of america in a way to just get that wall or that border security done. they do not support that at the expense of their communities and their families. over the past 18 days or so since the shortchanges i've heard from any n >> to call the office here in washington for mobile and montgomery - - montgomery and birmingham. one constituent is a small business owner in north alabama with 30 plus employees haveve continuous support for programs in over the past seven years that work has been delayed or stopped altogether. because if their work stops they will need jobs and they will start looking for other

jobs in the economy people are looking for workers. and then the business could be shut down. and the military who also works with the federal to be deployed to afghanistan. that does not believe they should be a bargaining chip t for her job and family to cover these bills. this is a family xtra stress. on behalf of the family of four in smith station, alabama, another mother wrote to me about their lapse in health care coverage. because of the shutdown, because employees at the federal health

insurance agency, geha have been furloughed. her family's change in coverage was never fully product at the end of the year and it lapsed and was canceled as of december 31. they're now facing important medical decisions, appointments, prescriptions, refills in the next few weeks but don't know if they're going to have the health insurance to cover them. today -- today the administration announced that the deadline for farmers to receive their subsidies because of the administration's trade policies will be extended, which all sounds really great, sounds all good and well. we're going to extend that. we're going to put a band-aid on this for our farmers. these farmers have been hit hard by the trade war this administration has started. i've talked about that on the floor -- this floor of the senate on any number of occasions and around my state.

so to easy that pain a few months ago, the administration decided to ahe allocate $12 billion as a bailout almost. now, these farmers really don't want these handouts. they want their markets. but to ease the pain to their credit, the administration came up with is $12 billion to ease that pain. but less than half of that amount, roughly about $5.2 billion, in payments were made before the department of agriculture offices, the local offices, were closed. only less than half. so while extending that deadline sounds very good, and it is simply putting a band-oid over the wound, the fact is that until we get this government open, farmers who did not get their payments in before the shutdown are going to see a problem. the problem with a shutdown more because they can't depend on the federal government anymore than they can depend on the weather.

these farmers are at risk every season, every year of things out of the their control. what they don't need is a government that they cannot depend on. and that's what we have right now. they're out of luck at a time that they need it most as they are starting to plan for their spring plan and summer planting. their loans, their crops, buying the seed, as senator bennet talked about a few moments ago. there's one constituent that wrote me a heartbreaking letter about the fact that the impact of losing her snap benefits after january 31 if the shutdown continues. she's living on a razor's edge financialland depends on social security disability benefits, and those benefits and that's snap dollars sneads to survive. it is not a lot. it is not a lot of money on a monthly basis. it is such a small amount of mo enthat folks on this body and folks in the house and folks certainly the folks in the

administration wouldn't think twice. it is probably less than they spend at starbucks every morning. but for her, it's an incredibly important part of the her life. and we have to make sure that we do everything not to let her down. now, i did see just before i came over here that the administration has said that we're going to extend, we're going to make sure that snap benefits are paid in february. well, again, it is -- that's great. and it sounds wonderful. but it's a band-aid. sooner ar later if we don't end up doing something about the shutdown, that band-aid is going to be ripped off and these folks will be left in the cold once again. we need to remember, and i this i itest goes lost sometimes in -- we need to remember, and i think itest goes lost in the shutdown, that this is not just about the paychecks and direct benefits that people in this country receive from the federal

government f it also is affecting all those people in our communities who serve those who work for the government, who take in their grocery money appeared take in their -- and take in their utility money and their gas money. it is going to affect those people. it is going to affect car dealers. it is going to affect the local businesses, just like the folks in aliceville at the prison said today that sooner or later if they don't have money to be spenters it's going to affect that community. this touches so many people in this country that we need to not lose sight that. the letters and calls and voicemails that are pouring in every day the shutdown continues, more and more americans are facing increasingly consequences of the impasse that we see here in washington, d.c. there is simply put no excuse for it. we can and must do better. we can and must find the common

ground that so many of us talk about every day. every day we hear it over and over about talking about finding common ground. but we have to practice what we preach in terms of finding that common ground. you know, this past year i've talked to a number of my constituents back home. we've gone through a number of issues, and i've talked to a lot of people who've asked me to support the wall. they always say -- they stop me over the holidays. and i would always stop and talk to them. they were always very respectful, unlike some things that happen in our political discourse nowadays. these people were very respectful. i asked them what they were talking about when they said this i needed to help vote for a wall. they need, said, we need border

