tv House Rules Committee Meets to Discuss Government Funding CSPAN January 8, 2019 11:22pm-12:50am EST
portions. the departments of transportation, agriculture dura and housing and urban development are scheduled for debate and vote on the house floor this week starting wednesday with financial services, which includes the i.r.s. and the treasury department. this is the committee's first meeting under a democratic majority in the 116th congress. >> before we continue with consideration of the appropriation bills in front of us, i would like to have a discussion about reducing our committee's paper waste. for today's meeting, we have provided each of you with your own copies of the bills and amendments being considered. moving forward i would like to reduce that number by half with two members sharing a hard copy of the bill and amendment text. this is not meant to be a way
to hide anything from anyone, but to be mindful of the amount of paper we use and save trees. i want this to be a collaborative decision, so i would like to hear from anyone who has a strong objection to that. that is great. >> mr. chairman? >> mr. hastings? >> i don't have an objection, but looking forward, this is 2019, and as many of you know, i at one point was the president of the parliamentary assembly of the organization for security and cooperation in europe, and i am fond of saying if you can say that, you ought to be the president of that organization. but while i was president, i traveled to 56 of the 57 countries. and in more than half of them, they were already using computerized access for all of their membership in their respective parliaments.
in addition i visited several of the organizations that did have rules committees, and all of them had computers. while i am not the most computer literate person here, i do believe looking forward we ought to be considering that. i am in full support of your amendment with reference to paper waste, but let's go all the way. >> and i think as we move forward, we can consult with the minority about what everybody feels comfortable with. but if we could reduce the paperwork, it is all good. the rules committee is going to come to order again. let me begin by saying i was hoping to start the first meeting talking about the future. but instead we are dealing with the past. we are frankly cleaning up a mess that was created by the previous majority. they enabled the shut-down by refusing to take the senate passed bills to open the government. i was on the floor multiple
times pleading with the majority in the waning days of the last congress to let us consider the bipartisan spending bills, and they refused. but it is a new congress and a new majority, and one that will act responsibly to end this trump shut-down. this president's temper tantrum over this stupid wall should never have led to any part of this government being closed for business, and certainly not agencies like the agriculture department or the department of housing and urban development, which are totally unrelated to border security. food access for 40 million americans shouldn't be a lot risk. f.h.a.'s ability to help families achieve home ownership shouldn't be at risk. the safety of americans shifting our national parks shouldn't be at risk. i can go on and on and on. so we are here to do the responsible thing, to take up a series of floor appropriation bills that recently passed the
senate on agriculture, housing and urban development, financial services, interior government and appropriation bills. this president may be totally comfortable keeping this government closed for years as he suggested recently at a press conference, but democrats are not. the trump shut-down shouldn't last another minute, and it wouldn't need to if the house and senate passed these bills. again, these are bills that recently passed the senate by a veto-proof 92%. they piatkowskied the house as a package last week. we are now giving members a chance to vote on them this time individually. congress is a co-equal branch of government. if the president doesn't want to sign these bills, both chambers could pass them with veto-proof margins and reopen the government. we are now 17 days into this trump shut-down. enough is enough. having said that, i would now like to turn to my friend, the
ranking member, mr. cole, for any statements he would like to make. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. first i want to secrets my thanks to you and to your witnesses today for coming forth on a matter of such great importance. as you know, i have often said on the house floor that funding the government and keeping it open is one of the most important duty members of the house face. as such, i am glad to see my colleagues in the majority making an effort to pass funding bills and to reopen the entire government. but that being said, i do think these bilts are misguided and do not represent a serious effort to resolve the crisis we are currently facing. let's take a look at what the majority is actually proposing. they are putting forward four appropriations bills for consideration this week covering the transportation, housing and urban development, financial services and general government, agriculture, and interior and environment titles. all four of these were included in the package the house passed
last week on a closed rule. all four of these represent the senate work product on the fy-19 proceedingses. they do not take into account any of the work the house appropriations committee did in putting together the fy-19 bills. she do not reflect any of the work product to iron out the difference between house and senate versions. in short, they do not represent any input at all from the house of representatives. and they are again coming to the floor on a closed rule, which means that once again, the house will have no input at all into the appropriation process. i also note that the senate has made it clear they will not pass these bills as written. the president has made it clear he will not sign them into law. given that we have already passed these bills, but the senate won't pass them and the president won't sign them. why then are we here? what do we hope to accomplish? i would ask this of my friends in the majority. have you had any positive conversations with the senate
on these bills? are they now willing to consider these either as part of a package or a stand-alone bill? as leader mcconnell agreed to take this bill up on its own terms? has the president agreed to sign this bill into law if it passes? i think the answer to each of those questions is no. if that is the case, then there is clearly a political exercise in futility. mr. chairman, as you know, i have been a member of the appropriations committee for 10 years, and i understand it is hard to have a full process on appropriations bills. but it is indeed possible even when funding bills carry over into a new year or even a new majority. in early 2011 right after republicans took majority control of the house, we considered a bill on the floor to fund the entire federal government, and we did it under an open rule. when we considered that bill on the floor, 162 mend i ams were offered from both sides of the
aisle, and we had a grand total of 66 hours of floor debate on the bill stretching over almost five given the time we used in 2011, i understand the enormous undertaking it would be, but that doesn't mean we should not take time now, unless you can tell me the president is signing this bill into law, then there is plenty of time for thoughtful debate frp all members of the housom. -- from all members of the house. this package does not address border security. the american people have told us they want more border security. none of these bills will address that problem. i think rather than something forward bills that have already passed, the majority can do better to come up with solutions that serve all americans. in closing, i will add while i appreciate the good intentions to bring these bills to come
forward, i do not think the packages sufficient. with no house and put on the package, members are being given a ticket or leave it option. until we can work on real options to fund border security, i would rather leave it. >> i appreciate the comments about a more open process. i hope that is the process we follow when we get to our appropriations bills. 92 senators voted for it. now we have them saying we do not hold hostage over this wall.
