Providing for Consideration of H.J. Res. 48, Additional Continuing Appropriations Amendments, 2011

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, here we go again, considering yet another short-term continuing resolution. The last CR was for 2 weeks. This is a 3-week bill. So I guess the good news is that we're heading in the right direction, but that's about the only good news, Mr. Speaker. This is no way to run a budget process. It is no way to run a government. It is like water torture: drip, drip, drip. How are governors and mayors and city councils supposed to plan if we keep passing these short-term bills? How are the financial markets supposed to have any certainty if we're passing bills that go only for 2 weeks or 3 weeks?

We all know what needs to happen. Democrats and Republicans in the House, the Senate, and the White House need to get together and figure out a sensible, bipartisan solution to this year's budget. And while it may, you know, be convenient to blame the Senate, I should remind my colleagues here that the majority leader in the Senate tried to bring up a bill, but the Republicans voted to not allow the bill to be considered. So it's not like there aren't alternatives out there.

The time for rhetoric, Mr. Speaker, is past. The time for press releases and posturing is over. The time for finger-pointing must end, because despite what some on the other side of the aisle seem to believe, a government shutdown is not in our Nation's best interests.

I look at today's Politico, and one of the leading Republican spokesmen, Representative Steve King, is quoted extensively in an article saying that defunding is worth a shutdown. I think the last thing the American people want is for us to shut down the government.

You know, Mr. Speaker, I suppose we should also be grateful that the bill before us today does not include some of the policy changes that were in H.R. 1, such as blocking money for health care reform and Planned Parenthood, which they voted to eliminate in H.R. 1. H.R. 1, Mr. Speaker, took a meat ax to border security, to food safety, low-income heating assistance, medical research, and I could go on and on and on. And thankfully, thankfully the Senate rejected that approach last week.

But make no mistake: H.R. 1 is what my Republican colleagues not only want but are demanding. Their ideological and rigid loyalty to H.R. 1 is what is holding up these negotiations, and the cuts in H.R. 1, Mr. Speaker, are not only egregious but they are reckless and they are damaging. According to former John McCain economic adviser Mark Zandi, the bill had the potential to lead to 700,000 lost jobs, exactly the wrong prescription for our recovering economy.

And speaking of jobs, Mr. Speaker, where are the Republican jobs bills? Where is the legislation to encourage investment in new technology, in infrastructure, in education, and in medical research? It's been 11 weeks and we have seen nothing, not a thing from the other side of the aisle on jobs. Let me remind my colleagues that if you truly want to achieve deficit reduction focus on job creation. Put people back to work. We can help grow out of this deficit that we have.

Mr. Speaker, we can and we must do better, and I urge my colleagues to oppose this closed rule. I remind my colleagues that we have yet to have a truly open rule in this House. This is a closed rule. Oppose the closed rule and oppose the underlying legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I think all of us are dedicated to eliminating excessive spending, wherever it may exist. The problem with H.R. 1 and the Republican approach is that all the tough choices and all the burden falls on the middle class and on the poor in this country.

The fact is that Donald Trump got his tax cut. We didn't touch that. Big Oil companies continue to get taxpayer subsidies. They wrote H.R. 1 in such a way so we couldn't get at those subsidies. Big agribusiness continues to get its subsidies, and I go on and on and on: No-bid defense contracts in the Defense Department.

All those special interests were protected. But they cut LIHEAP to help people heat their homes this winter. They go after the National Institutes of Health. You want to find a way to make Medicare solvent, find a cure for Alzheimer's disease. You don't find a cure by cutting moneys to the National Institutes of Health.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

r. McGOVERN. Well, there you have it. That is the difference between Democrats and Republicans in terms of how we approach this issue. They want to shut the government down. You know, what happens to Social Security checks and veterans' benefits and National Parks, and I could go on and on and on? There are consequences to being so rigid and being so ideological.

I am going to say to my colleague from Georgia, he said H.R. 1 was not the will of Republicans; the House spoke. The House didn't speak. Three Democrats voted for H.R. 1. We have 192 Democrats in the House. It was not the House speaking. It was what Republicans wanted. So H.R. 1 is wholly owned by my friends on the Republican side. And I again will say that that bill represents some of the most reckless and heartless cuts that I have seen since I have come to Congress.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

What is reckless and heartless about H.R. 1 is that it attempts to balance the budget on the most vulnerable in our country, making deep cuts in the low income energy fuel assistance program to help keep people warm in the wintertime; cutting WIC, the Women, Infants and Children program to help keep pregnant women healthy so they can deliver healthy babies which, by the way, in the long run saves us money.

What is heartless and reckless are the cuts in nutrition programs and the National Institutes of Health, medical research, trying to find cures to diabetes and Alzheimer's and cancer.

And what's protected are taxpayer subsidies for oil companies. What's protected is Donald Trump's tax cut. What's protected are our subsidies to big agri-businesses. And what's not even talked about is the fact that we are fighting two wars and we're not paying for it. Everybody wants to go to war in this Chamber, but no one wants to pay for it. It is wrong and unconscionable, and that is adding considerably to our deficit.

And what's also adding to our deficit are tax cuts that are not paid for. So what's heartless about H.R. 1 is that it goes after the people who need government the most, and it leaves people who don't need any government or taxpayer subsidies alone.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, as I said at the beginning, these little short-term continuing resolutions are no way to run our government. And beyond the social debates that we're having here on a variety of issues, the fact of the matter is that this 2-week, 3-week continuing resolution puts an incredible burden on our local communities and our States and on our Federal agencies. They can't proceed with initiatives that they thought they had the money for. They're not sure whether next week we might cut an entire program or the following week we might cut it or sometime down the road. So there's uncertainty, and that uncertainty is having an adverse impact on our economy, and it's having an adverse impact on economic development all across this country. And so we need to get serious about negotiating a compromise with the Senate and with the White House and get this year's business done.

And, again, the United States Senate has put a number of offers on the table. The one that majority leader Reid put on the table the Republicans wouldn't let come to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, one of my chief concerns about H.R. 1, which is, basically, the Republican continuing resolution, is that it has created a climate in Washington that makes it unfashionable to worry about the poor and the most vulnerable. Turning our backs on the most vulnerable in our country doesn't make them go away. There is a cost, and all of us pay that cost.

We need to get serious about job creation, putting people back to work. That's the way you reduce the deficit. That's how we grow out of this economic crisis that we're in.

And yet, here we are in March and nobody's talking about jobs. I mean, we've talked about everything else; but the Republicans have refused to talk about jobs or bring a jobs bill to the floor.

And I would suggest to my Republican friends, rather than this ideological rigidity, this allegiance to this bill, H.R. 1, which is filled with reckless and heartless cuts, I would suggest to my colleagues that they understand that to get a deal here it requires some compromise. And I think I would urge them to get about that business.

I would also echo what Mr. Pallone said earlier. We're going on vacation next week. Rather than a vacation, maybe we should finish the work of this year. Rather than having Members go back and go on CODELS overseas or go on vacations, let's finish the business of this year. Let's provide some certainty to our mayors and to our city managers, to our city councils and our boards of selectmen all across this country. Let us provide some certainty that some funding that they're depending on will be there.

Having said all that, Mr. Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question, I would urge them to vote ``no'' on this closed rule, and I would also urge them to vote ``no'' on the underlying bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source