security. which gave me the opportunity to say, i completely agree. unfortunately, the so-called wall that we keep hearing about pre-merrell on twitter has -- primarily on twitter has become a metaphor. to support the wall is to support a secure border. to oppose it is to oppose a secure border. that makes no sense. what's getting lost in this debate is that every member of this body wants secure borders. every member of this body, every member of the house wants border security measures that will keep our communities safe. we might have disagreements about the best way to make sure our borders are secure. we might have disagreements on what border security will look like. but it doesn't mean that we want open borders, as i keep hearing from the administration. that is a preposterous

statement. in fact, in the last congress when we had the nominee, one of the president's nominees for the head ofize h. i.c.e., he used to work on a border. he was there. he controlled it. he was the head of the border security. i asked him in the hearing, have you ever heard one politician, have you ever heard anybody in washington, d.c., that they are for open borders, he said, no, sir, not at all. so we've got to get away from that political posturing so we can find the common ground necessary to move this forward the fact of the matter is we have found common ground. we have to you understand that common ground right near in this body. bauer last february in the midst of bipartisan talks on a more comprehensive immigration reform, a number of senior administration officials came to the senate and briefed members on the situation on the border. they outlined how an infusion of money in the context of a larger piece of legislation could

improve security and conditions for asylum seekers and on the border. in the wake of that presentation -- i think if i recall correctly, that they proposed a $25 billion price tag for border security. in the wake of that presentation, republicans and democrats alike, a majority of the united states senate, voted to include that $25 billion in border security funding over the next decade. that was a bipartisan effort. over the course of the last spring and early summer, the senate appropriations committee, the united states senate appropriations committee, led by my colleague from alabama, senator shelby and senator leahy, the ranking member, passed a bipartisan homeland security funding bill by a vote of 25-5. they did that in june of this

year, and that included $1.6 billion in border security funding. that was on top of the $1.3 billion i think that was funded last year. so today what has started this whole process is the administration demanding a blank check of $5.6 billion for a wall as the price to reopen the government. that is simply not how our government should work. now, candidly -- and in all fairness -- in recent days we've gone from an argument that was just simply about dollars and cents on both sides of the aisle -- it was simply about dollars and cents, $5.6 billion versus $1.6 billion or $1.3 billion. 0 we've now seen the administration beginning to slowly roll out how they would actually spend that money. there was no plan in the beginning. it was just send us $5.6

billion. we're learning about that plan via twitter and on the tv talk shows, not the way that this body is used to getting information from the administration, and that is through a budget process or through some proposal that comes that you can ask questions and you can vet. if the administration is serious about border security -- and they should be serious about border security, just like the senate of the united states and the house of representatives of the united states should be serious about border security -- we should reopen the rest of the government and officials should also come back, come back to the hill like they did in february and brief members of both parties in congress about what is needed and exactly the new border security money, how it will be spent. this week the house has been voting on a series -- or will be on a series of funding bills that the senate has already passed.

many by a vote of 92-6. think about that. you know, as i travel around the state, i tell people all the time, what i saw last year in my first year is that there is so much more bipartisanship that is seen in this body that you don't see just by watching c-span and listening to dueling press conferences. there is a lot of it that goes on and we passed those bills 92-6. these bills will ensure the federal employees and contractors go back to work, they get paid, that food assistance and housing vouchers can go forward, that vital research can be done, that our parks and museums can reopen, that our airports are safe, and our prisons are monitored. it ensures that instead of handing political appointees a 10% raise, we pay the coast guard, who continue to serve

throughout the shutdown without knowing if their next paycheck is going to come. mr. president, i'm just literally sad to say -- and i really hope people will take this into account, especially folks that have been here for a long time. it is sad to say that if my first year here, my first year in the senate, this is the third government shutdown that we have seen. we should be embarrassed about that. the administration should be embarrassed about that. at every opportunity i have voted to keep the government open. i can't say that i will do it every time because it will depend on the circumstances. but thus far i have done all i can to keep this government open and the american people are frustrated and disheartened by the dysfunction and empty rhetoric that they hear out of this town.

but we have to remember that the senate of the united states has done its job and done so in a deliberative and bipartisan way. no one on either side of the political aisle should lose sight of that. we came together and found common ground, and we should be he -- and we should insist that the president of the united states not only acknowledge that but honor that. get this government up and running and let's sit down to continue to discuss the plans for the border security that we all know is necessary and we would like. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. rounds: thank you, mr. president. i understand that there is a bill at the desk, and i ask for its first reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read for the first time.

the clerk: s. 47, a bill to provide for the management of the natural are resources of the united states and for other purposes. mr. rounds: i now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i object to my own request. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will receive a second reading on the next legislative day. mr. rounds: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 10:00 a.m. wednesday, january 9. further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day and morning business be closed. further, following the leader remarks, the senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to s. 1. finally, that the senate recess from 12:15 p.m. until 2:15 p.m.

to allow for the weekly conference meetings. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. rounds: mr. president, if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of our democratic colleagues. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: i come to the floor tonight to talk about hostages. seven hostages, seven spending bills, bills that have come through this republican-led chamber, bills that the house is ready to move forward, taken hostage ironically by the republican leadership of the senate and the president of the

united states. now those seven hostages, those spending bills the house has said, well, mr. president, we have a difference of opinion that has to be worked out. it affects homeland security. so let's continue that debate while setting the other six free. freedom for six bills passed by the republican-led senate so we can put america back to work. it sounds like a pretty good idea. but good ideas and common sense seem to be victims, victims of this presidential temper tantrum over a symbol on the southern border. so while it shut down nine

cabinet departments: agriculture, commerce, justice, homeland security, housing, interior, state, transportation, and treasury, affecting all kinds of everyday functions for americans. the local school keeps functioning. they figure it out. the local city doesn't shut down. the county doesn't shut down. has your state shut down? i don't think so. so why this childish behavior here? why this incompetence? why this disregard for the quality of life for americans? 800,000 workers either instructed to work without pay or instructed to go on furlough? we're all affected, every one

of us are affected by these departments being shut down, but those 800,000, they don't get a paycheck. what does that mean when they try to write the check that will pay for their mortgage or their rent? their students' tuition, the utility bill? how do they keep the lights turned on? fine for the president, his lights are staying on. he's not inconvenienced. but these 800,000 americans are more than inconvenienced. they're put into a hard place over this hostage taking by the president and the republican leadership of this body. out in oregon the estimate, admittedly somewhat imprecise is

9,000 workers have been affected. it seems in the ballpark. 1% of 800,000 so 9,000 oregonians affected with this foolishness. an air traffic controller wrote to me and said we're tired of being a pawn in the partisan games played in washington, and these shutdowns have compromised aviation safety, he said. they hinder the f.a.a.'s ability to hire and train controllers and upgrade air traffic control systems. they break down morale and already understaffed and frustrated workforce. or the constituent who wrote to me to say, quote, it's unconscionable for trump to deprive federal employees of earned and necessary income, holding them hostage for his

foolish wall. so seven spending bills held hostage and 800,000 americans and their families finances. there's the young man in lane county who i spoke with after one of my town halls last week. he is supposed to be moving to california to begin working in the sierra national forest this past weekend, all set to go, given up his current living arrangements because he's going to be moving into forest service housing. then the shutdown happened. he has no job, has no key to undo the lock, has no ability to move into that forest service housing. he's stranded. just all kinds of everyday stories of challenges to americans. to president trump, i say listen. listen to the voices of ordinary

americans who are having a hard time because of you and because of the leadership of this senate, the republican leadership of this senate, catching ordinary americans in the middle of this. this is your shutdown, mr. president. you said so. you said it on television. you said it from the oval office. you said you were proud to own this shutdown. you said i'm not going to blame anybody else. it's my shutdown. yes, it is, mr. trump. mr. president, it is your shutdown. it's not a shutdown with a mission, a mission that's important. because the mission that's important that you talk about is border security. but every democrat, every republican supports border security. all of us who were here in 2013

voted for huge sums. i heard some describe that bill we passed was $35 million for border security. i heard tonight an earlier speech it was over $40 million in border security. smart border security, smart border security. don't you want to spend the taxpayers' dollars smartly? you want to waste them? you want to shut down the government and create hardship for 800,000 people because you want to waste their money? mr. president and to my colleagues across the aisle, listen to the common sense of people in your home state who want border security, but they don't want a foolish shutdown. now the president said there's a crisis, a crisis at the border because so many people are coming. well, how many people are coming to the border? well, let's take a look. this shows the numbers of folks

who have been apprehended at the border from the year 2000 now 19 years ago, to year to date in strait. -- 2018. slightly out of date. you see the report. really high numbers from 2001 to 2007. and then the numbers dramatically decline through 2011 on over. i just got the numbers before i came to the floor from the last month we had, which was october. about 60,000 people came to the border. in one month in 2000, 200,000 people came to the border. quite a difference, less than a third now, in last month. so no crisis there. only the humanitarian crisis, mr. trump, that you are creating with your war on

children, your war on migrant children, shoving them back into mexico to put them at the mercy of the mexican gangs. proceeding to let them into the u.s. but then rip them out of the arms of their parents while you lock up their parents. deciding you're going to lock up the children with the parents behind barbed wire in internment camps. establishing a national system of child prisons that last month held 15,000 children up from 7,000 in june. failing to provide medical evaluations for these children when they cross the border, and two have died, one after six days in the care of the american border guard. you, mr. president, have created a crisis, a humanitarian crisis. the arrivals on the border are not the crisis.

it's your hardened heart, your hard and evil heart, your war on children. the deliberate strategy of inflicting trauma on children in order to send a message of deterrence, a political message of deterrence. who here believes that it's right to deliberately injure children to send a message of deterrence? that's the strategy jeff sessions announced last may that started this intense assault on migrant children. who would defend it today? find me one caretaker of children who believes that inflicting trauma on children is acceptable. p find one religious tradition, one moral code that says that's okay, because it's not okay, and every human civilization recognizes that. meanwhile, our farmers are

wondering what happened to their farm service agencies. they're closed down across the country, including 23 in oregon. and what happened to those payments that the president promised for those affected by tariffs, but the payments can't be distributed because of the shutdowns. how about our federal firefighters who need to be in training right now for the fires we're going to see next summer because of climate chaos? we're seeing the impacts in every conceivable way as my colleagues have been pointing out, and it's time to end it. it's time to release the hostages. it's way past time to end it. 18 days, three days from the longest shutdown in history. time to end it, put people back to work, return to common

sense, and at the same time quit afflicting children and migrant adults as a political strategy. almost everybody, probably everyone in this room came here as a descendant of immigrants. almost all americans. not many of us are directly descended from native americans. most of us are descendants of immigrants. how do we want them to be treated? with respect and decency as they wait an asylum hearing. and that's what we have to return to. so release the hostages, return to common sense, and treat the american people with respect. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania.

mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i join in raising these issues tonight about the government shutdown. the reason that so many of us have referred to it simply as the trump shutdown is because the president is the person who led the way to have the government shut down. he said that before the shutdown, as we all know. we've seen that, that statement he made in the oval office. then, of course, we went forward and i think it's important to reset where we've been and where we are. there was an agreement in this body in the united states senate just before christmas by 100 senators to extend funding for the government for a short period testify time so if -- period of time so if there were issues to debate before now and the end of january, we could do that. it's hard to get 100 senators to

agree on anything, but that's what happened and then it went to the house and we know what happened after that. the president got pressure from right-wing talk show hosts and i guess they have more influence on him than on americans who never want a government shutdown. so as we stand here tonight nine of 15 federal departments are closed, shut down. that means that -- and i'm not even itemizing the number of agencies that is. but then we came into the new year on january 3, i don't know what hour it was, but it was in the evening, with a new majority in the house of representatives. what did the democratic house speaker do in her first act as speaker and their first vote in -- in essence their first vote on substance?

they voted to open the government up by voting in favor of a bill that was essentially a republican appropriations bill. that's what the democratic house did -- democratic-controlled house voted to move forward on republican appropriations bills that were voted on here in committee but also were agreed to here in a sense by the consensus, the 100-0 consensus just before christmas. so there is ample reason. there's a lot of documentary evidence, video evidence that this is a trump shutdown. i think it's important for people to understand that just wasn't -- i know that some here called it a partisan bill. no, it wasn't. it was a bipartisan bill. it just happened to be -- happened to have its origin in the work of republicans in the

senate. senate appropriation work that was done by republicans, with democratic help, but, of course, this chamber is controlled by republicans so these were republican bills. but it's also important to know what could happen here. there is legislation now that the senate could vote on that would open the government up by doing the following -- by funding eight departments of government until september 30. so it's important for people to understand that. they see the back and forth and they see how a bill like that is characterized on television, but it's important for people to know, and i will keep saying it for emphasis because it's important to get the facts right, this is an action by a house controlled by democrats to move forward bills that virtually every republican agreed to in one way or another over time on various occasions. the effect of passing that bill

here would open the government for those agencies -- those departments is a more correct word -- those departments that are shut down right now, leaving only one department that would not be funded over a longer department, department of homeland security. so that department would not be funded after a certain date in february in we couldn't agree on funding until then. what that effectively is move forward to keep the government operating, to keep, just by way of example, 13,709 f.b.i. agents who could be working without pay, 4,399d.e.a. agents who could be working without pay. i could go down the list. we've had many examples tonight. i won't restate them. but it allows all those

operations of the federal government to go forward but still preserves the opportunity for the president or anyone to make assertions, to make arguments, and to put forth policy regarding border security no matter what it is. we could debate that from now until that moment in february, that date in february when the homeland security department would run out of money and see what would happen at that point. but that's what people have to understand here. there is a way to continue a debate about border security, a very important debate. i voted for i don't know how many tens of millions -- billions with a b -- on border security since i have been here. i voted on the bill in 2014, the comprehensive bill that got 68 votes here in 2014. that means a number of republicans voted for it.

that committed $40 billion to border security based upon the testimony of experts, based on people who understand border security. let's be honest, folks, a lot of house members and a lot of democrats and republicans in both parties in both houses are not border security experts. that's why we should ask for their advice in telling us what is the best way to secure the border. that's essentially what happened in 2013 when both parties voted 68 votes here to pass a comprehensive bill that had more than $40 billion for border security. that's how you do border security. you don't just say, well, because i used a word in a campaign, i used a sound-bite in a campaign, therefore the sound-bite, which isn't based upon good policy has to become the policy. that's not how we should do

things here. no one in either party should do it that way. so now we're, i guess, 17 days since the president decided to shut down government because he would not get his wall. we should never confuse a wall with border security. we all want border security. i don't know of a legislator that doesn't support that. most people here voted nor it -- voted for it many times, border security based on what the experts tell us, not the politicians. if we were using politicians for that kind of expertise, we would be in big trouble. we wouldn't do that in many subject areas particularly something as qoangsal and compli -- consequential as border security. we should do it right way and hear testimony about it from experts, not just hot air from politicians because they said a word or two or three in a campaign. that's not policy. right now there are 2820,000

federal -- 820,000 employees, 14,000 some in pennsylvania wondering how they are going to make a mortgage payment or pay the rent or buy food, and you know the list is longer than that. so it's, in essence, appropriations hostage taking. my colleague used that word in his remarks earlier. this is appropriations hostage taking that hurts a lot of people and will continue to hurt more and more people as the days go on. that's one of the reasons why i supported the legislation introduced by senators cardin and van hollen that would guarantee back pay for these hardworking federal employees who do so many things for americans that we don't itemize or praise until there is a crisis like the one we're facing right now, the crisis of not

having a government fully funded. so the president shut down the government over a wall that will not work -- will not secure the border. let's not confuse the two. we've always made investments over time, both parties, many administrations, many sessions of congress have made investments in effective border security based upon the recommendations from experts. we should do that again as we have done over many years. security experts over the number of years charged with keeping our nation safe have said that this concrete, or steel, wall along the width of the southern

border won't work. former commissioner of customs and border control said in january of 2017, and i'm quoting, i think anyone who has been familiar with the southwest border and the terrain kind of recognizes that building a wall along the entire southwest border is probably not going to work, unquote. that's someone who understands this subject. that's what he said. he's not a politician spewing out a sound-bite or just doing an interview. he's a person who has dedicated a large portion of his life to border security and we should listen to those voices. so building a concrete wall will not stop illegal activity. border security -- effective border security will. what's that? well, it's technology, it's 24-hour surveillance. it's, as the 2013 bill, in

essence, doubling the border patrol. i think we could have hired 20,000 more people at the border to do border enforcement that's why the cost was so high because to hire 20,000 people is important. i haven't even listed all of them. those kinds of methods, battle tested, proven methods would work. that's what we should do. according to a drug assessment report, most of the illegal drug smuggling happens at the ports of entry, not the southern border, ports of entry. one example is at our parents. so that's among the places we should be focusing our attention. i haven't heard the president talk about airports. maybe i haven't been listening, but he's been president now for more than just about two years and i'm not sure he talked about stopping smuggling at ports of

entry. if the president was serious about securing the southern border or fixing our immigration system, he would work with both parties, both houses on an immigration system that would secure the border and do a whole range of things that we need to do because we have a broken system. here is my belief. i can't prove this. this is just my belief watching what he has said and listening to his speeches and listening to the policies he supported and the policies he has not supported. i don't believe that the president has any interest in fixing our broken immigration system. he seems to have an interest in building a wall that will not work, but i'm rather certain of that. but i don't think he has any interest in fixing this broken

system. he has a strong system, in my judgment, of scoring points, and i'll give him that. he is an expert at scoring political points. but in terms of sitting down with people in both parties, taking hours and hours and hours and hours of testimony from border security experts or at least listening to the presentations made here by way of hearings or information that can be ascertained in a hearing, i don't think he's willing to do that. i don't think he has any interest in doing that. the presiding officer and many members of this chamber, including the senator from new hampshire and the senator from virginia worked long and hard, not over hours but over days and weeks to come up with a proposal last year which would have provided, what, $25 billion for border security over -- over about about 10 years. that's a lot of money over ten

years. and they he had to -- and they had to agree to that and based it upon those expert recommendations. and they also coupled that with a statutory change that would make sure that those dreamers in the daca program were given the benefit of the fulfillment of our promise to them. that could have been done in law by a statute, and i commend republicans who stood up then and worked on a -- in a bipartisan way. what did the president do? he told them that he would back them up. that he would sign that bill, that bill with $25 billion and a fix for the daca program, and then his second promise he made he said, i'll take the heat. it didn't happen. he didn't sign it, indent greated it -- he denigrated it. and he didn't take the heat.

he ran for cover. i don't see much evidence on the record that he wants to fix a broken system. everyone knows the system is broken. everyone knows that we have to rely upon experts to secure the border. everyone knows that the path to citizenship is complicated, but we had a way to do that in the 2013 bill. everyone knows that the guest worker program and bringing people out of the shadows and having order and rules to our immigration system is complicated and difficult. everyone knows you can't do that with a sound bite, you can't do that with an image, can't do that with a symbol. you've got to do it with policy. that's what you've got to do. the president seems totally disinterested in sitting down and trying to lead an effort on the kind of immigration reform that both parties know we need and that most americans know we need as well.

so we all want to fix this system with a comprehensive bill i mentioned the 2013 effort, what that would have done. so instead of wasting $5.6 billion on a wall, we could use that money to rebuild our infrastructure or to invest it in border security that's based upon expertise, but we could use $5.6 billion to do a lot of infrastructure in my state and a lot of other states, like fixing bridges, for example. i live in a state, like many, that has thousands of structurally deficient bridges. we could use that money to enhance our national security. i'm told that we're to understand the president is looking for money, the $5.6 billion out of -- potentially out of the defense department. that's what we should be doing with the department of defense dollars that are meant for

national security. we could also use $5.6 billion to invest in our children. thereby invest in our future. but i don't think the president's interested in that. he wants to win a sound bite war or an image or symbol war, not fix the problem and not make the investments we should make. so instead of creating chaos and perpetuating chaos, the president should support the bipartisan funding bill the house passed last week, the democratic house which passed the republican bills for a little shorthand there. the bills would reopen the government while also providing $1 billion for border security. that's based upon facts in evidence and expertise and effectiveness, not based upon some sound bite and hot air. the vast majority of senate republicans support these funding measures last congress. on august 1, senate republicans

joined democrats to advance funding for the department of agriculture, financial services, transportation, housing and urban development and interior. that big appropriations bill is affecting all those agencies referred to there. the vote was 92-6 on the floor of the united united states sen. i don't know who the six were but 92 is a good number. the commerce, justice, science, and related agencies appropriation bill passed out of committee -- this is a committee vote, not a floor vote -- but an important vote. june 14 by a vote of 30-0. the state and foreign operations bill passed out of the committee by a vote of 31-0. so one bill passed on the floor 92-6. the other committee votes 30-0, the other 31-0. again, bills passed by a

democratic house that are, in fact, republican appropriations bill. that's what the house did. so that bill is here, in essence. all the majority leader would have to do is put it on the floor and it would pass. the government would be opened up and we could debate the border security until the cows come home. all the rest of january, longer into february, as long as we all agree to debate it. but let's have a real debate. let's not debate a sound bite about an image that refers to a a -- a way someone thinks that we should do border security. let's have the evidence, put it on the table. i think my point of view on this would prevail, but let's hear from both sides. so, mr. president, we have a way out of this predicament for the american people, a way to provide certainty and relief to those families that are suffering right now, and the many more families that will continue to suffer if that

happens, if this continues, i should say. so it's time for the majority leader to schedule a vote and stop making excuses why he shouldn't. let's see the president, let's see what happens if the president has to confront a bill passed by both houses. if he vetoes it, then it's just further evidence that he is not serious about border security, but we'll see. maybe the president would sign a bill that was passed by both parties in both houses. mr. president, i would yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. i will withdraw that. i will withdraw that. thank you. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mrs. shaheen: mr. president, i thank my colleague from pennsylvania, senator casey, for his compelling remarks. in fact, for the last several hours, we have heard compelling

remarks from a number of my colleagues. i thank senator kaine from virginia for helping to organize this effort and all of those who have come to the floor to talk about the lasting and negative effects of this senseless shutdown, a shutdown that is all about president trump yielding to rush limbaugh and the right-wing commentators who told him he wasn't being tough enough. senators casey and markey reminded us how we got here, that we had an agreement, that we thought the president had committed to sign. his vice president, his chief of staff, acting chief of staff told us he was going to sign it. it passed the senate on a voice vote. and what's so ironic, as senator

markey said, is that what's happening now is actually making us less safe. the idea that we've got all of these people on our southern border, all of these t.s.a. agents, people who are working, 800,000 employees, 400,000 who are furloughed, 380,000 who are working without pay, and that's actually making us less safe. as senator durbin pointed out, a wall across our southern border wouldn't do anything to interdict the fentanyl that's coming across from china. that's the biggest killer of people in new hampshire from overdoses, that's the fentanyl. as senator jones pointed out, the coast guard's role in interdiction is what's significant. it's not a wall that's going to keep out those vehicles that are going to come through our ports

of entry. senator stabenow reminded us there are 38 million people who depend on food assistance, and a quarter of the people in new mexico, as senator heinrich told us, depend on food assistance. and he quoted his constituent kathy who pointed out that the president is holding us hostage. she said federal employees are being held hostage, and we're being held hostage now in the senate because we are unwilling to act the majority is unwilling to act on the legislation that has passed the house and previously passed the senate. senator bennet talked about china landing on the dark side of the moon last week. it's a reminder that we have to compete in this world, but we --

that we can't assume that america is going to be number one in everything again. and yet, while china was landing on the dark side of the moon, our government was shut down. thousands of researchers weren't doing their jobs at nasa and the department of agriculture and so many other places because we were shut down. and the cost to the economy as a whole, as senator hassan pointed out, there are craft breweries in new hampshire, small businesses, who can't get their businesses started because government is shut down. senator klobuchar pointed out that the costs to the economy, according to the president's own advisors, is $10 billion a week. now, at a time when the stock market is going up and down, when we have people losing billions of dollars because of fluctuations in the stock market, $10 billion a week contributes to that uncertainty. and then, of course, senator van

hollen and senator merkley and virtually everybody here talked about the impact on ordinary americans from this government shutdown. well, we're going to hear from president trump. in about five minutes, he's going to speak to the country. but i'll bet he doesn't talk about the impact on ordinary americans of this government shutdown. i'll bet he doesn't talk about the cost to the economy or what he promised to sign when this congress passed funding bills. i'll bet he doesn't talk about the future of america and what's going to happen if we don't continue to invest in research, if we don't continue to invest in our people and instead get involved in these partisan fights. no, i think what he's going to do is tell americans a madeup story about the emergency at our southern border, an emergency that we saw from senator durbin and senator merkley is not real.

we have gone from 1.6 people coming across our southern border and being arrested down to about 200,000 in the last year. so this is not a crisis that's affecting america. we need to address border security. everybody here believes that. all of the people who spoke tonight said we need to address border security, but we need to do it in a way that's thoughtful and that spends taxpayer dollars wisely. so, mr. president, it's time for us to act in the senate. it's time for congress to fund this government to get it back open. i very much appreciate senator kaine's work here tonight as we talk about the impacts on this country of this government shutdown. thank you, mr. president. mr. kaine: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. kaine: mr. president, i

would like to finish this colloquy of the democratic senators who talked about this important issues, the -- issue, the need to reopen the government and stop the trickle down. i intend to do so before 9:00. i want to thank my colleague from new hampshire and all the colleagues who appeared on the floor today. on friday, january 11, if we do not end this shutdown, it will be tied for the longest shutdown of government in the history of the united states, and it's also a payday where more than 800,000 federal employees will not get a paycheck. my quick census research suggests that's essentially the population of south dakota. more than 800,000 people who just want to serve their country, some of whom have been forced to work without a paycheck, will not get a paycheck on friday. friday, january 11, is right after christmas when a lot of christmas bills come due. friday, january 11, is in the middle of winter when heating bills are at their highest. friday, january 11, is right

before the beginning of the college spring semester where families are sitting around kitchen tables to write tuition checks for their kids to go for spring semester. that will be this friday. this shutdown hurts workers. i have told stories of workers in virginia who have already suffered and my colleagues have as well. it hurts citizens, mr. president. i had the experience two saturdays ago of going to four federal either national forests or park service operations and seeing gates closed, and i watched families come up they had driven away. they may not get a lot of vacation. they had kids in their car. they came up to have fun with their families that day. i watched the looks on their faces as they pulled to the location and saw the gates closed and the signs saying that they weren't able to enjoy the day that they planned with their family. that's not the same as missing a

mortgage payment, but for families that are stressed in time and they want to spend a day enjoying with their family, i saw the looks on their faces as they were turned away. mr. president, you and i have worked together on an important initiative to train students, college students to be our next cyberrerpro formas. today is the cyber job fair that the national soings foundation sponsors for college students all over the country. it was at national harbor. as i went there, i walked by a lot of students who had come because they wanted to serve the country as cyber pro formas and they were having interviews, but a lot of booths -- the department of justice, there was a booth, there was a sign, but there was nobody there. there was nobody there from the federal agency to hire. these are effects on everyday citizens, kids who want jobs, federal agencies who want to hire workers, families who just want to go to parks. this is hurting workers, it's hurting citizens, it's hurting our country. in conclusion, i just want to

say why? why? why would we want to hurt federal workers? why would we want them to be without a paycheck? why do we want to hurt everyday citizens? why do we want to hurt the reputation of the country? i could see on the looks of those faces of those getting turned away from the park, not just aggravation, i could see what kind of country is this. i'm a hard-working person, i pay taxes. i'm coming to a national forest and i'm getting turned away because the president wants to shut the government down over a debate about border security. you know, mr. president, because you and i worked on it together, in february, $25 billion for border security, that wasn't enough. the president blew up the deal. five years ago $44 billion of border security wasn't enough for the republican house. we want to fund border security.

as i conclude, i just would say to this president, do not hurt american workers. do not hurt american citizens. do not hurt the reputation of the greatest country on earth. and i would say to my republican colleagues, please be willing to vote in support exactly what you voted and supported just three weeks ago. why the change in position? why was it okay in december and it's not okay now? is it not okay because the president suddenly said he didn't like it? is it the job of the article 1 branch to play mother may i with the president and seek his permission to be an article 1 branch? i don't believe that it is. let's end this shutdown. let's reopen government. let's do border security and immigration reform the right way. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned under the previous order until

to

a group of newly elected democratn congress talked about campaign finance reform measures in hr one, an anticorruption bill. they talked about the their legislative agenda and campaign finance as an election issue. the hour-long event was hosted by the group end citizens united. >> we are going to get started. thank you, everyon