this is an emergency. this is last year's mess we are trying to clean up. we will keep on doing this until we reopen the government, it's that simple. at this point we will try to call as many people up at once. if you would all come up. >> while they are readying themselves, if i may with your permission -- responding to my good friend from oklahoma, i don't think it is take it or leave it, i think it is open or closed. we asked the question whether or not the president is going to sign these measures if they were to come to his desk. first, if he chooses not to sign
it, there is a layor period -- layover period where it would become law anyway. everyone recognizes politics is at play, but the senate having approved these measures troubles me immensely that they would now take a different position. there talking about opening requisite committees -- jurisdiction of this congress, and leaving the homeland security issue on the table until february 8, a measure clearly past the senate. so the other body, under its leadership, is escaping for the moment. i would tell them at some point they can reasonably expect during this shutdown they will begin to experience heat. once they do, i suspect if we
continue to offer measures they have in fact passed, we will be doing the people's business. >> thank you. we will try to do this in a way that makes some sense, to match you up to your subcommittee. then mr. graves. >> i appreciate serving with you on the appropriations committee. i appreciate to testify for the 2019 general government appropriations bill. mr. chairman, congratulations. your comments i have to mention. you talked about someone saying you became chairman, an opportunity to settle scores. it reminded me of practicing in cook county, an extraordinarily
bad judge was appointed to the appellate court. someone cynically said he had the opportunity to reverse all your bad decision. the fiscal 2019 appropriations bill you consider today was developed by chairman langford ad overwhelmingly approved by bipartisan vote. this provides discretionary resources, an increase of $265 million over the fiscal year 2018 level. this bill is fiscally responsible and makes hard choices among competing priorities. the bill rejects the president's proposed elimination of the kennedy development institutional fund and cuts to the small business spursstration which economic growth. more importantly this bill will reopen the department treasury,
securities and exchange commission, and multiple other agencies that have a direct impact on the livelihoods of american families, businesses and communities. areassing this bill, we able to get more than 100,000 federal employees back to work and receiving a paycheck. as far as substantive terms, the bill includes $12.7 billion for the department of treasury, including $11.6 billion for the irs to support its base fy17 taxs for legislation. the bill maintains fy0218 enacted levels for the office of national drug control policy, $360 million above the president's budget, to continue support for programs that target drug trafficking and address
substance abuse problems at the community level. middle includes funding at the president's request for regulatory agencies to protect businesses and individuals from unfair and unsafe business practices, including the federal trade commission's, indications -- and securities and exchange commission. it includes full funding for the federal services demonstration to perform basic repairs and alterations for federal buildings which is necessary to address the backlog of maintenance projects across the federal government. the bill provides a pay increase for civilian federal employees in 2018 while putting a stop to the excessive -- forbill includes backpay employees furloughed during the shutdown. it includes a total lack of controversial policy riders, a clean measure squarely under the jurisdiction of the committee. as you know, we have entered the
18th day of the president's shot down, the consequences of which compounded daily. fundamentally it is time we reopen government. this bill does that for a number of key agencies the american people rely on to be fully, open, functioning, and ready to serve them. thank you for the opportunity to appear before the rules committee. i will be happy to answer your questions. >> i appreciate the opportunity to address the committee on the half of the house of representatives. fors on their behalf i ask a better process. we have been in this process for 17 days. andish to have a thorough open process. >> have only been in control for five days. i was trying to get recognized, and you wouldn't recognize me on the floor. >> in those five days, i will
point out the majority voted to go home rather than continue this process. >> i want to address the financial services bill i worked on last year. he introduced a bill identical to the senate bill. unfortunately it does not reflect the house priorities nor does it reflect the bipartisan work. i think we all have our tussles with the senate and it is our job to reflect house priorities. we are not allowing the bipartisan spirit in which i kn ow this new majority has spoken of. for example, the financial service bill that passed the house last year in july contained nearly $270 million for the california land port of entry, something important that
fully funded that project. yet the senate bill is $100 million short. the bill that passed the house last year included nearly 20, if , bipartisan pieces of legislation that dealt with financial reform, which were approved by this chamber, the last congress, with a vote of 270 votes for more each time. that is bipartisanship being omitted by the senate. democratic senators sponsored many of these from last year. these provisions facilitated capital formation enhancing our capital markets, providing targeted relief to financial institutions, but more importantly protecting her constituents. yet the senate bill ignores all of this great partisan work we did in the house last year. it also shorts the small business administration's
entrepreneurial development programs by $10 million. i know from working with my friend from illinois, the senate bill is deficient in funding his priorities as well. i should point out some of his priorities are being eliminated by the senate. if we were to pass this, then his constituency as well is being forgotten. the consumer product safety commission is $1 million below the house bill, does not fund aants for pool safety, priority of many longtime members of this body. a new structure for the treasury department's committee on foreign investments in the united states. they need another $6 million to meet the requirements of the new authorization. mr. chairman, i am ready to sit down. i am ready to work together as we did last year.
