WIC lose funding does not mean that we should wait until the last minute to fix the problem. Nearly two-thirds of SNAP participants are children, elderly, or people with disabilities. In my home State of Massachusetts, over 760,000 people receive assistance. It is a program that is crucial for low-income, hardworking families. SNAP is often just a supplement to a person's or family's monthly food budget. The average SNAP participant receives about $126 a month, which breaks down to a little over $1.40 per person, per meal. Believe it or not, the funds that the President is demanding for his wall could be used to pay for an entire month of food for all 40 million SNAP participants, and then some. And while the SNAP funding problem starts with low-income families, depending on how long this shutdown continues, furloughed Federal employees themselves may temporarily need to rely on SNAP to keep food on the table. The shutdown is also negatively impacting thousands of businesses that are seeking and updating their SNAP licenses, not to mention the negative impacts on thousands of farmers who are already feeling the backlash of the President's tariffs. These same farmers are facing further setbacks, because they will now face delays in processing and receiving the exact Federal aid that was promised to help subsidize their losses. Madam Speaker, none of this has anything to do with the debate over border security. The President should not be holding these families hostage over this debate. Last Thursday, the House passed a key spending bill to fund the USDA because we recognize the crippling effects that these funding gaps have on the American people. We have programs like SNAP, WIC, and Federal farm loans for a reason: because they make a difference in people's lives. We owe it to our constituents to listen to their voices and to do the job they elected us to do, but we can't do it without the support of our Senate colleagues. Madam Speaker, our counterparts in the Senate ought to consider all that is at stake when they shut down our government. This isn't about partisanship. This is about acting in the best interest of our constituents. Today marks the 24th day in what has become the longest Federal shutdown in our country's history, and we have nothing to show for it. What a shame. The President ought to consider the real impact his shutdown is having on Federal employees and low-income families, children, seniors, and persons with disabilities. It is not a game, Mr. President. This isn't the art of the deal. Real people are being hurt. Real lives are being thrown into chaos. Let's reopen the government so we can have an informed and rational debate about how best to secure our southern border. Madam Speaker, I am not going to be silent while millions of families are caught in the crosshairs of a medieval solution to the real 21st century challenges this country is facing. Families, children, farmers, and small businesses don't deserve this. We can't let this government shutdown get to a point where we fail to provide our most vulnerable citizens with the food assistance that they need to thrive. That is cruel. Let us do the job we were sent here to do. Let's end this stupid shutdown. Let's stop families from going hungry, and let's end hunger now.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), my good friend, the ranking member, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 28 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, the article reports on the situation of Jordan and Tracey Smith of Madison, Maine, and their five children. They were scheduled to close on their very first home last Friday, but this ridiculous Trump shutdown ruined that. They need the Department of Agriculture to finalize their mortgage, but USDA has been closed for weeks. Here is what Mr. Smith said: ``We're living out of boxes. ``We're paying our landlord on a week-to-week basis, but he has people waiting to move in.'' So lives are being thrown into turmoil, and we don't have a lot of time to just carry on these conversations and endless debates. This is a time for action. This is the first time a prior Congress ended in a government shutdown. It is fitting. It is almost like an exclamation point to the President's first 2 years in office. But it is a new Congress, and we are ready to responsibly clean up this mess and do what the last Congress could not do. We are offering an extremely reasonable solution to this unnecessary government shutdown. The underlying legislation is virtually identical to the four appropriations bills that already passed the Senate, 92-6. Compare that to what the prior Republican majority put forward in the waning days of last Congress. They passed a partisan funding bill with billions of dollars for the President's wall, legislation they knew Democrats would never support and that the Senate would never pass. Then they left town. They refused to even recognize me when I tried again and again to bring up a bipartisan bill to end the shutdown. 800,000 workers stopped receiving paychecks. That includes, by the way, thousands of border and law enforcement officers, more than 41,000 Federal law enforcement officers, people like FBI agents and DEA agents, nearly 54,000 Customs and Border Patrol agents and Customs officers, and almost 90 percent of the Department of Homeland Security employees. This Trump shutdown is an embarrassment. We owe our Federal employees and all Americans better than this. Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to vote for this rule and the previous question and join with us in supporting these underlying bipartisan funding bills. This is another chance for us to do the right thing. Let's take it and bring an end to this unnecessary and painful Trump shutdown.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, let me say to my friend from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) that I think he is one of the best Members of this Chamber. I admire him, and I think that he is absolutely right when he says that the Appropriations Committee did its work, and that goes for Republicans and Democrats. People worked together, and they moved appropriations bills forward. So I find no fault with and I have no blame for the appropriators. What I do blame is his leadership that, at the last minute, when the President decided to have a temper tantrum and threatened to shut the government down, the Republican leadership was complicit, basically, and said: We will go along with this. And here we are. By the way, I can't wait to get this over with so we can get on to other business. By the way, we are going to bring up the disaster appropriations bill next week. We have a notice out asking for amendments. I think the deadline is on Friday at noon. I can't recall the last time a disaster appropriations bill ever solicited amendments. We are going to do that. But I appreciate his words. Mr. Speaker, this is an emergency. We are now dealing with a major crisis in this country, and it is not just Federal workers. USA Today reported last week: ``Government shutdown 2019: Homebuyers with USDA mortgages can't close on house sales.'' Mr. Speaker, I include this article in the Record. Government Shutdown 2019: Homebuyers With USDA Mortgages Can't Close on House Sales [From USA Today, Jan. 3, 2019] (By Janna Herron) Jordan and Tracey Smith of Madison, Maine, were scheduled to close on their first home on Friday. But the government shutdown has gotten in the way. The couple needs the U.S. Department of Agriculture to help finalize their mortgage that is guaranteed by the agency. But the USDA's operations have been closed for 13 days, so the couple and their five children remain in limbo. ``We're living out of boxes. We're paying our landlord on a week-to-week basis, but he has people waiting to move in,'' says Jordan Smith, 32. ``We just want to move and get this process over with.'' It's the same for other borrowers who depend on the USDA. The department provides--through private lenders--mortgages with no down payment requirements and low interest rates and fees to rural and suburban homebuyers. It's a small program, helping just over 140,000 people to buy a home in 2017, but is considered one of the best options around if you're eligible. ``We just can't close a USDA loan without a commitment letter from them. ``Your loan is at a standstill,'' says Pava Leyrer, the chief operating office of Northern Mortgage Services in Grandville, Michigan. Leyrer's company is an approved USDA lender. Leyrer is telling her affected clients to call their representatives. Otherwise, they may ultimately need to switch into a different loan. ``How long will the seller wait, especially if the sales contract expires?'' she says. Waiting for repair money In other cases, those who already have a USDA mortgage are running into trouble. Jenneffer Azcuy, a homeowner in Lynn Haven, Florida, with a USDA mortgage, is waiting to get the insurance money she needs to repair her house after it was damaged by Hurricane Michael in October. ``Since my insurance repair check is over $7,500, the USDA controls the disbursement of funds,'' Azcuy says ``But the money is tied up.'' On mortgages it guarantees, the USDA requires that it oversees how insurance claims funds are used to make sure they are spent properly. When insured losses exceed $7,500, the agency requires the funds to be deposited into an escrow account it controls. Azcuy has a contractor lined up to repair her leaky roof, replace a fence, and fix the gutters and outside doors. She has called the USDA for help but can't leave messages because the voicemail is full. ``It's ridiculous. This town is devastated as it is from the hurricane,'' she says. What about other mortgages? The other mortgages backed by the government are unaffected so far by the shutdown. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Veterans Administration--which all back home loans--are running as normal. The Federal Housing Administration, which guarantees mortgages popular among first-time homebuyers, is operating with a smaller staff because of the shutdown but is still approving loans. ``You can get some answers,'' Leyrer says, but adds: ``They are slower to respond, and it takes longer to get through on the phone because of limited staff.'' Lenders are also working around other shutdown-induced hiccups. For instance, they can't verify a person's tax information with the Internal Revenue Service, which has limited services. As a result, many lenders are still approving those loans conditionally and will confirm the information later when the IRS reopens, says John Stearns, a loan originator with American Fidelity Mortgage Services in Mequon, Wisconsin. ``If there is a problem, then I have to figure it out then,'' Stearns says. On Capitol Hill Azcuy and the Smiths hope the new House of Representatives convening on Thursday can end the shutdown. Democratic House leaders have scheduled votes on a package of bills to reopen the federal government and provide more time for Congress to negotiate a border funding deal with the White House. Until then, they wait. ``My wife and I support Donald Trump. We agree with border security,'' Jordan Smith says. ``But he has to look and see that this is affecting other people's lives.''

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am sorry the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Mitchell) left the floor, but I know Mr. Newhouse is still here, and I am complimented by the fact that they quote me so much. But I want to quote me, too, because I am going through what I have said about open rules and about the way this House should be run. On November 14 on the floor I said: And I am not suggesting that every rule needs to be an open rule or that there is never a time for a closed rule, but there is never a time for more than 100 closed rules. There is no justification for that. That is me. And on April 24, I said: I am under no illusion that every bill has to be an open rule; although it would be nice to have at least one symbolic open rule before the year is out. On April 13, I said: I can't promise that every rule is going to be an open rule, but I can say that there would be a greater attempt to try to accommodate Members. On September 2, I said: Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not suggesting that everything that the House considers should be under an open rule. There are times when a closed rule might be necessary. But more than 100 closed rules? There is no justification for that. So I think I am being pretty consistent here, because I have actually voted for closed rules on this floor that have been suggested in times of emergency. I voted for one to actually bring a continuing resolution to the floor so that we wouldn't have to deal with the mess that we are in right now. So in times of emergency, in times of life or death, yes, there are justifications for a closed rule, and this is one of them because this is last year's work. This is what my friends on the other side left us with, unfinished business from last year. Not only unfinished business, but they allowed the President to shut the government down. So hundreds of thousands of American workers are in a panic right now because last year's majority, my Republican friends, did not do their job. This is ridiculous. We ought to figure out a way to have our discussions without shutting the government down. This is not the way you are supposed to run government. And so we are offering a solution here so that we can reopen the government and continue our conversations about whatever you want. The gentleman from Oklahoma said we should split the difference on the border wall. Mexico was supposed to pay for it. Why are we splitting the difference? Why are we assuming the cost of a border wall when the President said that Mexico was going to pay for it, a border wall that most experts say is useless and ridiculous and that that money could be better spent on other ways of enforcing border security? Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Judy Chu).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of my friend from Washington State, a former member of the Rules Committee. I should just tell him-- and I am a little bit surprised, since he was on the Rules Committee-- two of his amendments that he offered didn't even comply with the House rules, so that is why they wouldn't be made in order. But let me just say to him, as I began my remarks, it is unfortunate that we had to start this Congress cleaning up after the last Congress, but that is where we are. That is what you have given us. And I am eager to return to regular order as soon as we reopen this government. What we are witnessing is extraordinary. In fact, it is unprecedented. For the first time in history, we have begun a new Congress in the middle of a government shutdown. I tried last month to bring up appropriations bills, bills that Mr. Hoyer offered on the floor to reopen this government, but you shut me down every single time, so here we are. We meant it when we said that we would do everything we can to reopen this government, because this is a real emergency. 800,000 hardworking civil servants are either furloughed or working without pay. That is what an emergency looks like. This is an emergency. I appreciate the kind of laid-back attitude of some of my friends on the other side of the aisle who are like: Well, let's start all over again. Let's reopen the process. Let's have endless debate from now until whenever. But do you know what? It is not us who are not being paid; it is our constituents. So this is an emergency. It is time that all of us come together and end this ridiculous shutdown and then get on to the business of the future. That is what I am committed to. I hope that the Rules Committee will be much more accommodating to my friends on the other side of the aisle than my friends were to us, by the way, overseeing the most closed Congress in the history of the United States of America. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Oklahoma's comments. I just want to make a couple of quick points before yielding to my next speaker. We, as Democrats, are struggling in support of border security, and we have supported initiative after initiative to basically make our borders more secure. We believe in investing in infrastructure and more personnel. We believe in providing more judges to be able to adjudicate asylum claims so we can process people more expeditiously. We believe in technology. It is 2019, yet the President insists on this medieval approach to border security, which most experts say is just ineffective. On top of all of that, our objection is that it is going to cost tens of billions of dollars. The President said that Mexico is going to pay for it, but now he is saying that the American taxpayers are going to pay for it. I mean, give me a break. As far as why we are doing the strategy of taking up these Senate- passed bills, let me remind my colleagues: They passed the Senate 92-6 back in August. I would have liked a different process. My friends were in charge of everything up to a week ago. They controlled the House; they controlled the Senate; and they controlled the White House. Yet they sent people home during the holidays and just kicked the can down the road, and we have inherited this mess from the last Congress. So we are doing the best we can. If the Senate would vote, like they did in August, again for these bills--92-6--we won't need the President. We could override his veto; we could reopen the government; and we could stop all of this nonsense right now. That is my hope. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 28, providing for consideration of H.R. 264, making appropriations for financial services and general government; H.R. 265, making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs; H.R. 266, making appropriations for the Department of the Interior, environment, and related agencies; and H.R. 267, making appropriations for the Department of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies, each for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2019. The rule provides for consideration of each bill under a closed rule. Mr. Speaker, we need to pass these bills, because we need to reopen government. Let me just say to my colleagues, quite frankly, this is not the way I had hoped we would start the new Congress, essentially cleaning up the mess that my Republican friends left us from the last Congress, but we are where we are, and this is an emergency. It is time to reopen the government. Mr. Speaker, what we saw last night from the President, in my opinion, was a disgrace. He used the Oval Office to fearmonger and smear immigrants. There was nothing new, no plan to get us out of this shutdown, no solutions, just more of the same offensive rhetoric we have heard time and time again from this President. But this Democratic majority is moving quickly to end the Trump shutdown. On day one of this new Congress, we passed a complete funding package using bipartisan language to reopen government, and now, today, we are taking further action to help the American people while responsibly protecting our borders. This rule will allow us to pass individual appropriations bills to reopen key government agencies. That includes the Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, to prevent Americans' tax refunds from being withheld during the shutdown; the Department of Agriculture, to prevent hungry families from losing the lifeline of SNAP benefits and assure that our farmers get the services that they need; the Department of the Interior, to prevent our national parks and monuments from being further degraded and allow EPA to resume its work protecting public health and our environment; and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, to help hardworking families in the process of realizing the dream of homeownership. These bills offer us a way out of the President's shutdown, an embarrassing spectacle that never should have happened in the first place. Nineteen days ago, the President of the United States threw a temper tantrum. He went back on his word, breaking his promise to sign bipartisan appropriations bills that would have prevented a quarter of our government from shutting down. He turned on FOX News or some rightwing radio show somewhere and changed his mind. Suddenly, the President demanded $5 billion in funding for his offensive border wall just to keep the lights on-- billions of dollars, by the way, that would just have been a downpayment on an unnecessary project that would cost tens of billions of dollars, and not at Mexico's expense like President Trump promised over and over and over and over again. Now the costs have been shifted to the American taxpayer, when, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling, only 25 percent of the public says they support Trump shutting down the government over the wall--25 percent. This is crazy, but this doesn't have to continue. At his press conference the other day, the President boasted he could keep our government closed for years. Now, he may not know how to get us out of this mess, but this Democratic majority does, and there are many responsible Republicans on the other side of the aisle who are with us on reopening the government. Last week, our funding package passed with bipartisan support. Seven Republicans voted with us, including Republican Congressman Will Hurd, whose district includes much of the U.S.-Mexico border. In addition, a growing number of Senate Republicans have encouraged the majority leader to bring those bills to the floor, including Senator Collins of Maine and Senator Gardner of Colorado. Senator Gardner said, recently: ``The Senate has done it last Congress; we should do it again today,'' and I agree. So let's send these bills to the Senate so they can once again pass Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support. The Senate Majority Leader already supported these bills once. Why not support them again to finally reopen this government? Because we can't wait for the President to publicly promise to sign these bills before we act--we already know his word isn't worth much; his broken promise is what got us here--it has fallen to Congress to get us out of this shutdown. Congressman Hurd said after voting for the Democratic appropriations package last week: ``Ultimately, Congress is a coequal branch of government, and it should operate that way.'' He is absolutely right. And these bills are this majority's latest attempt to fulfill our responsibility. There are 40 million Americans who rely on SNAP to put food on the table. Their benefits will lapse shortly if this shutdown is allowed to continue. Mr. Speaker, why should Americans go hungry just because the President wants to appease someone like Rush Limbaugh? Why in the world would Congress sit idly by as thousands of people trying to buy a new home or refinance FHA-insured mortgages are left in limbo? We are now in tax season. If we don't end this shutdown, more than 2 million Americans who every month turn to tax assistance centers will find them closed as they try to complete their annual returns. This is madness, and it is completely unnecessary. Tax returns delayed, home purchases in limbo, food assistance in jeopardy for the hungry, trash piling up in our national parks, it is an embarrassment-- not to mention the 800,000 Federal workers who aren't getting paid, and countless more contractors. It can be over in a heartbeat if we pass these bills and the Senate takes yes for an answer. These bills honor our responsibility to turn the lights back on. They don't waste even a dollar of taxpayer money on the President's immoral border wall, nor should they. People overwhelmingly object to building it. I hope this President comes to his senses, that he stops holding our Nation hostage as he plays to the fringes of his base. But none of us can control that. We do have the ability, though, to do our jobs and to end the shutdown. That is what this Congress will do again today, and I urge all of my colleagues to join with us. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Shalala) for yielding me the time. It is an honor to serve with her on the House Rules Committee. As the longest serving HHS Secretary in U.S. history, she spent much of her life leading on the issue of healthcare. Madam Speaker, the American people have been living in fear for years, worried that Washington Republicans would make good on their promise to repeal the Affordable Care Act and that the President and his allies in Congress would take away their ability to see a doctor or afford care, including for preexisting conditions from asthma to domestic abuse. Who can blame them? When the minority controlled this institution, they voted 69 times to undermine the Affordable Care Act. Sixty-nine times they tried to take away healthcare from more than 23 million Americans. Thankfully, the Senate thwarted these efforts, and Republicans weren't successful. Now the Trump administration is using the legal system to try to do what the Republican Congress could not: strike down the Affordable Care Act. Its Justice Department has asked in a legal filing for the courts to invalidate this law and, in doing so, erase protections for preexisting conditions. Now, I have heard my colleagues on the other side of the aisle try to pretend that they are somehow champions of this provision, despite working relentlessly to abolish it and voting nearly 70 times to undermine the ACA. Madam Speaker, who are they kidding? This Democratic majority doesn't deal in alternative facts. The American people are smarter than that. Thankfully, it is a new Congress, and this majority isn't trying to abolish preexisting condition coverage. Instead, we are moving swiftly to protect it on the opening days of this Congress. This measure will allow this House to legally intervene to protect preexisting condition coverage in the Affordable Care Act. If you support coverage for preexisting conditions, then you will support this measure to try and protect it. It is that simple. Enough with the sound bites. It is time to vote. I urge all my colleagues to vote for this measure.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), for yielding to me and for his leadership on the Rules Committee. I am looking forward to working with him as a member of the majority in this Congress. Madam Speaker, we started an important conversation about how to improve this House as the rules package was developed. Members on both sides of the aisle brought forward ideas. Many of them were included in the final package. But these rules shouldn't be the end of the dialogue. They should be only a start. I know that there are many Members who will have even more good ideas in the coming weeks and months, and this Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress is a unique opportunity to continue the conversation. It is a truly bipartisan way to consider ideas on how to promote a more modern and efficient Congress and procedures to develop the next generation of leaders, increase staff diversity, and improve technology and innovation. It is also a way for this Congress to hold ourselves accountable, to ensure our work to reform this House is delivering on behalf of the American people. I especially thank Representatives Kilmer, Lipinski, and Sarbanes, as well as the New Democrat Coalition, for this idea. It is a step that this House can take, and it is a step that this House, quite frankly, should take. Madam Speaker, finally, I just want to say, as the gentleman from Oklahoma pointed out, this select committee is truly bipartisan, and the ideas that come out of this select committee will be truly bipartisan. We can improve the way this House is run. We can improve the way we do things here. I think the American people are hoping we will move in that direction, and I think we have an opportunity to do that. I say to the gentleman from Oklahoma, I really appreciate his tone and his support for this initiative. We all talk about new beginnings and about ways to make things better, and I think we are off to a good start. For that, I thank the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object--and I will not object--I had hoped to have been recognized earlier to offer a unanimous consent request to call up H.R. 7397, Democratic whip Steny Hoyer's bill to end the Trump government shutdown and fund the government through February 8. I was told that I would be blocked from doing that. For the life of me, I don't understand why President Trump and congressional Republicans have shut the government down three days before Christmas. I think it is embarrassing and it is wrong. 800,000 Federal employees will not get paid during this holiday season because of the shutdown. The Senate passed a continuing resolution unanimously. We were set to do the same thing in the House, until the President had a temper tantrum. It is frustrating that Republicans won't allow us to proceed to end this shutdown. I would hope that maybe the Speaker would be open to a unanimous consent request so I could bring this legislation up so we can fund the government and end the shutdown.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker.