Chris Van Hollen

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I would ask my colleagues whether the majority leader or his designee is on the floor of the House today. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker, and this will be my last one.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Just again, Mr. Speaker, I want to be absolutely clear that H. Res. 368 changed the standing rules of the House so that only the Republican leader or his designee could call up the bill to open the government.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, once again we are considering a piecemeal bill to fund just one part of the federal government while ignoring every other priority. Speaker Boehner continues to prevent this House from working its will and passing a clean CR that would open the FAA and every other agency in our government. That is undemocratic and, in the face of increasing negative impacts from this government shutdown, unsustainable. Of course we all want the Federal Aviation Administration to open. But there are many more transportation safety programs that the House Republican leadership is ignoring by failing to bring a clean CR to the Floor. Just this weekend, there was a terrible accident during track work on the DC metro system. But 95 percent of the National Transportation Safety Board's employees are furloughed, so they can't investigate. 94 percent of the Federal Transit Administration's employees are furloughed, preventing them from fully implementing the new safety oversight responsibilities that so many of us worked hard to include in MAP-21. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has had to suspend investigations into safety defects in cars. We need all of our transportation systems to be safe. Let's vote on a clean CR today and put all federal employees back to work.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.J. Res 79, a bill which claims to fund border security, but in reality is just a continuation of the piecemeal approach to funding government operations being used by the House Republican leadership to create political cover for their continued refusal to hold a vote to immediately reopen the entire government. I support funding border security and appreciate greatly the dedicated men and women who work to keep our borders secure, but I do not support this bill because, in the end, it does more harm than good. I believe the proper way to fund border security is for Congress to fulfill its responsibility to pass regular appropriations bills. The House passed a full year funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security in June that would provide $40.1 billion more for DHS than the bill before us today. Using a cherry-picking approach to fund selected programs within an agency neglects other important programs within that same agency. In this case, supporting H.J. Res 79 funds border security at the expense of other Homeland Security-related functions like the Secret Service, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Transportation Security Administration and the Office of Disaster Assistance at the Small Business Administration. The fact is that by taking up the Senate's clean continuing resolution and sending it to the President for his signature tonight, we can fund border security, DHS and all the other important programs and services of the government. That is why I call on my colleagues to bring up the Senate CR so we can end this shut down and get all our federal workers back on the job.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, after months of refusing Democratic calls to negotiate a replacement to the sequester that slashed over $400 million from the Head Start budget this year and eliminated slots for 50,000 children, I'm pleased to see some of my Republican colleagues acknowledging the importance of this early education program. However, to truly serve these kids and their families, we should pass a clean CR that will immediately send funding to those centers that did not receive their payments last week and then we should work together to replace the damaging sequester cuts. A clean CR would reopen all programs for vulnerable children and their families. It would provide funding for the Community Action Agencies that represent one-third of all Head Start grantees. It would fund child care programs that help parents find affordable and safe places for their children when the Head Start day ends. And it would fund the Social Services Block Grant that helps fill gaps in services to help low-income families get back on their feet. All of these vital programs are ignored in the resolution on the Floor today. I urge the Speaker to let the House vote on the Senate- passed CR and reopen the government now.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank my friend from New York. Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely the right thing to do to make sure we pay Federal workers on time whether they're the Capitol Police or any other public servant doing the work of our country right now. It was also the right thing to do on a bipartisan basis to make sure that Federal employees are not punished through no fault of their own. We did that unanimously by the vote on Saturday to make sure that Federal employees do not have to bear that burden when they're not the ones making the bad decisions. What is very puzzling, Mr. Speaker, is, in having voted unanimously to say that we're going to make sure we pay those Federal employees who are being furloughed, we would at the same time block them from going back to work for the American people. I just don't understand, Mr. Speaker, how the Speaker of the House can explain that to the American people when we have in our possession here in the people's House a piece of legislation that, if we were allowed to vote on it, could reopen the entire government right now, without preconditions. Now, we've heard from our Republican colleagues that they want to open one little piece--let's open the national parks. Let's open another little piece--but on Saturday, what we did was vote to make sure that every Federal employee, whether they work for the national parks or any other Federal agency--everyone--would get paid for yesterday, for today, for tomorrow. So why would our colleagues want to let one more day go by when we're compensating Federal employees and making them stay at home? Why wouldn't we open the Federal Government today so that they can do the work that we're paying them to do on behalf of the American people? It is absolutely mind-boggling, Mr. Speaker, that our Republican colleagues would take that position. In the Senate right now you've got a Senator from Texas, Senator Cornyn, who is blocking that particular provision that we passed unanimously. I hope that he will let it go. But over here in the House, we have a bill that the President's waiting to sign right now. All we need to do is pass it, and the votes are here in the House to do it. If the Speaker doubts that fact, there's an easy way to figure it out. We all know that. Put it up for a vote. What's the Speaker afraid of--a little democracy in this House? So we're going to be paying all the Federal employees, as we should, because they absolutely should not be penalized--not for one day that we're forcing them to be out of work. These are men and women who are dedicated to providing service to our country. They want to get back to work, and what this House is saying is, We're going to keep paying you, but we're not going to let you go to work for the American people. That is an astounding position to take. Let's vote to open the entire government right now. Let's take up the Senate bill. Let's get it done.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank the gentleman. So after all this refusal to negotiate, you now want to set up a fake committee on deficit reduction where you refuse to even include the idea of reducing the deficit in part by shutting down tax breaks for big oil companies because you don't want to use one penny of revenue, even from closing tax loopholes, to reduce the debt and deficit. I hear from my colleagues how important it is to reduce the debt--and it absolutely is--but apparently it's not important enough to shut down one tax loophole for special interests. End this sham. Vote on the Senate bill. Open the government.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida. As the gentleman said, we discovered right now that the government is still shut down because our Republican colleagues want to repeal the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare, when in fact we could open the government right now by passing the bill that's in our possession. Mr. Speaker, I want to talk a little bit about negotiation because the President and the Democrats in Congress have been trying to have a budget negotiation with our Republican colleagues all year long. In fact, in March, the House passed its budget, and in March, the Senate passed its budget. And just like the textbook says, you're then supposed to have a negotiation between the House and the Senate to negotiate your differences to reach a compromise. What happened? The Speaker of the House refused to appoint negotiators from the House. We tried three times to get a vote; each time the Speaker said ``no.'' In the United States Senate, on 18 occasions, in fact 19 now, the Democratic leader and Senator Murray tried to get consent to have a budget negotiation between the House and Senate. On 18 occasions, Senate Republicans said ``no.'' They didn't want to talk. They didn't want to negotiate. So the clock ticked until we got down to government shutdown. And then what happened? The Speaker of the House and the Senate Democratic leader had a negotiation. On Sunday on national television, the Speaker of the House told the country that he had a negotiation with Senator Reid. They had gotten a deal. But guess what? The Speaker reneged on the agreement. Why? He told us that, too. He couldn't sell it to a reckless faction of his own party. He wanted to allow that faction of the party to run the country and shut down the government. Now what are our Republican colleagues saying? That they're not going to let us pay our bills on time unless we adopt the Republican budget agenda. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask my colleagues--and I think this is an important question for the country--if the President of the United States said that he would veto a debt ceiling bill, that he would veto legislation to pay the country's bills on time unless Republicans adopted the President's budget and the President's agenda, our Republican colleagues would say he'd lost his mind. Our Republican colleagues would probably start impeachment proceedings. And yet, that's exactly what they're doing. They're saying that they won't take responsibility in joining us to pay our country's bills on time unless we adopt the Republican budget agenda unless we say let's get rid of the Affordable Care Act, unless we do everything their way. Again, if the President was to take that position, you would say he was off his rocker. So now, our Republican colleagues are coming up with a fake committee where it actually sets the rules.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to both H.R. 3230 and H.J. Res. 72, two bills which claim to fund our veterans and our National Guard and Reserve but are nothing but a political ploy and a piecemeal approach that do nothing to address many of the crucial services relied on by our military and veterans. Let me be clear. Every member of Congress fully supports our National Guard and Reserve and our veterans. Yet neither of the two bills we considered today actually accomplish this objective. Although H.R. 3230 does provide for the pay and allowances of military personnel in the reserve component who are in inactive status, it does not fund other essential programs and services to support our military, like equipment needed for readiness; military maintenance and procurement; and research and development for technological superiority of U.S. forces. H.J. Res. 72 also neglects to fund several critical programs for veterans, including the delivery of veterans' health care services, grants to state veterans homes, and funding for the VA's Office of Inspector General. In fact, this bill represents a $6.2 billion reduction in funding for the VA compared to the bipartisan MilCon/VA appropriations bill passed overwhelmingly earlier this year. So H.J. Res. 72 is not a vote to fund our veterans; it is a vote to cut veterans funding. In addition, it would leave their children and grandchildren behind without funding for programs like Head Start or medical research to cure the diseases that harm our veterans and every other citizen. Taken together, these two bills fail to equip and train our troops or build housing for their families. The fact is that we do have a way to solve this issue today. If we take up the Senate's clean continuing resolution, we can send it to the President for his signature tonight. The clean CR also provides $6 billion more in funding for the VA and veteran's programs compared to the piecemeal bill offered today. That is why I call on my colleagues to bring up the clean CR so we can end this shut down and pave the way for full and immediate funding for our National Guard, our military reserves, and our veterans.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank my friend from California. Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege of representing the congressional district that is home to the Food and Drug Administration. Those individuals do great work for our country; and I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, nobody--and I mean nobody--is being fooled by this ridiculous stunt that the Republicans in this House are pulling, trying to cherry- pick little pieces of government to fund when they know they're not going anywhere, when the American people know that this House is in possession of a piece of legislation that, if we were allowed to vote on it, would go to the President's desk tonight; he would sign it; and we would open up all of government immediately--FDA, NIH, the VA, everything. The position Republicans are taking is made even more ridiculous by what we did on Saturday. On Saturday, we said, We're going to pay all Federal employees--not just employees at FDA, not just at NIH--all Federal Government employees. That was the right thing to do. Now you're saying you only want to keep some of those agencies open, not all of them open. So what our Republican colleagues are telling the American people is, we want to pay all the employees in the Federal Government; but we don't want to allow a lot of them to go to work. We want to pay for everybody in the Federal Government, but we don't want to allow everybody to go to work. What kind of policy is that? Now, Mr. Speaker, just this weekend, the Speaker of this House admitted on national television that he had reached an agreement with the Democratic leader in the United States Senate, Senator Harry Reid, where Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats said, We will agree on a temporary basis to the lower funding levels in the sequester in exchange for making sure we have a clean continuing resolution, that we keep the government open. That's what the Speaker agreed to. But then he came back to this House, and he couldn't hold his caucus. Why? Because Senator Cruz and a radical reckless faction said, No, we can't do that. We have to close the government unless we shut down the Affordable Care Act. And that position hasn't changed. That's why today we can't open the government, because our Republican colleagues want to continue to shut down the Affordable Care Act. Let's vote today to open the whole government. Let's have a vote, Mr. Speaker, on the bill that's in our possession.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Maryland. No one should be made to suffer for actions that are no fault of their own, so I'm very pleased that we're taking up this measure to ensure that dedicated Federal workers who are among the many innocent victims of this government shutdown will be held harmless in the long run. But this important measure simply highlights the sheer folly of keeping the Federal Government shut down for one additional minute. These are public servants who are paid to do what they love to do--to serve the public. So for goodness sake, let them all get back to work for the public now. This bill, Mr. Speaker, doesn't say let's just pay the Federal employees at FEMA. It doesn't say let's just pay the Federal employees at the national parks. It doesn't say let's just pay the Federal employees at the piecemeal, cherry-picking agencies that our Republican colleagues have brought to the floor. It says let's make sure we hold all Federal employees whole. Absolutely. And let's reopen the entire Federal Government and do it now. Mr. Speaker, let us have a vote on that very simple proposition.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.J. Res. 85, a bill which claims to fund operations at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, but in reality is a piecemeal approach to funding government operations in order to score political points. Let me be clear, I support FEMA and appreciate greatly the dedicated men and women who work on behalf of FEMA, but I do not support this bill because, in the end, it does more harm than good. I believe the proper way to fund FEMA is for Congress to fulfill its constitutional responsibility and pass regular appropriations bills. The House passed a full year funding bill for DHS in June that would provide $40.1 billion more for DHS than the bill before us today. Using a piecemeal approach to fund selected programs within an agency neglects other important programs within that same agency. In this case, supporting H.J. Res. 85 funds FEMA at the expense of the Secret Service, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Office of Disaster Assistance at the Small Business Administration. The fact is that by taking up the Senate's clean continuing resolution and sending it to the President for his signature tonight, we can fund FEMA, DHS and all the other important programs and services of the government. That is why I call on my colleagues to bring up the Senate CR so we can end this shut down and get all our federal workers back on the job.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing a resolution, along with Representatives George Miller and Nita Lowey, which is designed to reopen the Federal Government. House Republicans have shut down the government in an effort to push their reckless agenda, allowing a small group of Tea Party Republicans to hold the entire Federal Government hostage. And they think they can distract from that by cherry-picking pieces of government to re-open, and leave the rest of it to die on the vine. They are playing games with peoples' lives, leaving families, small businesses, veterans, and our economy to pay the price. The fastest way to proceed is to vote on the clean Senate-passed bill to immediately re-open the government. The President has indicated he is willing to sign it tonight. Unfortunately, House Republicans have manipulated the rules to block democracy in the House, and will not allow an up-or-down vote on the bill. So today, House Democrats are offering an alternate way to end this irresponsible shutdown and allow our public servants to return to the work of the American taxpayers. We are introducing a petition that will compel consideration of legislation to open the government. By signing this discharge petition, both Democrats and Republicans can finally stand up and demand a vote as early as October 14 on a short-term extension of government funding consistent with what the Senate has passed. This would allow Congress to finally get back to the work of boosting job growth and reducing our long-term deficit in a balanced way. And it would allow government to get back to the work of helping to keep our nation safe, fight and cure diseases, help veterans, and provide vital services that touch virtually every family in our country. Speaker Boehner has made it very clear that he is afraid of democracy. But that is why we were all elected to the peoples' House. It's time to stop playing partisan games and stop this damaging shutdown.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I am encouraged to hear my Republican colleagues stand in support of the District of Columbia's ability to expend its own local funds. I agree. As a member representing a district that neighbors DC, I have been a long-time supporter of budget autonomy for our nation's capital. It should be able to spend its local dollars without waiting for approval from this Congress. I hope my colleagues will remember this debate and work towards a long-term legislative fix for this issue. However, we have a way to solve the immediate problem for the District of Columbia today. If we take up the Senate's clean continuing resolution, we can send it to the President for his signature tonight, giving DC the necessary authority and letting those federal employee residents of DC and all our Congressional districts go back to work tomorrow. We could reopen the National Institutes of Health, our national parks, and the Veterans Administration. And we could ensure that all Americans have access to the government services they need. I call on my colleagues to bring up the clean CR and end this shut down today.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I am asking why it is that the standing rule of the House, the normal rules of the House that we have been operating under, rule XXII, clause 4, what is it that has changed that that makes it impossible for me now to offer a motion to send the clean CR to the White House where the President can sign it tonight? What is it that has changed the standing rule of the House?

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, so a special order has changed and modified the standing rule of the House; am I right about that?

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, under the regular order of the House, would any Member of the House, including myself, be able to call up a motion to immediately send the CR to fund the government to the President of the United States, to immediately call up and have a vote on that?

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, you started by saying the gentleman is correct. Did you mean that I am correct in saying that the standing House rule XXII, clause 4 that says that the ``stage of disagreement has been reached on a bill or resolution with House or Senate amendments,'' that that would be applicable under the standing rule if the standing rule was in order?

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I have the great privilege of representing the congressional district that is home to the national treasure that we call the National Institutes of Health where you have scientists doing critically important work, looking for treatments and cures to diseases that plague every American. These are scientists. They're not Republican scientists. They're not Democratic scientists. They're scientists. They're very smart people. I've heard from some of them, and they say they are not fooled by the cynical ploy in the House today because they know that the fastest way to open up the National Institutes of Health would be to take up the clean Senate-passed bill and send it to the President tonight. That's how you help the National Institutes of Health. They also have kids in schools, so they'd also like to keep open the Department of Education and help the Department of Veterans Affairs. They know that the way to do that is not to cherry-pick little pieces of government and leave the rest of it to die on the vine, but to pass a clean CR and keep NIH open, the Department of Veterans Affairs open, all the parks open, the Defense Department open, to keep the government open. Why hasn't that happened? The Speaker of the House refuses to hold a vote in this people's House. What's he afraid of, the democracy? What's he afraid of, we are going to vote to open the government? Because that's exactly what would happen. If you want to help NIH, vote for the clean CR. Get it done tonight. Quit the game-playing.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I'm trying to understand why a motion to keep the entire government open is not in order on this measure. Why would the rules have been written in a way that a simple motion to keep the entire government funded now would not be in order in the people's House? Why would it be written in a way that this House cannot work its will on keeping the government open? This is the people's House. Why would a rule be written in a way that we cannot have a vote to keep the entire government open now, tonight? So we apparently have a rule in this House that says we're shutting down democracy tonight. We can't have the opportunity to have a vote to keep the government open. That's what's happening here. Let's not play any games, my colleagues. That is what's happening here. You know if we had a vote tonight, it would pass.

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