the chairman from illinois agrees with me we had a bipartisan agreement prior to the end of the fiscal year last year. it was negotiated. it can be done. by ignoring the voice of the house, i don't think we are doing our constituents any service at all. >> i appreciate your comments. there are things in this appropriations bill that i would like to see there. this represented a compromise. this is last year's work. you guys left town. year.his mess for this we don't have days and weeks. people are panicked. i don't know about your constituents, but we are getting calls constantly, people wondering whether they will get paid, whether they can pay their rent or mortgage is. this is a crisis. this is an emergency.
we want to have a more open process on the bills we will be responsible for. we have a disaster supplemental coming up. we put out a call for amendments. forward a more open process -- you can look forward to a more open process. i will move to the department of interior bill. >> let me begin by congratulating you both on your new position. it is unfortunate i am testifying under these circumstances today, but nevertheless i look forward to working with you in congress. you and other members of the rules committee have important jobs to do. i appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the fy2019 interior
environment and related agencies appropriations bill. the interior bill before us was drafted by the senate and past overwhelmingly -- passed overwhelmingly 92-6. this was part of the six bill package that passed overwhelmingly in the house last week. this bill provides $359 billion, which is $601 million more than fiscal year 2018 enacted bill. it maintains funding for nearly every agency at or of fiscal year 20 -- or above fiscal year 2018 level. it is important to know what this bill does not contain. there are no new partisan riders. let me repeat, there are no new partisan riders in this bill. i would have written something differently, especially in regards to funding for indian
country. this will immediately open up the department of interior, immediately open up the epa and other agencies in this bill, an will give us a path forwardd to end the trump shut down. this has one important addition. this bill would ensure federal employees at the apartment of interior, epa, and other agencies would receive back pain for the time they are for load -- back pay for the time they are furloughed. i urge my colleagues on both sides of this bill to consider moving this bill forward on the floor when we have an opportunity to vote on it. i would like to point out one thing. --ht now there are tribes this is something our committee works on. nonpartisanly.
when we first did the project control act, health care was protected for the majority of americans. medicare, medicaid was protected. tribal care for our brothers and sisters was not included specifically. they find themselves in the same circumstance again. that is why this is not as generous to indian country and the great work i did in a nonpartisan fashion with my colleague from the other side of friend,e, who is m himy as well is what i worked on in the senate. this is a life and death emergency. it is a crisis we get tribal health care funding stabilized that i wholeheartedly support moving forward with the senate bill to the floor. you.ank
>> mr. chairman, i am here today to respectfully recommend an open rule for consideration. the senate proposal for funding the department of interior and related agencies for the rental of of the fiscal year 19. as it stands now, this bill is entirely a senate product. that is why consideration on the floor is essential. republicans and democrats alike must be able to amend this bill so it reflects the body closest to the people, the u.s. house of representatives. my friend and i worked har. we held nine budget oversight hearings to on her treaty rights -- honor treaty rights given to our native american brothers and sisters. that, when the buildup to the floor, it was amended 50
times. , last year we defended it against competing priorities in the united states senate. i am extremely proud of our work. let's not throw it away by rubberstamping the senate. let us highlight a few of the house priorities missing in the senate bill which concern our colleagues on both sides of the aisle. the senate bill provides $20 million less for the u.s. geological survey national hazard research and early warning systems. $24 million less for the forest service and department of interior wildfire hazards fuel production programs. we went through tremendous wildfires on the west coast. these measures save lives. with disasters in recent years, we need to prioritize our limited funds. this bill provides $77 million less than the house republican bill for brownfield remedial
programs. these provide regulatory relief, improve water in for structure, and spur economic development. epaead the senate bill -- regulations additional redtape in my mind are bipartisan concern. our beloved national park system, the senate bill falls short $27 million for park operations and reducing maintenance. park visitation on the rise. even with this shutdown, is no time to cut corners on its budget. the bill falls under 60 million 160rt of the last years -- $
million short to funding alaskan natives and indian health services. the front page story today in usa today about hospital horrors, and they threw out indian country. we should all be concerned about it. our new chairman is very concerned about that. we all worked together to fix that problem. the senate bill is $135 million less in the indian health service than the bill we passed last year. let's not turn our backs on them. this bill is $10 million below in funding the historic preservation grants, something i know is important to are near chairman -- to our new chairman. the house added $500 million in amendments on the house floor last year. why would we give this funding up? case toe made a strong
open this bill to amendments on the floor. house control the power of the purse. both sides of the aisle deserve to have their voices heard. >> thank you very much. we will hear from mr. bishop and mr. aderholt. [chatter] >> we have to get up one person at a time. >> thank you mr. chairman, and congratulations to you and ranking member cole. i look forward to working with both of you in your new capacity discharge your new
responsibilities. approaching the 18th day of the partial government shutdown. each day of this needless shutdown pushes many vital government services to the breaking point. while the house built last year reflects a lot of work, this bill, the senate bill, reflects only the senate's products, but it is adequate in most respects. most importantly, it was by 96isan and supported of the 100 senators in the senate. it will open the government we pass it and send it back. homeland.lture and
it contains backpay for the workers who have been for load reimbursementand for states that have had shortfalls. a critically important piece of legislation through a diverse rural urban coalition. this includes a farmer safety net and food nutrition programs. it provides over $23 billion in discretionary funding. provides funds to cover the latest estimates for a mandatory program required by law. agprovides $2.73 billion for research, which is an increase of $114 million from fy2019.
it is not as much as the house bill would have provided last year, but this will ensure american agriculture remains unparalleled in the world. according to usda, more than 8004 people are working without pay to inspect our meat, poultry, and eggs products. this bill would fund the food safety and inspection service at $1.049 billion, which is above the budget request from the administration. the farm service agency coos county offices shutdown on december 28, and are often the primary lines for communication for farmers and ranchers providing critical data and answering questions, set under this bill to receive $1.62 billion. it is not enough, but in my district every one of the usda
farm services offices are closed. this bill makes significant investments in rule development -- rural development, including $825 million dedicated for infrastructure development in rural america. as a result of the shutdown, there are no loans for drinking water or sewage system upgrades that can be made. loans and grants for community services, tele medicine programs are not being made. these are real consequences that affect the lives of those all across this country. rural broadband programs funded $175 millionon, below the fy2018 connected
level. -- enacted level. regard to international aid, it projects the president -- rejects the president's proposal abovends it $116 million 2018 levels. the program also proposed for elimination is funded at $210 million. across america in every district, nearly 40 million people are facing the prospects of no food assistance through the supplemental nutrition assistance program, the snap program. without an appropriation from congress, these benefits will stop. i sent a letter to usda demanding answers.
thousand government plans to administer snap in february should this shutdown continue. we need to pass this bill to end the shutdown. 6% of the population of georgia ofeived snap benefits -- 16% the population. 98,000 people are at risk of losing their benefits. this legislation provides the in with $2.97 billion discretionary funding, an increase of $159 million above the fy2018 level. more than 10,000 fda employees are working without pay, while another 7000 have been furloughed. the shutdown is infecting everything from -- impacting everything from users deviceions to accepting
registers and applications. from the food we eat to the medications we depend on, this bill touches the lives of every single american. as i stated the other day, this bill is not perfect -- no bill ever is, but we must reopen the government. security and well-being of too many people is at stake for us to do nothing. i support a rule passing this bill so we can open this government and provide the services we are constitutionally responsible to provide for the american people. you mr. chairman. congratulations to both of you. thank you for letting us testify today. colleague,ay to my the new chairman and former
ranking member of the ag subcommittee, mr. bishop. i know he will do a great job. unfortunately as a lot of my colleagues are hearing around the table, i have to express my .trong opposition to the bill anything but a fully open rule was condemned by the democrats for the past eight years, and the new majority, the first action is proposing a closed rule. i work to develop the original 2019 bill for ag rule development and related agencies. worked in close cooperation with mr. bishop. the priorities of the house subcommittee as well as hundreds of other house members were a part of that legislation.
starting last march, we developed a house built with most priorities. heldafted hr5961 after we five oversight hearings. we reviewed nearly 6000 bills and report requests submitted by 355 members. we supported bipartisan house requests from every corner of the country and from all demographics. briefly a few examples for the bill that is fund houseails to member priorities. when it comes to public health, this bill provides $149 million less for the food and drug administration. when it comes to public health, compared to the house bill, this bill fails to include the two provisions that place limits on chicken imported from china.
the house bill includes an inright ban on chicken school meals -- this does not. in 2019, would establish a pilot ingram for rural broadband communities. this bill provides $125 million less than what we provided in the house bill. these are just a few examples of why the new house majority's bill that is adopted from the senate is going in the wrong direction. the other side wants to claim these bills are bipartisan, but they are not bicameral. appropriatorsuse that we have lost over the years would probably role in their grave right now if they knew we
were taking up senate bills without any output from the house side. as democrats used to say, just because you can do something does not mean you should. i urge members of this committee to stand up for public health and rural development, project the strategy of passing the senate bill. thank you very much. >> last but not least, mr. r price from transportation, housing, and urban development. it is a pleasure to appear before you and testify about hr267, legislation to responsibly fund that government of transportation and housing and urban development. my republican colleagues tonight aren't looking wistfully at those house senate compromise
bills that we put together last fall. we negotiated conference agreements last year. we preferred those bills -- of course we do. we missed an opportunity to pass those bills in the summer, and now we are in a shutdown. the premium is on making it as easy as possible for the senate to say yes, since they have already said yes to these bills. they said yes to this transportation hud bill on a 31-0 vote, and they said yes in the full senate. bill. good bill.a fiscalllion above the 2018 enacted level.
in addition to maintaining additional infrastructure, it will allocate $17 billion for new transportation and housing projects in rural and urban areas. this includes several billion dollars in funding above authorized levels to accelerate improvements to our aviation system, expand transit and rail infrastructurece and affordable housing stock. theress we have made sense bipartisan budget agreement to ensure vulnerable populations have access to reliable transportation and safe housing, but also provide robust funding for flexible grant programs, especially home that allow towns and cities across the country to leverage public and private capital to address their most pressing community needs.
this legislation would finally reopen these departments and allow more than 20,000 furloughed employees to receive backpay and returned to their mission. the trump shutdown has dragged on for more than two weeks, creating chaos and uncertainty for families, businesses and communities in each of our districts. grants to help pay for aviation and rail facilities put on hold. state department of transportation delaying the onset of new projects. national transportation safety accidentsing investigations. new hiring and training for air traffic drillers ground to a halt. exacerbating an ongoing staffing shortage. disaster relief funding for
states hit by disaster last year, funding already appropriated, now remaining un-allocated because staff at hud remains furloughed. we discovered hud officials failed to renew more than 1000 housing contracts for project-based section 8 projects for the end of the year. that is exposing tens of thousands of tenants to possible eviction. it is madness . put an end tod it. this legislation reflects the best of bipartisan collaboration. it excludes problematic policy riders from either party. i urge colleagues to support this bipartisan approach to reopen the government without further delay and would be happened to respond -- would be happy to respond to any questions. >> i also want to congratulate
mr. cole. it is great to see my fellow floridian. a new floridian on the committee. chairman for this opportunity. i would like to thank chairman price for his trenchant -- his friendship. he is truly a gentleman. over the past four years, have workedwe to craft bills that reflect house priorities. but to opposece the bill before us today with this closed rule. the speaker is asking us to blindly accept senate priorities while turning our backs on the members of the house. we work through the summer and fall on a bipartisan bicameral way to come to a agreement.
we were not able to get that across the line, but we still have an opportunity to hopefully do that. that agreement protects the priorities of the members of the house. the bill before you today is frankly an affront to that process of compromise and cooperation. this bill rejects a years worth of bipartisan work to advance house priorities to build our nation's infrastructure and restore communities. last year we worked across the aisle to include over 80% of member of requests for transportation and housing. this bill disregards and throws those requests and that work away. these are requests that you and other members of this body made on behalf of your constituents.
let me throughout a couple --mples where my colleagues wrinkly even my democratic colleagues are asking us to shortchange or toss all the work that has been done on the house proposal. this bill provides less. it shortchanges the ports in our country. highways -- we talked about infrastructure being a priority. yet compared to the house bill, this shortchanges highways and ouair traffic control system. programs, compared to the house bill, this means less funding for people with disabilities, including our veterans. cuts to housing for people in property -- in poverty are living with hiv and aids, a
concern to so many members. drops hundreds of bipartisan accountability provisions we included in our report. instead this bill would give a free hand to a number of bureaucrats. on top of all that, this bill would not get us any closer to reopen the federal government. agree we have to reopen the government. the senate has no plans to take the legislation, and the president would not sign this anyways. i fear this is an effort in futility. i clearly want to open up the federal government. this will not do that. this will be another week of spinning our wheels and not reopening the federal government.
members to get things moving in the right direction and respectfully reject this rule. i have an amendment before you. >> speak on it now. >> i am requesting at least one of my amendment to the appropriations bill before you theade in order and that committee provide the waiver is necessary. the amendment will finally provide legal status to the dreamers and to those tps recipients who will soon lose their status. these are issues that so many of us hear. we have an opportunity to do that in this amendment. we protectent has --
the dreamers, in exchange for te $5.7 billion. i think this is good policy. this would receive strong bipartisan support. this is the way to move forward to get out of the shutdown. i will take any questions. thank you very much. >> i appreciate your suggestion. to gentlemen knows we had a wide open rule. that amendment would be legislating under the appropriations bill and not be made under order. everyone on this side of the aisle wants to help the dreamers and tps recipients. who have been fighting for that constantly when you guys were in charge to no avail. it frustrates me they are used as political pawns. these are human beings.
may have obeyed our laws. they raise families. they pay taxes. these are good people. we should celebrate them. instead they have been told by the president they are not welcome. now we are told they could be a pawn, we could trade them for a wall. say one other thing. i have great respect for my colleagues, democrats and republicans. i am alarmist by your lack of urgency. people are. c. people are in a pani they are worried about food
stamps to national parks to whether government contractors will get paid. panicked.- people are you guys are in control of the senate and white house. you control everything, that he left town with the government shutdown. this is extraordinary. it is unprecedented. this is the first time in history we have begun a new congress in the middle of a government shutdown. i get it. i would like these appropriations bills to reflect more of my priorities as well. we'll have the luxury -- we don't have the luxury to go to last year's business and debate these appropriations bills. our constituents want us to do something now. 800,000 hard-working civil servants are either furloughed
or working without pay. that is what an emergency looks like. you guys could have passed a short-term continuing resolution to keep the government running. you didn't. you left town, and the government shutdown. here we are trying to clean up last year's mess. i certainly don't appreciate having the first thing we have to deal with in rules last year's business. we are where we are. we need to clean up last year's mess before it does any damage priorities to our where we are hopefully working in a more bipartisan way. i don't have any questions because we know what is in these bills. for being here and i yield to the gentleman from
florida. >> i echo your sentiments. i have no questions and look forward to getting passed this particular period and the rancor that exists in the country. we are a better country than we have manifested of late. i just hope everybody understands we are the united states of america. community asiverse a country, and we need to spend more time healing our divisions than perpetuating them. much.nk you very i want to thank everyone who came in testifying today. we view this somewhat
differently than you do. quite frankly the president was here all december. in halfed a deal to cut the amount of money he had requested for border security. i was not part of that negotiation. that is usually what people call a fair deal. that would stop this government shutdown from happening. to say we have voted on these bills is in a sense true. i don't know why we are voting on them again this week, for messages for political posturing. the bills in front of us may well be bipartisan, but they are not bicameral. there is zero input from any number of the house of representatives. worked really
hard in interior. my friend had the numbers exactly right on indian health care. if you cared about indian health care, he would want to vote for the house bill. i was part of the larger conference on a bundle of bills. why in the world didn't the democrats take where we had agreements with the senate? you literally had written out hills today that whenever presented -- the only reason it is not because somehow that is more embarrassing to the senate. if that is the attitude to the project negotiation, you don't have negotiation. this will not robust one step closer to a resolution. the lesson for both sides, when you are dealing with domestic politics, if you are trying to achieve absolute victory, you are going to fail because it leaves you an in bedard in --
embittered the electorate. we've got products that have franklyotiated out and the priorities of 435 of our you areare represented, in a lot better shape. i don't have a lot of questions here, although i will not ever simply allow the u.s. senate to dictate what the house of representatives does in terms of funding. this is the most egregious surrender of funding power that any speaker has ever done. we will just throw away everything we have done for a year and take whatever the u.s. senate manages to agree on. we do that knowing it is not likely to get picked up by the senate or signed by the president. i suggest these people that talk
about negotiation actually start negotiating and look at something that is reasonable. reduction in what was pretty modest to begin with at $5 billion -- that could have saved us all this trouble. instead we have people that wanted to fight the clinical war war to thepolitical end. it certainly includes both sides of the aisles. why we are doing this again, we did it last week. it is still sitting in the senate. if they want to take it up, they can do it. i suspect badgering them is not the way to do it. i had a whole series of questions. i could literally ask each member what was better about the
bill they had written themselves, and they can each give me an answer about one hour long about what the house did was better. to say we didn't get our work done -- in a sense, that is true, but that w the best record of gettingas appropriations bills on time in 22 years. this process would be a lot worse if we did not get the labor and defense bill and a number of other bills across the line. record, it will be adjusting to see if this congress can pass 75% of government funding by september. i will work with you. i don't think this exercise will us to where i know we want to go, which is getting the government open. it will make everyone more bitter, more entrenched. it is not moving us in the right
way. doing it under rule is at odds with the way the majority wanted to operate. this is a closed rule on a multibillion-dollar, hundreds of billions of spending with no house member, liberal or conservative, having any impact whatsoever on a vast portion of federal spending. i regret this egregious surrender of constitutional authority. i think it will come back to haunt us. with all due respect, i don't think it offers any prospect of a negotiated settlement to reopen the government. we can go through this exercise. we will have a lot of fun on the floor. we can get a lot of speakers lined up, but nothing in this bill will move us toward a
solution. >> i agree with you. i wish we weren't in this mess. i have nothing but the highest respect for the appropriators, but democrats and republicans, because i know how hard they work, oftentimes in a very bipartisan way. i will repeat what i have sent, i think we're at the point now where this is an emergency. impacting every day people in this country and we have to do something. >> if it was an emergency now or back in december when the president cut in half the money to keep the government open. >> i thought he backed away from that. the't this the case of
pot calling the kettle black? it is laughable that my republican colleagues are sitting here calling out, we could have done this, we could have done that -- unfortunately we didn't. congress, republican members decided to leave office with two black eyes. you shut down the government and you went home. that is what you did. you shut down the government and you went home. you didn't give a darn about anyone but yourself. you put up your finger to see which way the political wind was blowing, you lost the election, you lost the majority, and you
cited to do nothing. nothing for the 800,000 people that are out of work. let me tell you something -- last week, the day after we got sworn in, i went to my mailbox to clean it out here in washington. you know what i pulled out of there? an almost $100 rent increase. thinking about those federal workers who also received a rent increase, but they have not received a paycheck because of you. you failed them. now you are going to be failing your own constituents, continue to fail them. you had an opportunity in december, an opportunity in december. you had an opportunity during the lame-duck session. you chose to go home and do
do nothing. now you sit here and complain. i have many ideas how we could have improved these bills. we did not have an opportunity to debate any of that because up these to not put bills for a vote. that was your choice. unless you are willing to put your name behind something -- at least my colleague had courage to sign a discharge petition to protect dreamers. at least you did that, so thank you for doing that. we were missing one more signature. one additional member with a backbone could have helped us bring relief to daca. we couldn't find that among the members that left. i am sorry we are where we are
today. we had an opportunity to open up the government while we continue to negotiate until february. you chose not to go down that route either. what is it going to take to get us to open up the federal government? that is our primary responsibility. i didn't haveyor, a choice. i was bound to pass the budget on time. local governments are depending on us to do our jobs. it is about time we did that. with that i yield back. witht me associate myself the comments of our ranking member, particularly his comments on the ability to negotiate. it means not everyone gets what
they want. , this rulessay 217ittee a month ago got votes on an appropriations bill that did fund disaster assistance and border security, went over to the senate where it failed. i have heard the word emergency used several times today. i agree it is an emergency, and i frankly do not understand why the majority leader of the other body would not declare an emergency and not require the 60 vote threshold, just as they have now had to do almost every presidential appointment, as they have had to do for a number of things. theres divided situation, are individuals in the other body who are simply not going to agree to anything. of former speaker
boehner that he only controlled one half of one third of the federal government, and would always use that as his fallback position. you will find how difficult it is dealing with the other body. mind you they were allegedly our friends when we were dealing with these difficulties. fda ist understand why under the department of agriculture. we will leave that for another day. can i ask you about the funding reduction in the bill before us today compared with the level you had approved in your bipartisan negotiation previously? >> thank you for mentioning that . in the ag bill might
be a discussion for another day. house levels are critical, as you know. with greater efficiency. benefactor of higher levels is to help the american consumer. coverage ond critical public health areas , more rep andoids device production. 149icularly, there was million in the original bill above the level in the senate bill. things, ahose
promotion of the domestic manufacturing initiative. also the industry tries to incentivize drug compound meters. 12 million in the house version as opposed to zero in the senate version. a new initiative that tries to capture more health information. 60 million in the house version as compared to zero in the senate version. out, heneed to point has done a phenomenal job in the fda over the last two years. whichpidity with
approvals are occurring is unparalleled. as well as new drug approvals could the additional money you proposed would be well invested. we have done that work before on a bipartisan basis on the use agreements that passed in october, i'm sorry, august 2017, then of course the security bill that passed right at the end of the obama administration. i think that we recognize for some time, that the investment that we make in the fda is certainly one that is important and it protects the american public. at the same time, it does not make sense to be ratcheting that back in whatever vehicle we decide to use to send something to the president's desk. this is funding that should be considered and again, dr. gottlieb has done a phenomenal job in getting the products
through in a timely passion and it has not compromised patient safety. the risk-averse nature of the fda has changed. the culture has saved and i for one welcome that. > mr bishop, you look like you want to respond. >> yes. let me just say this. the bill provides strong support for the fda. the $2.96 billion that is provided for fda salaries and expenses is $159 billion more -- more than last year's level, million that is a 6% increase. the primary difference between this bill and the house is the level of the support for new initiatives. new funding for domestic drug manufacturing and new platforms for drug development is provided. the house bill provides a full requested amount for the requested proposals, whereas this bill is a compromise.
however, the senate bill takes a stronger position than the house bill on one key area, that is opioids. we have all heard a lot about opioids. it is constantly in the news every single day. this bill provides $59 million in new funding for opioid prevention activities, which is $29 million more than the house bill did. sustained a funding to combat the opioid epidemic and target increases for ongoing operations that allows for a flexible approach for the many public health issues that are facing the nation. while this bill is not perfect, perhaps it would have had some areas funded more to the liking in the house. the other hand, it does provide stronger funding in the areas
that we all support. like opioids. if we could have gone to conference and had regular order, you would have been able to resolve this. we are where we are and we need to open the government. again, my time as the senate majority leader has suspended the 60 vote requirement, we might have gone to congress. i agree that an emergency situation exists. i believe that we will hear the president address it this evening. >i yield back. does our site have any additional questions or comments? do you want to welcome --
hopefully reconsider. >> i do have a couple of questions. one about mr. calvert, if he is still here. important.s are very i think in part of your testimony, you said that because we are adopting the bill, you had worked with the senate to try to get in more money for water infrastructure. so i was wondering if you could tell me what the shortfalls are if we pass this bill instead of what you had already negotiated on water issues. >> one of the issues that we have a new program with. and the senate cut it back $14 million. that seems like a small amount of money, but because it is used to offset the bond authority, it actually equates to $3.6 billion in spending for infrastructure.
that equates to tens of thousands of jobs, but also infrastructure that is necessary throughout the united states in aging water infrastructure like you are talking about in arizona. so, it was unreasonable, i think, for that to cut that. it is a bipartisan initiative. along with a couple of other items that the united states senate has their own priorities of, as we do. fortunate, our priorities were not addressed. >> thank you. mr chair, this could go to either mr bishop or mr price, who sitting at the table, i had heard repeatedly that the reason we have to vote on these bills right now is so that we can get the government back open. so i guess my question is, when i was voting on december 20, the house passed a bill that would have kept the government open,
but not one democrat voted for. wanted to know why. why did you not vote for it? >> before the answer, i can say that the bill that the democrats brought to the floor last week, seven republicans did join with us, so the bipartisanship is moving our way. i will let them answer that. >> i think we all agree that our respective subcommittees did a lot of work and a lot of good work in working with our senate colleagues and coming up with compromise bills, the equivalence of conference agreements and i think we all wish that those were in law today. but the bill that the then majority put up in the lame-
duck session was -- went beyond those bills as you very well know. and it included very controversial funding for a border wall that really, the president had sprung on us very late in the season and is highly controversial. it should not surprise anyone that it was viewed as a political ploy. and as something that is designed to let republicans show support for the president, perhaps, but that was not really serious opportunity for the two parties to get together. on the bills that we had agreed on. we had a chance to do that in september. we had a chance to do it in december. the four bills we're talking about today were part of a mini bus. if we had been here one more week, one more week, in the
fall, we would have had these bills on ice. and that would have been a good thing. but we went home to campaign and we did not get it done, but the bill that the majority put on the floor in december was not the amount of these bills, it was, as you well know, bill mainly about the border wall. all right. i want to thank all of our witnesses for taking the time to be here. would like to remind you to give our stenographer any opening statements that you might have or anything else you would like to put on the record. i appreciate your patience and thank you for being here. hopefully the next time you come will be a happier occasion. are there any other members who wish to testify this legislation? seeing none, this closes the hearing portion of our meeting. at this time, the chair will entertain a motion from the distinguished gentleman from florida. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman.
thank you very much. i move the committee grant hr 264 the financial services and general government appropriations act 2019, h.r. 265. the agricultural and rural development and agencies appropriation act 2019. as you are exiting, please, so the transcriber can hear us. the reporter can hear us. hr 266. the department of the interior , environment, and related agencies for the appropriations act of 219 and hr 267, the
department of transportation, housing and urban development and related agencies appropriations act 2019, each are closed rule. the rule allows one hour of debate on each bill, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority number of the committee on appropriations or their respective designees. the rule provides all points of order against consideration of each bill, the rule provides that these bills should be considered as read. it waves all points of order against all and the rule provides each bill one motion to recommit. would someone please close the door? finally, the rule waives the requirement of rule 13 for two thirds vote to consider a report from the committee on rules on
the same day it is presented to the house with respect to any resolution reported through the legislative day of january 15, 2019. relating to a measure making or continuing appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2019. and i am hoping that we meet that deadline and my friends from oklahoma and i can celebrate on that day. >> thank you for the motion. gentleman fromed florida. >> i have an amendment. an amendment to the rule to report a modified open rules for each bill before us today. >> hr 264, 265, 266 and 267. the role would require that all members be received for the portion of the congressional record dated at least one day before the day of consideration of the amendment.
>> the amendment is not agreed to. are there any more amendments for discussion? gentlemen from oklahoma? >> in order to provide the -- amendmentaivers two, offered by representative homer. amendment three, offered by idsonm.ntative dav to make an order and provide the appropriate amendment. amendment number 2 by representative newhouse. amendment three. make in order and provide the appropriate waivers for hr 266. finally, make an order and provide the appropriate waivers to hr 267.
>> c-span. where history unfolds daily. c-span was created as a public service. we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, this in court, -- the supreme court and public policy events in d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider.