quick moment from dallas, texas. what's your point? caller: i'm sorry. i'm active military. if i don't get a paycheck or have a hiccup in my paycheck, i think the president shouldn't get paid. capitol hill shouldn't be paid. i spent 116 days in iraq and if this was happening while i was overseas, my wife wouldn't be able to pay the bills. host: quick comment? >> i think that gets -- guest: i think that gets straight to the heart of the issue. if this comes down, it's going toal affect people directly and look very bad for the politicians. host: live coverage on c-span now on the floor. speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of

representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary the secretary: i have been directed by the sna inform the house the senate has passed with an amendment h.r. 658, cited as the f.a.a. reform act of 2011 which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 5, 2011, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party mimented to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and minority whip limited to five minutes each. but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from south carolina, mr. wilson, for five minutes. mr. wilson: thank you, mr. speaker.

mr. speaker, our nation is standing at a crossroads. the government can continue to mortgage america's future by reckless borrowing which is a threat to the young people of our country. it's a threat to our senior citizens. or we can limit the growth of government. we are facing a government of shutdown today. as liberals are driving our nation to a permanent economic shutdown. dr. buries is correct. yesterday the house passed a bill funding the troops and military families for the rest of the year. senate democrats have yet another opportunity to pass a budget. they have had 48 days to act but have refused. yesterday liberals laughed and mocked republican leader eric cantor when he warned of bankruptcy. but eric was standing up for freedom in the best virginia tradition. we face a shut down today because the liberal majority in the house last year failed to pass a budget. the new republican majority did pass a budget 48 days ago but the liberal majority in the senate failed to act.

citizens should call liberals and demand they pass a budget today. in conclusion, god bless our troops, we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from rhode island, mr. cicilline. mr. cicilline: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized without objection. mr. cicilline: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in defense of our nation's seniors who are currently under attack and the worst part about it many of them are just waking up this morning to the nightmare that faces them. why is that? because the republican budget proposal released this week is literally balanced on the fragile backs of our nation's seniors. that's right, it ends medicare as we know it. that's the simple truth. it no longer honors our commitment and our promise to our nation's seniors. as americans now know we are in the midst of a serious budget battle. republicans are even threatening to shut down government. there are real differences

between our approach to the budget and the republican budget released earlier this week. the republican budget replaces medicare with a voucher system. seniors will have to use this voucher to buy insurance from private insurance companies. under the republican plan, medicare as we know it will end. and in the same budget proposal, the republicans give away tens of billions of dollars in subsidies to big oil companies. under their plan, they'll slash support for seniors in nursing homes while dwiffing away -- giving away tax breaks to companies that ship our jobs overseas. what else? america's seniors more than 150,000 in my home state of rhode island, will literally be paying more for their health care and getting less in order to provide additional tax breaks to the wealthiest americans. also reflected in this republican budget. to make matters worse, the republican plan does not reduce the deficit. the nonpartisan congressional budget office determined that

this budget actually adds $8 trillion to the national debt over the next decade because its cuts in spending are far outpaced by the guyantic tax cuts for the -- gigantic tax cuts for the richest americans. our seniors cannot afford this budget. it would deny them health care, long-term care, and the benefits they earn and deserve. the republicans' choice to privatize medicare, turning more power over to the insurance companies will result in reduced coverage and exposure to greater financial risk for our seniors. the congressional budget office determined that under the republican budget seniors out-of-pocket expenses for health care would more than double and could almost triple. to put that into context, the congressional budget office found out by 2030 seniors would pay 68% of premiums and out-of-pocket costs under the republican plan compared to only 25% under current law. and it found the republican plan seniors will pay more for

their prescription drugs because of the doughnut hole. even the former budget director under president clinton who worked with the republican architect of this budgets on a deficit reduction proposal said she could not support his medicare proposal because it eliminated the traditional medicare choice and lowered the great of growth beyond what's defensible. the conservative "wall street journal" concluded earlier this week, quote, the plan would essentially end medicare which now pays for 48 million elderly and disabled americans as a program that directly pays those bills, end quote. under the guise of deficit reduction, republicans are recklessly attacking the vital supports for our seniors. we all agree that we have to address the deficit. the issue is not whether we reduce the deficit but how we do it. we can't cut what helps us create jobs, innovate for the future, and remain competitive in the global marketplace. we cannot balance this budget on the backs of our nation's seniors. the federal budget is more than just about dollars and cents, it's a statement of our values

and priorities as a nation. republicans in this budget have set the wrong priorities. they would rather cut benefits to seniors than cut subsidies to big oil or corporations that ship our jobs overseas. the republican budget breaks the promise made to our soonors -- seniors to protect them in their golden years. i say to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, if we can't protect our greatest generation, i ask you, what's next? i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs. black, for five minutes. mrs. black: thank you, mr. speaker. on a daily basis i listen to the people of my district and they told me they don't want games or the bucket passed. they are sick of the status quo here in washington and my constituents are sick of the big spending, the big government, and the political games. they are sick of washington

doing what's easy. well, we are here today because last year it was easier for the democrats in congress to do -- to not do their job and not pass a budget. isn't that a shame? we are here because harry reid and the senate democrats want to play political games and defend big spending. yesterday we passed a bill to protect our troops in the event that harry reid shuts down the government. and the president then said that he would veto this bill. and harry reid and the president are playing games with our troops as well. now, the house is leading and we passed four bills to keep the government opened and cut spending. and we are going to be here until we get our fiscal house in order. i stand here today nine days after i first joined my colleagues outside of the demanding that harry reid act like a leader, and i said it then and i'll say it now, harry

reid, get your act together. let's put this country on the right track and move forward. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. woolsey, for five minutes. ms. woolsey: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, 14 hours from now it appears the doors of the federal government will shut. and it will happen for one reason and one reason alone. because of the republican majority's inflexibility, callusness, and political gamesmanship. for three months they have been in charge of the people's house, but they haven't done one thing that the people want. they haven't lifted a finger to create the jobs americans so desperately need. one republican member in fact said on the house floor last

week that we should stop talking about the jobs. stop talking about the jobs? they don't want to talk about jobs because they don't have a plan to create any. they have offered nothing but deep, painful, unnecessary job-killing spending cuts and they have refused to budge an inch. i want to cut government spending, mr. speaker, but i don't want to take the money from children who need early childhood education. i don't want to take the money from families that need help paying for college. and i don't want to take the money from seniors who need medical care. i want to cut the gobs and gobs of money, nearly $7 billion every single month we are spending to occupy a foreign nation. and have our servicemen killed and maimed by insurgents. you want to eliminate wasteful government spending? i say the war in afghanistan

could be the number one on our list. 10 years after we started sending our troops there, we continue to be stuck in a hopeless, quagmire that isn't doing anything to eliminate the terrorist threat or accomplish our national security goals. but of course the republican leadership won't consider cutting more spending. instead they want to go after middle class working families who need a government that's on their side, particularly now because of how dire the economy has become. i hope my republican colleagues won't give up this childish refusal to compromise. the american people deserve better than to have their government held hostage by an extreme ideological agenda. let's keep the doors of the federal government opened and as we look to next year's budget instead of making seniors and school children bear the sacrifice, and instead of dismantling medicare and cutting education, instead of

threatening women's health, why don't we restore fiscal sanity by finally bringing our troops home? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arkansas, mr. womack, for five minutes. mr. womack: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to add my voice to those calling for agreement on funding the government for the remainder of this year and avoid the consequences of a government shutdown. i don't want the government to shut down. our conference does not want the government to shut down no one i've talked with wants the government to shut down. and talk of such a shut down is weighing heavily on consumer confidence in an already fragile economy, not to mention its confidence in this body. we can do better. we should do better. we must do better. yesterday on this floor we took

yet another action that keeps our government afloat and guarantees that in the event of a shut down troops and their families get paid. that's the least we can do. mr. speaker, yesterday i sat in a hearing with the c.e.o. of amtrak. during the hearing it was suggested by a colleague that the carrier examine the feasibility of shutting down routes that are losing, hemorrhaging money. the answer he received was that because of legal agreements mandating payments on labor and benefits and other guarantees, it would still cost them billions. i find it incredible that we have these federally subsidized guarantees in place but we can't guarantee the same for those men and women down range willing to take a bullet for their country. shame on us. jobs continue to be our highest priority and it should surprise no one that fundamental to this objective is dealing with a balance sheet full of red ink.

it's fundamental to business. it's fundamental to household. and it's fundamental to government. no reputable organization behaves financially the way this government behaves. the message from the electorate is simple. live within your means. the reason we are facing the potential government shutdown is simple, no budget for 2011 and democrats don't see our spending issues with the same degree of urgency as we do. i said it a few days ago on this same floor and it's worth repeating, we have kicked this can down the road so long, so often, and so far that america and this congress has a chronic case of turf toe. message to america, if you want to remove uncertainty and create jobs, fix the balance sheet, cut spending. it's as simple as that. this republican-led house has

done its job. we have attempted time and time again to fund government in a responsible way. prevent a government shutdown and restore fiscal integrity. i join my colleagues in urging the senate to act and to act now so that we can turn our attention to the far more important and substantive work that lies ahead. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer, for five minutes. . mr. speaker. yesterday mr. blumenauer: thank you, mr. speaker. yesterday on the floor of the house, steny hoyer, minority whip, offered the republicans the time by unanimous consent to work out the details in terms of getting the numbers right because regardless of the pontiffcation it's very clear that urgent negotiations have gone forward and the differences between the two

parties is small. it could be worked out in a day or to but this offer was rejected because our republican friends are no longer interested in the money. it's about the ideological agenda, the writers, the change to policy for e.p.a. or dictating their ideology on the people in the district of columbia, for instance. but it is about a much larger agenda going forward. i spent most of wednesday listening to the republican budget road map that is on its way to the house floor. it is so extreme that before the election when my good friend, paul ryan, unveiled it very few republicans would sign on because they knew that in the heat of an election, if people knew what they had in store they wouldn't get elected. so they were counseled, stay away. well, it's unveiled now, the

election is held and this agenda is back with a vengeance and i invite any american to look at independent appraisals of what's in it. there is nothing new or reforming about vouchers for health insurance companies or block granting medicare to the states. under this proposal, total health care costs are going to go up, but the cost to the government of the voucher is going to go down. and 230 million americans, 55 and under, are going to pick up the tab. and, yes, they are going to keep for 80 million americans medicare that's going to be limping on in its current form. 2050 there will be eight million people. there are massive cuts but not for defense. that's more or less off-limits.

there's talk of reform, but in reform, when i've worked with paul ryan for years, agriculture, no. we are going to leave that until re-authorization takes place. health care for the poor is on the chopping block. they are going to block grant, aid to the states so that it can go down over time. bear in mind that the cost per person for medicaid is the lowest in this country at a time when private health insurance premiums have doubled in the last 10 years and overall private health care spending has gone up faster than government health care spending. now, in these troubled times we should be looking at reform. in the health care reform act passed last session we have an opportunity to actually change those health care curbs.

every health care advance to restrain accelerated health care costs are embedded in that legislation. but rather than accelerating it our friends want to delay it. i strongly urge the american public to take the time to look at what's in this proposal because that's what's coming down the line and not be distracted by the shutdown that they are insisting upon. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arkansas, mr. crawford, for five minutes. mr. crawford: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to add my voice to the growing number of members not only here in this body but also in the senate that are calling on senator reid to take action. last week on wednesday, 30 freshmen and myself wrote a letter imploring senator reid to pass a long-term continuing resolution so that we could address the bigger issue over

fiscal year 2012 budget. we said we call on you to pass a long-term resolution, a resolution that hears the calls of the american people and makes reasonable, responsible cuts. we've received nothing from the senate except denials of the dire straits of our nation's fiscal health. mr. reid, we're letting you know we'll rally on the senate steps every day until you pass a long-term continuing resolution and that's exactly what we've done every day for the past week. in fact it will be the eighth day in just a few minutes that we step over to the senate steps and call on him once again to be a leader. on wednesday of this week we sent another letter asking senator reid if he wasn't willing to lead to step down and allow someone in who would lead. 90 members signed that and we were joined by members of the senate in that call. asking mr. reid, simply, your lack of action and absence of leadership is irresponsible. let's take a look at the costs that we faced as we are literally hours away from a government shutdown.

we spend $69 billion per week in spending of which $27 billion is borrowed. we're asking for $61 billion in cuts, 2%. any small business that i know of in this economy if you ask them, can you cut 5% out of their budget and the other option is closing the doors? what do you think they're going to do? they are going to find the 5% to stay in business. that's all we're asking at this point. a small down payment for the bigger picture that's coming up in fiscal year 2012. not to mention our troops. i got a call this morning from a young sergeant with four children. a national guard unit in my district that's being deployed in just weeks. and he said, congressman crawford, we are frustrated. we're angry. we're upset. what's going to happen to my family as i go to afghanistan and they rely on my paycheck? and yet the senate says, nope,

we're not interested in funding the troops for the balance of this year. yesterday, this body took responsible action in funding the troops for the balance of this year and funding our government for another week until we could address the bigger picture for the balance of fiscal year 2011. it's time for senator reid to lead as his title suggests. we passed a bill to fund the government. we're asking for leadership on the senate side, mr. reid. please pass the bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. tonko, for five minutes. mr. tonko: thank you, mr. speaker. the republican road to ruin budget if enacted will end medicare. it will end the program that 46 million seniors and disabled individuals depend upon for their health care. this gross injustice is made immeasurablely more egregious but to expand and permanently

guarantee even bigger tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires and give tax breaks to some of the most profitable companies. rather than the path to prosperity this bill is more like a road to riches with lavish handouts to special interests, paid for by senior citizens who will see their hard-earned benefits rationed more and more with every passing year. i have heard a lot of talk in the last few months about the need to make tough choices in this budget. the average citizen earns just over $19,000, about one quarter of medicare beneficiaries from a cognitive or mental impairment and have at least one or more chronic conditions. what is it about stripping these americans health and security that qualifies as tough? there's nothing tough about stealing from the poor and the weak and the frail to give to the rich. our seniors, on the other hand, know all about tough choices. do i buy groceries or do i buy

prescriptions? do i pay rent or do i pay medical bills? it hurts but how much will it cost? these are tough choices. these are life and death choices. with the passage of medicare in 1965 we entered into a covenant with every american citizen. this budget breaks that promise and brings us back to square one. the republican voucher plan ends medicare. instead, seniors will be on their own with a measly voucher and forced to buy insurance in the private market where all decisions will be profit-driven. more profits for insurance companies on the backs of seniors. sounds like a republican plan to me. this new voucher program amounts to a ration card and the value of the voucher is not linked to increases in health care costs in the private market. yet, the cost to private health insurance has risen over 5,000% since the creation of medicare. 5,000%. the analysis of the nonpartisan congressional budget office has estimated that in less than 20

years the vouchers under the republican road to ruin budget would pay just 32 cents on every dollar that a senior spends on health care. now, the republicans have repeatedly stated that their budget gives seniors the same coverage as members of congress. well, as a member of congress myself, i know that our health plan pays for about 72 cents on every dollar of our health coverage, not 32 cents on the dollar. according to c.b.o. the voucher program will provide a ration of $8,000 to seniors every year to purchase their health care from private insurance companies. yet, the private insurance premium charge by blue cross in 2010 for a member of congress was well over $9,000. do people honestly believe that sick senior citizens and disabled people will pay $8,000 when they are charging $9,000 for members of congress? for seniors over 65 in 2009 was

$11,743. if an insurance company were to take on $11,740 of risk for $8,000 they would be out of business in short order. but republicans don't believe their insurance company buddies will actually offer coverage for $8,000 or even $11,743 just to break even. they know that seniors will have to go into their pockets for thousands of dollars as this plan hands it over to the medicare company to make more profit. c.b.o. found seniors will have to pay more than twice as much out of pocket as they do today. this budget takes trillions from seniors and rations their care. and where does it shift the savings? well, if you guessed permanent tax cuts for millionaires and a new tax breaks for corporations making billions, you guessed right. after more than a year of hurling lives and demagoguery about death panels and rationing care, republicans on the panel before us have demanded that we restrict seniors to a health care ration

card and ensure that those who cannot afford coverage on their own will be left to suffer or die. well, therein is the real death penalty they talked about. they pay lip services to americans' responsibility to share the burden and instead steal from those that can't afford an expensive lobbyist and give to millionaires and billionaires and companies that can afford much, much more. i'm not speaking of planned politics. america knows our budget is a statement of priorities and values, not purely dollars and cents. america's priorities set their budget each and every day and i respectively and honestly disagree with the priorities that the republicans have established in their road to ruin budget. let's not end medicare. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. mccotter, for five minutes. mr. mccotter: thank you. i'd like to start, mr. speaker, by thanking my democratic colleagues this morning for disabusing affliction.

when i woke up i found that i had a hankering to listen to led zepplin and i couldn't figure out why. this has happened before. usually when i leave the tv on at night and they run one of those rolling stones buy it now before it's more expensive in the dust bin ads and i was backing over here and i said, is it because there is a communication breakdown between the parties? it's possible. it's possible. i said, is it because one of the nice senators is wearing a cashmere sweater? it's possible. i realize why i wanted to listen to the strings of page and plant and john bonham. it's because the song remains the same for the democratic party. once again, seniors and children wake to the hysterical frightening visage of expecters

of doom and gloom. democrats. once again we're regaled with the democrats' entitlement reform plan. it is called do nothing, spend everything, go bankrupt, benefits bye-bye. we continue to see a party that does not understand, you cannot lift an economy when it's crushed beneath the weight of big government. we continue to see a party ideologically zealous in spending your tax dollars on planned parenthood to the point where they would shut down the federal government to do it. and we continue to hear the fundamental crux of the issue of a potential government shutdown. the democratic party will shut down the government so they can spend more of your money. the republican party is committed to keeping the government open and spending less of your money. in fairness, it is not just led zepplin they remind me of

because the reason we stand here today on the urge of a government shutdown is because they did not do their work when they had total control of the united states congress last year. they could not even pass a budget let alone finish these appropriations which we are still dealing with well into april, let alone lay out a strategy to do so when the parties changed power in this house. . know. the song remains the same but the american people recognize the song and dance. they will not be fooled. they know that the major change that we see before us today in the fight over government spending is a very simple one. and a very simple choice. it is the difference between bankruptcy and solvency and the republican party stands for solvency and for liberty. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. baca, for five minutes. mr. baca: thank you very much, mr. speaker. we find ourselves less than 24 hours away from abandoning our veterans, i state from abandoning our veterans, our seniors, and active duty military personnel. why? you ask yourself why, because republicans refuse to budge from the fiscal plan that would cost our nation 7,000 jobs and an anti-government tea party is dead set on shedding government. in my district in california, we face a 14% unemployment. my constituents need jobs. our priorities now should be about creating jobs, not about shutting government. we all know the devastation of the consequences of a shut down. eligible seniors and disabled americans would be unable to apply for medicare and medicaid benefits.

can you imagine someone that needs medical assistance and they can't get it? impact it will have on their life. impact it will have on their behavior and families? veteran service benefits would be delayed. pay for our troops and their families would be delayed. and on the other side you hear a lot of rhetoric about our troops and we should pass this budget. but they don't talk about, they are not willing to cut any of the rich or the millionaires or billionaires. they want to protect the rich, they want to protect the oil companies, they want to protect the outsourcing the companies that go outside, but aren't willing to make the cuts where they are necessary. i think everybody has got to have cuts. it will also impact our social security claims that would go

unprocessed. federal vendors and contractors , their employees would go unpaid. government housing assistance would be halted. and millions of tax refunds would go unsent. in my home a shutdown would mean no paychecks for 22,000 federal employees and retirees. think about the economic damage of this loss of revenue that it would cost. but instead of working, i compromise, i say instead of working i compromise because it takes two leaders and individuals. harry reid is doing what is necessary in meeting. it's the other side that's got to compromise as well. it's not a one-sided team. it's a two sided team. when the chemistry is good on both sides, we can come up with a compromise that is good for our nation and our country. but instead, republicans'

long-term budget that devastates our seniors and ends medicare as we know it. the -- it shouldn't be about flexing our political muscle. it should be about what's doing what is right for the american people. this republican budget makes all the wrong choices. the g.o.p. plan increases suffering, i state suffering for our seniors and young people while protecting, while protecting tax breaks for the wealthy. while protecting tax breaks for the wealthy. the republican budget. eliminates guaranteed coverage for our seniors under medicare which currently serve 48 million elderly americans, slashes medicaid for seniors and nursing homes and americans with disability. it increases college education

costs for 10 million middle class students. and we need to invest in education. they are our future. if we don't invest in our students and education, they can't provide for us. we need to invest on them. we don't need to cut them. and of course give tax breaks to the big oip companies -- oil companies and companies that shift jobs overseas. seniors in my district live on a fixed income. can you imagine living on a fixed income. as was stated before $19,000 a month, whatever income you have. it's very difficult to make your mortgage payments, put food on the table. know how you're going to get by the next day. or if you have any emergencies or others. we are a country, we are america, we are the greatest country in the world. and we should provide for every american that is here. regardless of who they are or where they come from.

they can't afford to pay more health care or seek cuts in the social security benefits. we all agree and it's been stated, we all agree that we must get our deficit under control. but remember, republicans had 12 years to do this. and went out of control in their spending and didn't do anything when they had control. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from indiana, mr. bucshon, for five minutes. mr. bucshon: i rise today to remind the american people why we are here. we are here today because of the failure. tetch congress to pass a budget for the first -- 111th congress to pass a budget for the first decade. you would think this would be a relatively easy thing to do, but you have to try. in an effort to protect a few powerful committee chairmen and

other incumbents in their own party, they have made a political decision not to pass a budget because it had a $1.5 trillion deficit attached to it. you can't run and you can't hide from the american people. now even after the people have spoke in november, they are continuing to protect the status quo. protecting out-of-control washington spending and offering no solutions of their own other than raising everyone's taxes and demagoguing anyone who puts forward a plan. again, i'd like to see their plan. i began running to represent indiana's eighth congressional district in october of 2009. an endeavor that i had never undertaken before. i was a practicing physician, cardiothoracic surgery. i decided to seek public office because our government's inability to control spending.

let's remind everyone where the status quo has led us. it's led us to historic unemployment and a mounting debt that is mortgaging the future of our children and grandchildren. but yesterday our counterparts in the senate and white house showed different intentions. i can't stand before you today in good conscious not advocating for the men and women who volunteered to wear the uniform of our great nation. a notion that a bill to fund our troops for the remainder of the fiscal year is being threatened by a veto is preposterous. this challenge to fix our government spending habits is above politics and talking points. while i stand here today in the people's house, individuals are playing petty politics while we offered a solution yesterday that pays our troops and avoids a government shutdown. we passed h.r. 1 with a modest $61 billion down payment on controlling washington spending

and we have been criticized. in the face of a $1.5 trillion deficit. i implore the senate and white house to join with us here in the house and act to significantly reduce spending and avoid a government shutdown. and i offer one last observation since i'm new to congress. a continuing frustration i'm finding here in washington, d.c., and that's i'm amazed by the resistence of some in congress to tackling this problem. especially the fact that some continue to find excuses why we can't even consolidate programs and downsize government and make things more efficient here in washington, d.c., at the very least. but i found this at a committee hearing the other day when we -- when the democrats continue to make excuses after a government accounting office report showed the excesses that we have here in washington, d.c. this is a serious issue we face

together as a nation. i began this conversation when i began running for congress almost two years and it's a conversation i continue to have with my constituents. this is an adult conversation about facts and our future. until we come to a solution that will put hardworking americans and hoosiers back to work, and our government begins to act in a responsible manner when it comes to our nation's fiscal issues, i'll continue to have this conversation with my constituents and with the american people. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from washington, mr. mcdermott, for five minutes. mr. mcdermott: i ask unanimous consent to address the house. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes without objection. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker pro tempore, there is a joke going around in congress that the difference between a boy scout

troop and the house of representatives is that a boy scout troop has adult leadership. now, i predicted a shut down of this place more than a month ago. not because i'm some kind of prophet but because i saw the movie of the gingrich shut down in 1996. the same elements are here today that were there then. i don't want a shut down, i know what it does. i think it's silly and stupid and hard on the american people and a lot of people are going to suffer, but the elements are there. first of all, a number of members came in new, a lot of them, who are absolutely sure that they knew what was right. secondly, they had no experience in governing. they didn't understand compromise. compromise was a dirty word. it meant you give up your principles. that principle is if you operate on that pins, you can nefrl negotiate a settlement in anything.

what they don't understand is that there is a time when you take what you can get and come back tomorrow. everybody who's been here for more than one term knows that nobody gets 100% of what they want. i have been here in this place for 23 years and i have gotten 60% and i figure i'm a big winner. now, you come back the next year for the rest. we are doing that in the health care bill. we are doing that in a whole lot of things. you do not get it all now by saying, that's my way or the highway. every battle is not to the death. the only hope i had for us was that our leadership on the republican side had been here in 1996. they saw what happened. two years later the republicans lost seats. two years later they lost seats. and the speaker, gingrich, was gone. he's hisry. -- history. on the basis of coming in here

and saying my way or the high way. -- highway. if you think this is the big battle, let me give you the real facts. in five weeks we are going to come to the debt limit. if you think people who believe their way is the right way are going to fight over what's going on right now, what is it going to be like when we get to the debt limit? or by september when we get to the next budget resolution? we could have three shutdowns in this year with no problem at all if the leadership on the other side allows their members to drive them into this craziness. they have to stand up and tell them, look, guys, there is a tomorrow, all right. we are hurting, people. and they are going to remember. people are not going to forget what happens here. they didn't forget in 1998, and they didn't forget in 2000. they kept whacking away at the

people who were in charge. what's it all about here? it's not about money. h.r. 1 was $101 billion. ok. the president's come all the way to $71 billion or $73 billion. that's more than halfway. the republicans won that issue. take it. take it. no, no, they say. but we have to change social polcy. this is really about social policy. it's not winning or cutting down the deficit or any of that stuff, it is just as it was in wisconsin. it was not about the deficit in wisconsin. it was about breaking unions. the judge said that. that's why he threw the law out. because he said, you're taking away people's rights in unions. you are not here worrying about the deficit in wisconsin. well, here the issue was n.p.r. if we took n.p.r. off the radio

tomorrow morning, do you think the deficit would be one bit affected? of course not. if we got rid of the e.p.a. would the deficit be -- would there be some effect on the deficit? no. in fact, the senate, they took the e.p.a. repeal off the table. they said, hey, look, rich people breathe the air. rich people drink the same water as everybody else does in the country. that's a stupid public policy change. so we are not going to take that one. what was left? family planning. . abortion. poor women. now there's a bunch 10:45 p.m. now there's a bunch we can't hold back. we'll finally get the poor women in this country. that's what this is about. it is not about balancing the budget. it is not about anything else

except getting poor people. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. mcdermott: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from south carolina, mr. duncan, for five minutes. mr. duncan: thank you, mr. speaker. you know, every evening across this great land after home work is finished and the supper dishes are cleared and the children are put to bed, mom and dad sit down at the kitchen table. they sharpen their pencils and they take out a pad of paper and they struggle to make ends meet. whether their budgeting technique is different than the house next door, they know without a doubt that they cannot have their monthly bills exceed their monthly take home pay. if the bills are higher than the monthly pay they have to make changes. so bill by bill they discuss what they have to pay. they discuss things like the

power bill and the rent and the mortgage, the car loan, the credit card payments, mom and dad cut out the things they can do without. maybe it's the golf membership for dad. maybe it's the weekly pedicure for mom. whatever it is they know they have to make tough and real decisions. it's time to stop the spending insanity here in washington, d.c. america, your nation is broke. we cannot continue to borrow 42 cents of every dollar we spend. can he cannot continue to spend $1 trillion more each year than we're bringing in, and we definitely cannot do that year after year racking up over $14 trillion in debt that our children must one day pay. and your congress is struggling with cutting a putry $61 billion and the american

kitchen, dad looks at mom at this point and he says, hundredy, something's got to change. -- honey, something's got to change. your house of representatives, folks, they passed a spending plan. the senate has failed to act. they've come across with their best-case scenario spending plan, even if the status quo of spending $1.5 trillion more than bringing in this year, they haven't brought anything across the aisle. so how do you negotiate if one body has brought their best plan and the other body hasn't done anything? yesterday i was proud to vote to provide military pay for the guys and gals across this great land that are standing on the wall defending the liberties that we have. they deserve to be paid. they don't deserve to stand on that wall and wonder if back

home wondering if the power is going to stay on, if she's going to be able to pay the rent or put food on the table for her children. that's the american way to take care of the military. i was proud, no prouder than to stand on the steps of the united states senate yesterday and implore, encourage, ask, beg the majority leader in the senate to get to work, to come to the table with a real solution because i don't want to be with my colleagues many years from now lying, dying in my bed hoping for one chance to trade every day to this or that and come back here and do what we should as americans, get our spending in control and protect the future of our children. i yield back the balance. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey, mr. payne, for five minutes. mr. payne: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. payne: mr. speaker, today i rise not to debate the economic crisis. our national debt recently reached $14 trillion and our deficit continues to rise annually. and so we know that we have a crisis. and so that's really not the debate here today. however, i would want to remind my colleagues that our economic deficit is dependent on our job deficit and our ever-growing education deficit. while we must work to rein in our spending, we must not indiscriminantly cut funding in areas like education, health and employment that will hamper our immediate and future economic growth.

as we remain vigilant in cutting the debt and reducing deficits we must remember that the most powerful driver of both is a growing economy which includes an increase of revenue. during this recession, unemployment hasn't paid in economic growth. one of the challenges in addressing unemployment has been the rapid decline in certain occupations and industries in and our labor market's to meet the demand of new occupations and industries. more than 2/3 of workers in occupations and industries that are growing have at least some postsecondary education. compared to 1/3 of the workers in occupations and industries that are declining. the demand for a postsecondary education is well as the -- as well as the rapid increase in baby boomer time, it's predicted to result in a shortage of more than 14 million college educated workers by the year 2020.

this is the deficit that we should work together and garner our national attention. we can only address this through our continued focus on education, training, employment and social services which makes up a total of 2% of our federal budget. to build economic combrothe we must continue our investment in employment and training programs which have experienced an increase in demand of support for displaced and unemployed workers. we must continue our investment in higher education by maintaining pell grant funding as well as support for programs such as trio, which sends a small amount of low-income students to and through college which helps the economic prowess of our country. we must continue our investment in title one programs which will continue to supplement resources of underserved schools which bring our economy down. we must continue our investment

in school improvement grants which provide important resources for states to turn around schools and reduce the high school dropout rate which causes our country a great deal of deficit. we must continue our investment in programs that address -- that address the word gap, between low-income 6-year-old and their advantaged pierce. we must support -- advantaged peers. we must have head start that replaces the cradle to prison pipeline to cradle to career pipeline by providing education to low-income children. these supports in tan dumb produce a number of higher tax-paying citizens and -- in tandem produce a number of higher tax-paying citizens. further, my colleagues, who made a pledge to america to develop a plan to create jobs and end economic uncertainty

and make america more competitive continuously -- continue introducing and support measures to undermine this pledge and devastate our economic growth as a nation. in march, unemployment fell to 8.8%, a two-year low. payrolls grew to 216,000 for the month, following 494,000 in february. private payrolls rose by 2 75,000 people in march followed by a 200,000 growth in february. incomes and consumer spending increase in february helping to expand the economy. yet, ignoring economic facts, the experts, the political reality and the best interests of american people, the republicans continue to embrace an ideology spending plan that would destroy 700,000 jobs and derail the economic recovery

just as it's beginning to gain momentum. the card republican spending plan will give away tax breaks that shift jobs overseas and give away $10 billion in tax subsidies. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. payne: make tax cuts for the wealthy permanent. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from new mexico, mr. pearce, for five minutes. mr. pearce: thank you, mr. speaker. this past week i had the opportunity to read a book called "lone survivor" a tale about four navy seals who were in circuit to afghanistan territory. lieutenant mike murphy, petty officer matthew axleman, petty officer dietz, marcus latrale, writes the book, said they built a building for lieutenant murphy it wouldn't be high enough. these four physical specimen,

men of valor, men of courage, were on top of an afghanistan mountain. shortly after arrival daylight hit. three goat herders came upon them. they easily subdued them. the choice was to kill them. they represented a clear and present danger or to let them go. one voted abstained. there was a tie vote between the other two. finally marcus latrale voted let them go. he knew what the consequences would be. 20 minutes later the taliban that they were after, over 100 came rushing over the top of the mountain firing their ak-47's and r.p.g.'s. the four young seals moved to the back of the press pus, they were forced back of the fire and finally jumped off the mountain 200 yards, the equivalent of -- 200 to 300 yards, the equivalent of two football fields straight down. lieutenant mike murphy had

already been shot through the stomach. they're facing 35-1 at least. they were worried about being tried for murder in this country because of their actions. they fell back off the mountain doing back flips headlong, enemies swarmed after them. they were pushing through trees, grabbing limbs, trying to stop. no seal has ever left behind. mike bleeding out his stomach and marcus move into the open and drag danny back to cover. the enemy keeps closing in. they're forced back to a second time to another precipice and jump off a sheer cliff, the equivalent of four stories, straight down. danny was shot again in the lower back. it blew out his stomach. he was still firing. grenades are now pouring in on them. the taliban reinforcements are coming closer, yards away, 20,

30 yards away. danny is shot again. this time he slumps over, drops his rifle. he props himself up miraculously and continues to fire. they have fallen over 900 feet down the mountain right now. they fall back to the edge again and go over the edge. still, 80 taliban seals had taken a heavy toll. 80 taliban are rushing after them firing. danny shot again this time in the neck. he slumps over, no seal is left behind. marcus steps out into the hail of gunfire to rescue him. props him up and starts pulling him back by the pack. danny is still firing his weapon. again, they have to go over the edge. this time lieutenant murphy understands they got one choice. he casually walks out with his

severe wounds into the opening to where he can get his cell phone open and make a call for help. he sits there with thousands of rounds of ak-47 rounds hitting near him. he makes a call and says, sir, taking heavy fire. need help. a round hits him in the back, blood spurts out his chest. marcus latrelle listens to him saying, yes, sir. he picks up his cell phone from the ground and says, yes, sir, i'll tell the men, sir. mortally wounded he sits there, rounds continuing to come in. lieutenant mike murphy falls on the ground and says, marcus, help me. marcus, help me. axelsson, the third soldier to die that day, is dying on the other side. miraculously marcus latrelle

survives. we made this yesterday a discussion that was academic about supporting our troops. we had friends on the other side of the aisle saying it's a trick. we had the president saying he would veto it immediately. and for us to not give the pay to men and women like this who put their lives in harm's way causes great shame on this nation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair rebling nieses the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen, for five minutes. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. that was great rhetoric but not reality. thank god when the architect built this capitol he put a top on it that detracts lightning. lightning rod, otherwise who knows what would happen in front of us. the budget that was put up yesterday talked about defense, but it also had one other element in it. one other element. that was restricting the district of columbia from using funds for low-income women to

get family planing, abortions. if you really wanted to take care of the troops, you would fund a spending proposal that took care of the troops. and you wouldn't add a rider to it that you know that no human being that cared about women's choice would vote for. you eliminate a great percentage of your possible supporters. if the troops are number one and number one only, you don't put something on with d.c. abortion rights on it. because that eliminates part of your constituency. one of the previously speakers talked about this, too. it's being -- one back into led zeppelin, i haven't figured that out yet. the discussion about planned parenthood. why is planned parenthood an issue? because the republican majority made it an issue. they put in their budget that there will be no funding for planned parenthood, a specific organization. not any organization that does family planning. not any organization that might provide abortions.

but planned parenthood. and that is a sticking point in the negotiations. it is wrong to single out a single organization that helps women with their family planning. and it does give low-income women opportunities to get testing for hiv-aids. and other health issues. the republicans have made that an issue and such an issue that they wouldn't have a clean c.r. proposal yesterday. mr. hoyer offered a proposal. he said, let's just continue the budget for a week at current spending plans. no cuts, true. they could come later. that was row soundingly rejected because they wanted to go forward with their extreme social policy. and that's what matters to them. they can hide behind what they want. the fact is, there are two americas today. two americas. i read about it when i was a young person. michael harrington wrote a book decades ago called "the other america." it was about an america that

didn't get the support it needed. appalachia, poor people, regular folks that didn't get what they needed and didn't have the opportunity that this country should give everybody. the two americas are the upper 1% that aren't going to be paying more taxes, and the other 99% that do. one gentleman said, the democrats want everybody to pay more taxes. no, not everybody. just the millionaires and they wouldn't go along with that. because the millionaires are the party that control the republicans. that's who they are about. they won't fund -- put a tax proposal won that will tax millionaires because they want the middle class to pay more. their budget blueprint that's going to come out lowers the overall rate to 25%. even more for millionaires. and the billionaires, they are not watching today, mr. speaker. because they've got their lobbyists working for them. they came here in december and they took the estate tax from

$1 million exemption to a $5 million exemption. and they took the rate that really mattered to them from 55% to 35%. so they can pass that wealth on and continue the differences in america. two americas. the upper 1% that the majority party represents and the other 99% that we represent. mr. speaker, let's get abortion out of the debate. let's protect our troops. let's keep this government moving. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from tennessee, mr. desjarlais, for three minutes. mr. desjarlais: thank you, mr. speaker. i find it shameful that washington has run up trillion dollar deficits for the past three years and yet there are those that seek to portray republicans' modest commonsense spending cuts as extreme. it is time for government to tighten its belts and balance

its budgets just like families do every day across-towntown's fourth congressional district. -- across-towntown's fourth -- across tennessee's fourth congressional district. americans deserve the truth. the choices that we make now on spending are not easy. but they are necessary. we cannot continue to spend money that we do not have. mike constituents did not send me to washington to ignore problems nor offer excuses. they did send me here to solve the problems and not kick the can down the road further. our nation is not in debt because americans are taxed too little. we are in debt because government spends too much. we must address our nation's debt crisis and spending

addiction and we must do it now. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, for three minutes. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to stand up for the middle class, the working poor, and the poor of this great nation. they deserve honesty and a fair shake from their government. i'm here to tell the american people the honest truth that the republican budget of fiscal year 2011 would destroy 700,000 jobs and derail our economic recovery. their plan, h.r. 1, would cut funding for government programs with the precision of a chain saw. the republicans are ignoring the fact that the policies of the 111th congress and of our president saved america from an economic free fall.

these same policies have been responsible for the unemployment rate falling to 8.8% last month. a two-year low. i think that -- last month was the 14th straight month of jobs being created as opposed to jobs being cut. instead of funding programs that are helping our economy, these republicans are poised to shut down the government. today every republican in unison speaks about this shut down in hushed and somber tones so as not to appear to be gloating. but they really don't care about you, the middle class. and they don't care about how they shut down -- how the shut down will affect you and they all in unison cast blame on

harry reid. that's going to be the whipping boy that we hear on fox news tonight. mr. speaker, a recent study found that more than 40% of house freshmen are millionaires . they have net worths up to $40 million. and these freshmen and some of these freshmen who have yet to become millionaires, they are wanna bees, but they enjoy -- wannabes, but they enjoy a median estimated wealth for these house freshmen of $570,000 each. in contrast according to the u.s. census, the median estimate wealth for the average american is $120,000. in contrast it's a big contrast, instead of funding

problems that are helping our economy, they are poised to shut down the government. today minorities, the median estimated wealth is $27,000. what the republicans are doing is trying to get us out of this budget turmoil -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. johnson: on the backs of the middle class and poor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fitzpatrick, for three minutes. mr. fitzpatrick: thank you, mr. speaker. we have the opportunity today to send a message that this congress is serious about cutting spending, creating jobs, and keeping the government operating. we can, we must do all three. it's important to note, however, how we arrived at this point. the last congress was the first since the modern budget process was instituted that neglected

to pass a budget despite the democrats having complete control of the federal government. the inaction of the last congress certainly did not excuse work on our part in this congress. instead made our responsibility all the more critical. mr. speaker, this house has met that responsibility. through an unprecedented and lengthy debate two months ago, the house deliberating $-- deliberated and ultimately passed a resolution cutting $61 billion in federal spending. in march the house passed and sent to the senate two short-term funding bills that cut a total of $10 billion and kept the government functioning. yesterday again this chamber sent to the senate a bill to avoid a shutdown and ensure our men and women in uniform are paid through the end of the fiscal year. the response to this senate has been consistent, deafening silence. despite their agreement on the short-term measures, the senate has not sent a single bill or single plan for this year's budget to the house. they have a responsibility to act now and i call on them to

pass h.r. 1363 to continue cutting federal spending and to keep the government opened. mr. speaker, this debate is not merely about passing any budget, it's about passing a responsible one. budgets despite their countless line items and technical language fundamentally reflect our priorities and our values as a nation. over the past three years the administration and the previous congress have added $5 trillion to our national debt, bringing the total to over $14 trillion. trillions are being spent each year to feed our spending addiction with nearly 42 cents of every dollar being mortgaged against our children's future. and perhaps the most sobering fact is that after july 27 every cent the government spends through the rest of the year will be borrowed. this is money that will have to be repaid by our children and grandchildren long after we are gone. we can no longer saddle the next generation with a bill for today's good intentions. mr. speaker, with america now

engaged in three conflicts in the middle east, with seniors worried about social security and with federal services in the balance, shutting down the government sends the wrong message at a critical time, but so does continuing the spending binge that has plagued washington for far too long. both must be achieved and must do so now. mr. speaker, this house has acted. four times we have passed resolutions to keep the government functioning and cut out-of-control spending. the overwhelming mandate from the american people last november was that the status quo cannot continue and we have answered. just yesterday while the senate and this administration have stalled and delayed, we again passed a resolution to cut spending and would have met our responsibilities without interruption. this chamber -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. fitzpatrick: i hope the senate and administration will answer the call. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california, mrs. capps, for four minutes. mrs. capps: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to express my

complete disapproval for the way this house is being run by the republican majority. to put it bluntly, the majority is negligenting its duty to address the biggest issue facing this country, creating jobs and implementing a fair and sensible budget that makes investments in our people while bringing down the deficit. for example, to date this majority has not brought to the floor a single piece of legislation to help create jobs. instead, we have seen bill after bill that would actually increase joblessness, including their omnibus spending bill, h.r. 1, which would cut nearly 3/4 of a million american jobs. while it is clear that we must take aggressive action to bring down the federal deficit, it shouldn't come at the expense of guaranteeing health care for our seniors. that's the case with the new republican budget proposal which uses our deficit as an excuse to achieve their long-held goal of ending medicare as we know it today. medicare has been a very successful program to ensure seniors have guaranteed access to affordable quality care.

it has its problems to be sure, and they must be addressed. but we should not throw the baby out with the bath water before deciding to essentially jung medicare as the republican budget would do, let's go back in time a little. before medicare, seniors were the most likely group to be uninsured. barely 14% of them had a health insurance coverage at all. before medicare, almost 1/3 of all seniors were in poverty and countless others would have been if not for the large sacrifices borne by their families. before medicare, seniors needed to make a false choice, go to the doctor and pay out of pocket or put food on the table and pay the bills. if it wasn't for seniors' lack of interest of being insured at all, it's because insurance company had little interest in insuring a group of people they deemed too expensive to cover. let's be honest, the more older you get the more likely you are to need health care. we are not a cohort that insurance companies are exactly fighting over each other to cover. it's clear that medicare's been absolutely critical to

providing access to quality care at an affordable cost for seniors. it is responsible for helping lift so many of our parents and grandparents out of poverty, giving them peace of mind after a lifetime of work. and it is free to their children as well, giving them the opportunity to invest in the future of their own children instead of having to worry about whether or not their parents will get the health care they need. it's a remarkable success story, one that has helped america prosper, but this republican budget proposal announced this week essentially throws it out of the window. first it reopse the doughnut hole for today's medicare beneficiaries, like beverly, who thanks to the affordable care act no longer has to worry about how she will afford her important prescription medications if she reaches the doughnut hole again this year. . their plan will roll back the wellness and screening checkups

that the law provided for with no co-pays at all and this will roll back containing important things from the program and it repeals processes in place to reduce fraud and abuse making this program more costly and less solvent. but the centerpiece of the republican proposal is the plan to privatize this critical program and end medicare as we know it. let's be crystal clear. this isn't a reform. it's not a tweak. it's nothing more than the end of the very program which right now guarantees health care coverage for america's seniors. medicare is much like social security which guarantees a pension for seniors regardless of the twists and turns of the market and our economy. medicare guarantees health care coverage for our seniors, guarantees it, but the ryan budget bill ends that by turning medicare into a voucher program. no guarantee of coverage, none at all. instead, each senior would get a set amount of money to purchase a private insurance

policy at an amount not high enough to start with and less each succeeding year. in fact, each year the voucher would cover less and these and other reasons are the important factors in this budget and one of the reasons we cannot accept it is we must save medicare. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. ribble, for five minutes. mr. ribble: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized. mr. ribble: mr. speaker, we are now drawing close to a government shutdown. i've been sitting over here listening to my colleagues on both sides speak this morning and i want everyone to know, i want the american people to know and i want the folks in northeast wisconsin to know that this is not about writers or extreme partisan ideological. it is about spending. and i will tell you i'm surprised at some of the language. a moment ago one of my colleagues said we wanted to take a chainsaw to spending. the president a few days ago

said they wanted to use an ax to cut spending. we are spending in march of this year alone $189 billion in deficit. our c.r. would have cut $8 billion. so instead of $189 billion we would have spent $181 billion in deficit. that is not a chainsaw. it is not an ax. some americans have been calling me from home saying it's not even serious. it is time that this congress takes our fiscal situation serious for the protection of our country, for the protection of our programs, for the protection of our seniors. it is time for this congress to act and act now. yesterday, we offered up a plan to fund our troops at the request of secretary gates and

we've been turned down once again. i call on my colleagues not to wait another day, another hour, another minute. let's fund this government and let's move on to the big task at hand, the next budget, so we can do what the last congress failed to do and that is provide certainty to the american people, certainty to job creators that they know what is coming ahead tomorrow. thank you very much, mr. speaker. and i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california, ms. speier, for four minutes. ms. speier: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. speaker. you know, the kabuke dance is almost over and like many of you i'm wondering if we have lost our senses. by all reports, by leader reid, speaker boehner, they are very

close. it's not about money. you know what it's about, it's about contraceptive pills. i can't believe that we are sitting here today about to shut down the government over contraceptive pills because that's what it's all about. it's all about defunding one organization, planned parenthood, that provides explicitly and only services around contraceptive pills, breast cancer screenings, s.t.d. screenings and cervical cancer screenings. not one dime goes for abortion services. in fact, the services provided under family planning have to be excluded completely. different locations, different service providers, different staff and on top of it it's all

audited. so not one dime for abortions. this is only for family planning services. so in the end we're going to impto the american people and say, yes, we shut down the government, we told all our men and women serving in faraway places trying to keep the world free and free for us and keep terrorists at bay, we are going to tell them, you are not going to get paid for a while because we didn't want to fund contraceptive pills for women who are poor in this country. the women who access planned parenthood and one in five womack sess planned parenthood at some time in her life, the average income is $33,000 a year. these are women that can't access health care for reproductive services because they're working in jobs where they don't have health insurance. and we're saying, shut down the government, shut down the government, don't pay our men and women serving overseas,

close down the national parks, make sure none of our exports get to their destinations, don't let any more small business loans be offered. just shut it down because we don't want to make contraceptive pills available to women in this country. it's absolutely shameful. this is a message to speaker boehner. mr. speaker, this is your opportunity for a courage. this is -- profiling courage. this is an opportunity for you to say to your caucus and to the american people, i am not going to allow this country to be shut down over contraceptive pills. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg, for three minutes. mr. walberg: thank you, mr. speaker. i've listened to a textbook case i believe of self-induced apple nearbyia this morning from my -- amnesia this morning

from my liberal colleagues, but the american people spoke in november and i heard the mandate, cut federal spending so that more resources can be left in the hands of american families and small businesses so that they can save and invest in order to grow jobs. i've responded their mandate by voting for billions in cuts. unfortunately, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, refused to receive the message. but the message is still true. let's put the budget issue into a little perspective. it actually is quite simple. they didn't pass the budget when they had control, and now we have to clean up the mess. my liberal democrat friends want to shut down government in order to maintain their overspending status quo. even at the expense of not sending paychecks to our courageous troops and their families at home. on the other hand, i and my republican colleagues want to keep the government open, pay

our troops and respond to the people's demands for cuts in spending and return to the blessings of freedom. our republican leadership has worked and negotiated on the other side in order to keep the government open while cutting deficit spending, but it has been to no avail. the democrats won't give up less than one half of one percent spending on a trimmed down budget and pay our troops. the argument has come down to the size and scope of the spending, and president obama, senate majority leader harry reid, and the senate democrats like a stubborn mule refuses to move in the direction of their masters. the constitution and the american people who are telling us to cut spending, it's time for them to start listening to the american people. it can't be just about the next election.

it must be about the next generation. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, for five minutes. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. you know, we are here because the last congress did not do its job. and for the first time since 1974 didn't have a budget, so we're having to do last year's work in addition to this year's work. and in the meantime we look at who is actually being hurt. and there were many of us that were inquiring over the last month, all right, is the military -- if there's a shutdown, is the military going to be paid? well, we find out that the military is essential, the military will be working in the event there's a shutdown, but then as recent as last week we find out they definitely will not be paid until after a shutdown is over, they will get paid for sure but it will be after a shutdown but they will

be working. in talking to many people on active duty, i find that things haven't changed a great deal since 30 years ago when i was in the army. there are lots of people in our military that are having to live paycheck to paycheck. they don't get paid all that much. but they're standing between us and harm to this nation, even its very existence. there are those that want to take this out. in the last week congressman jack kingston, john carter, steve king, michele bachmann, a number of people involved, we wanted to ensure that if the democrats say we don't care -- for example -- gee, providing federal tax dollars to fund abortion in the district of columbia is more important than anything else, we wanted a vehicle to make sure our military gets paid on time so while they're out in harm's way

they don't have to worry about it. we filed a bill within the last week and it's h.r. 1297. i contacted senator kay bailey hutchinson's office and jim inhofe's office, and they had it filed first of the week down there as senate bill 724. now we're told, gee, there's a procedural problem because even though in the first two paragraphs each one starts with to appropriate, to appropriate, later in the bill, very short, three pages, it says make available funding. that can easily be remedied by a manager's amendment to change to shall appropriate. easily handled. a rule was passed this week that this could be brought to the floor within 24 hours. that part is waived. there is no reason that the military cannot be paid on time, that they can be wiped away from their concerns, but our leadership was good enough

last week to say we're taking care of it, we're going to make sure it's taken care of. the best solution of what was done yesterday. the military is fully paid through the end of the year. that's the best way to go. it makes sure there's no glitches at all. but if our democratic friends down the hall with going to stand in the way of having the military funded for the rest of the year, then we need to bring this bill, h.r. 1297, to the floor today and make sure that our military does not have to worry. your pay, your allowances will be taken care of on time. our military that are out in harm's way, as we heard about marcus latrelle and other heroes, they're taken care of. your families back home get your paycheck, they're cared for. that's the responsible thing to do. secretary bob gates said as a historian it occurred to me that the smart thing to do for a government was always to pay

the guys with the guns first. that is a smart thing to do. let's take care of the people that are taking care of this country's protection. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer, for five minutes. mr. hoyer: thank you, mr. speaker. isn't it a shame, i tell my friend who just spoke, that his colleagues objected to unanimous consent request yesterday which would have taken care of the problem he raises today? there's not a person on this floor that doesn't want to make sure that our men and women in harm's way and in uniform ready to be put in harm's way are paid on time, but we're playing a political game here, a game of got you, a game of my way or the highway, not a game of coming together from all over the country and trying to make

laws for our country that require compromise. henry clay, one of the first speakers of this house from the state of kentucky, said if you can't compromise you cannot govern. that's why we are on the brink of shutting down government. we ask for unanimous consent, i'm going to tell you we're going to ask for another unanimous consent that will accomplish exactly what the gentleman from texas wanted to accomplish. i hope that none of you object. i hope that all of you will say, yes, enough of these games, let's do what republicans and democrats have historically done when they reached an impasse at this time. they said, well, we'll keep things in place and we'll create a bridge across which we can all pass to get to compromise, to get to agreement. that's what the american people expect us to do. mr. speaker, i understand some in this chamber shutting down

the government is a way of making a point. that's why they have included in this bill to fund the troops some of their social agenda. that's why they want to shut down the government, because they want to force the president to do something he has told the american people he would not do. now, ladies and gentlemen, when the democrats were in charge of the house and senate and we disagreed with george bush, we did not shut down the government. we said, mr. president, we understand. you disagree with this. so we can't do it. not because you won't do it, mr. president, we'll shut down the government. that's what's happening here. it's not about dollars and cents and it's not about funding the military. that's the image that's being created because we are all sympathetic and committed to funding our men and women in harm's way. that's the right thing to do. it's the moral thing to do. it's what we ought to be doing. i hope when i ask for a unanimous consent to do that today, that unlike yesterday

the republicans will not object. i want every member to be aware of the consequences for millions of americans of shutting down government. a shut down would put my economic recovery, our housing market, and paychecks at risk. and, yes, every person listening to me will be affected in one way or another. it's the wrong thing to do. who said it was the wrong thing to do? speaker john boehner who said it would cost more to shut down the government than to keep it running. he is absolutely right. goldman sachs has estimated that i quote if a shut down lasted more than two days, it would shave .2 of a percent for every week it continues. what's that mean? it means jobs. we have been here for 90 days. we are in our third -- fourth month. with no jobs legislation.

goldman sachs went on to shea when the government shut down for 20 days in late 1995, said the chief economist, said that the nation's economic growth was slowed by as much as a percentage point. that means jobs. this is a very inefficient political tactic and prank to play on the american people. "c.q." reports business leaders also understand averting a shutdown is crucial to our economic recovery. that is why, again, i hope you'll agree to my unanimous consent to keep the government opened. while we continue to negotiate. while we continue to try to get to an agreement. congressional quarterly also points out that, quote, in the event of a shut down the small business administration would not guarantee loans for business working capital. real estate investment, or job creation activities. it makes no sense to shut down the government. my friends, when they say, the

democrats in the senate, let me tell you why the democrats in the senate can't move things forward, because they can't get 60 votes. why can't they get 60 votes? because the republican leader of the united states senate will not let any of his republicans join the 53 democrats in the senate to get to 60. ladies and gentlemen, we ought not to shut down this government. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. hoyer: i urge my colleagues to approve a unanimous consent request that i will make. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from north carolina, mrs. ellmers, for three minutes. mrs. ellmers: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. mrs. ellmers: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of my colleagues and call on senator reid to pass a bill to avoid the government shutdown. i have been sitting here listening to my colleagues across the aisle and i am in complete amazement at their lack of ability to remember history accurately.

thanks to the efforts of speaker boehner, this house, this republican leadership has consistently led. we did what the 111th congress did not do. we passed a budget to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year. no, i will not. h.r. 1 was passed under an open rule with open debate and truly reflects the will of this house and the people that sent us here with their votes last november. again, open debate and it truly reflects the will of the people. their message was and is, get serious about cutting spending and change the culture in washington. so we can get our nation back on a stable fiscal path. remove many of the uncertainties facing our families and businesses, both

large and small, and we can create an environment for job growth. unlike my colleagues across the aisle, we here in government cannot create jobs. the private sector creates jobs. it has been 48 days since the house republicans passed this bill, but we have yet to see a bill passed in the senate to fund the government for the remainder of the year. yesterday house republicans listened to the will of the constituents who thought it shameful that our nation's bravest women and men volunteering to put their lives on the line for our freedom should have to face prospects of not getting paid during this government shutdown. with the passage of h.r. 1363, we fund the troops for the remainder of the year regardless of any prospects of a shutdown. so those meb and -- men and

women fighting in the three theaters now and their families will not have to face the worry about weather -- whether they will get paid. yet to hear senator reid's refusal to consider this bill in the senate and to hear president obama threaten to veto this bill is nothing less than shameful. to choose to put politics before our soldiers and their families to me is appalling. mr. speaker, it is time for the president and the senate majority leader to end this political game and work with us to ensure and provide for the nation's military families to continue to fund our government. the fact is discretionary spending has increased over 83%. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mrs. ellmers: i thank you, sir. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. farr, for five minutes. mr. farr: i ask unanimous consent to address the house,

revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. farr: thank you very much, mr. speaker. for allowing me to address the house. i would like to take a few moments to put some of this in perspective. i have been here 18 years now and i have seen a lot going on in government and i have had the experience in the state legislature and also local government before getting here. this is nothing but a employ -- ploy to shut down the government for ideological purposes. has nothing to do with running the greatest nation on earth and trying to be a responsible government, trying to teach democracies to countries around the world if you copy our system you may have a freer and more open system. this is about shutting down the entire united states government over a use of birth control. it's also the party that has a history of shutting down government. the last time government was shut down, it was shut down by the republicans. after they shut it down, what we did before that is we enacted taxes to pay off the

debt. under president clinton. guess what? that was a tough vote. not a single republican cast a vote for that. that's probably one of the greatest economic votes ever cast in modern congress because it put the country back on foot. we didn't have a deficit. we moved it because we earmarked those taxes to pay off the debt. along came brush, first thing he did was repeal all those taxes. the question is how are you going to pay for this? no, we don't have to pay for this. mr. president, you are about to go into a war, how are you going to pay for that? we don't have to pay for it. we'll put it on the credit card. they came up with a great plan to give senior citizens medicare drug reimbursements, but instead of using the medicare program, no, they invented another one. they gave the money to pharmaceuticaland said you take care of the poor. charity work. guess what? it won't cost you anything. it cost us a lot of money. how are you going to pay for it? we'll put it on the credit card. the fact is the huge deficit we

got was driven by the party now that wants to shut down the government. the party that has shut down government in the past. the party that keeps not wanting government to work. you took an oath of office when you came here. oath to uphold the constitution. that constitution is based on if you look around this room the lawgivers. people of history. incredibly bold things. our constitution is incredibly bold. there's nothing in that constitution that says that your job in congress is to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. that's exactly what the budget is doing, their strategic is doing -- strategy is doing and have a shutdown of government. they are gleeful about it and it's a very, very sorry state that we have to in these modern .times think that the greatest country in the world has to deal with shutting down government. that's the last thing we ever came here to do. it's a sorry state. yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. lungren, for three minutes. mr. lungren: thank you very much, mr. speaker. sitting here listening to comments on the other side can be quite instructive although i might warn my colleagues on the other side they ought to be careful about the metaphors they use. one got up to criticize the republicans for trying to stop funding of abortions which means saving babies, and use the unfortunate expression of don't throw out the baby with the bath water. it shows how almost obtuse they are with respect to what we are actually talking about. the distinguished leader on the other side from maryland quoted henry clay. i'd like to quote an outstanding american, his name is steny hoyer, who said just a couple years ago here on this floor, that if you can't budget, you can't govern. that's why we are in the problem that we are in today because when they had control

of both sides of capitol hill and the presidency, they for the first time since the budget act was passed intentionally did not pass a budget because they were embarrassed about the numbers. what did that lead to? that led to the fact that we didn't pass any of the 13 appropriations bills which led to the fact that we have to deal with the c.r. that's why we are in the mess we are today. because they did not budget. and now they have the affrontry to come out and criticize paul ryan, the republican leader of the budget committee's suggestion that we be serious about budgeting around here and that we understand that we are driving our children into the ground and our grandchildren with debt that cannot be paid and because we have the courage to bring forth a serious adult proposal on the budget, we get criticized for trying to put children on the street, to not

allow seniors to be able to eat, come on. the american people are smarter than that. they understand that they want this house and this senate and this president to be adults. and to come here to this floor and to suggest that we are trying to kill medicare, we are not trying to kill medicare we are trying to save medicare. every objective review has said it's going broke within nine years. but maybe collective am meesha is the way to leadership. i hope not. i hope not. not for me but for my children and grandchildren. they deserve better. this country deserves better. we should be required to do better. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. woodall, for three minutes. mr. woodall: thank you, mr. speaker. you have heard it a lot of different ways this morning. our challenge is not that we tax too little. our challenge is that we spend

too much. we are taking steps to make that happen. we do tax incorrectly. we do tax in a way that challenges the patience and tolerance and intellect of millions of americans every year. one week from today is tax day, april 15. that day that folks dread year after year after year atch year . -- after year. one of the things that makes tax day soically kated with the exceptions, exemptions, loopholes, those things that get written into the code year after year after year after year. i want to associate myself with the comments from the previous speaker, the gentleman from california, when he talked about the very serious, very serious discussion of the budget that's been going on in the budget committee. i'm pleased to be a member of the budget committee. bloomberg came out with a report this morning, $2.9 trillion in special tax breaks, loopholes, exemptions erased in that budget. not that taxes go up for americans but that taxes get simpler for americans and fairer for americans by taking away $2.9 trillion in special

favors and special exemptions. there is a proposal that goes even forward, i want to mention it now, that's h.r. 25, the fair tax. it's a bill that started with only two co-sponsors, one democrat and one republican. it grew to two democrats, two republicans, four democrats, four republicans. now there's 60 co-sponsors in the house, five in the united states senate, the most widely co-sponsored fundamental tax reform bill in this congress. it does this. it abolishes income taxes and replaces it with consumption taxes because the power to tax is the power to destroy. what we destroy in this country is productivity. . we're the only country on the planet that doesn't have consumption tax. the only one that punishes our producers instead of taxing our consumers. and it eliminates $9.6 trillion in loopholes but 100% of over corporate loophole we've heard on this floor over and over

again, loopholes for oil companies, loopholes for that company. eliminates every single corporate tax break in existence today. eliminates them for individuals as well in favor of a simple, low-rate personal consumption tax. you know, on tax day we talk about the income tax. the largest tax of 80% american families pay is the payroll tax. you've seen that fica line. you may not add it up but it is the largest tax that 80% of americans pay and there's not a single bill on this floor that deals with that except the fair tax. which abolishes that tax which you get to keep what you earn so nobody -- i want you to think what could be different, what the passage of h.r. 25, how april 18 could be just another spring day. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from nevada, mr.

heck, for three minutes. mr. heck: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i have said like most in this chamber that i oppose a government shutdown. last november nevadans spoke. the american people spoke. they said, cut the spending so the economy can grow. my primary goal is not a government shutdown. it's to do the job that the people elected me to do. cut the spending and grow the economy. quite simply, our country is broke. all because there are checks in the checkbook doesn't mean there's money in the checking account. and we're paying the overdraft fees with money that we're borrowing from china. some people ask, what's the difference between a billion here and a billion there. well, that's just a billion dollars that we don't have. there's an old same, take care of your pennies and the dollars

will take care of themselves. for those that question the importance of a billion dollars, i would say, take care of your billions and your trillions will take care of themselves. thank you, mr. speaker. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. duffy, for one minute. mr. duffy: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. duffy: i think many of us here in this house want to see the government to continue to be funded. but let's review what's happened here. last year the democrats failed to pass a budget. they failed to propose a budget. so this congress, we're here doing the work of last year's house and senate. we proposed a bill to fund the government and in that bill we cut $61 billion. that is under the backstop of the fact that we're going to borrow $1.6 trillion this year alone. our national debt is $14

trillion. the democrats in the senate say they don't like our proposal. that's ok. if you don't like it, pass your own proposal, give us a counterproposal and we'll consider it. but the bottom line is the senate has failed to act. they haven't september us a counterproposal. so -- they haven't sent us a counterproposal. so what we've done is pass two extensions to fund the government. again, yesterday we passed a third. the senate isn't going to take it up. again, if you don't like our proposal, give us your own. we can't negotiate with ourselves. we're willing to sit down and talk but we can't continue to put on proposals and our ideas and have you fail to give us a response. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. duffy: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair

>> majority leader harry reid said that we're going to have our own short-term continuing resolution one week. within the last hour or so, house speaker john boehner came out and had brief remarks in from some reporters privilege bring you that right now. >> good morning , everyone. there is only one reason that we do not have an agreement as yet have that issue is spending. we're close to resolution of the policy issues but i think the american people deserve to know

-- when will the white house and senate democrats get serious about cutting spending? a bill that fails to include real spending cuts will hurt job growth and signal that washington is not serious about dealing with its spending addiction. i think the senate should follow the house's lead and pass the troop funding bill and do it today. i also believe the president should sign the troop funding bill into law. this is the responsible thing to do to support our troops and keep our federal government opened. thank you. >> we understand speaker john boehner is scheduled to meet with the republican leadership

at noon as well on capitol hill. nearly two dozen house members who work and live in the capital might have some issues that the government shut down tonight. those members' offices may remain open if the government shut down but the members-only gymnasium would close and that's where many members who live in their offices when they are here in washington take their showers. the last time the government shut down in the mid-1990s, the house gymnasium with shattered but quickly reopened after an outcry from angry members who complained to newt gingrich. the hygienic arrangements are unimportant compared to the real issues and sacrifices. we had a chance to get an update this morning from a washington capitol hill reporter on the spending issue. you for being with us.

shortly after 7:00 in the morning this friday, where do things stand? guest: it is hard to tell. yesterday there was a lot of brings minted -- brinksmanship and tough talk but there were two negotiating rounds in the white house. the issue is less about how much to cut the budget and more about how many of these republican policy provisions to include. some of them are very controversial, involving cutting off money for planned parenthood and cutting off money for president obama's healthcare of law or stripping the epa of its ability to issue regulations on a whole slew of indtries. differences yesterday were chiefly about those. there has been a perception that ultimately speaker boehner bank is going to have to give up most of the riders because president obama is not willing to accept them. they cannot get through the senate.

but in exchange, i think he would like to get some more spending cuts. i would not be surprised if what he would like to do is bob the number of closer to $40 billion range we have seen published, and that would be the price for getting rid of the riders. president obama said he was not overly optimistic last night and i will take him at his word. host: is is the headline from "the baltimore sun." the baltimore-washington area, a large number of federal employees. andrew taylor, what would it look like if the government does shut down? we keep ca -- saying the partial shutdown because it would not affect every aspect of what potentially could be -- could we face? guest: the story is really that there is less impact than you would imagine, particularly if you don't live in washington, d.c. social security checks goes out, the military stays on the job,

although in an extended shutdown they might skip a paycheck but they would get reimbursed later. and if you want to go to a national park this wkend, you may be out of luck. or, into one of the smithsonian museums. but the mail would be delivered, essentials services like food inspection and guarding t borders and fbi agents and the like will all be kept on. on the other hand, if there weren extended shutdown,he white house is warning it could have an effect on the economy. host: let's go to the last 36 hours, because there was a session that took place yesterday and another session last night preceded by a late night session on wednesday with this president and now the president is saying he hopes to announce a deal later this morning. you talk about some of the so- called riders.

is that a hitching point? the elimination of those -- do we have an agreement between house and senate democrats and republicans? guest: under that scenario there could be an agreement. what is noteworthy about this is bad -- that we di n really know whether what each side is doing is playing brinksmanship and showing toughness for their respective sides in the ultimate hopes of getting a deal. i think neither side wants a shutdown. i think that is particularly true -- maybe not for speaker boehner's most ardent conservative base but i think speaker boehner nose in the event of a ship that he does not geany more leverage in the battle with the president of the stat. a to the pressure is on to make a deal. certainly everyone would look back if there was a shutdown and the troops would not get paid a potentially while they are overseas fighting to and have

wars. the pressure is on. the question is whether theyan get to that point where they could just shake hands. host: one of the headlines in "the washington post" andy "the new york times." secretary gates said there could be potential delay and the paychecks, they are distributed the 15th and 30th of each month. guest: that is true. a lot of military families live almost paycheck to paycheck. they are not enormously well paid. and i think that is one of the chief pressure points pushing him toward a deal. yesterday the house passed a bill that would fund the military in addition to kping the vernment open for a week. there has been some whispering over in the senate that while they would take that -- -- they might get unanimous agreement to just address military pay issue.

that talk itself proves how sensitive democrats are on the issue. ho: talking to a detailer who covers congress for the associated press. one other issue on the table before we let you go. certainly something you and others will be following once the budget agreement is reached in the current fiscal year, and that is raising the debt ceiling. cnbc pointing out the obama administration has been sounding a hazard warning all year on the need to raise the debt limit but yet to deliver the worst news -- congress may have to raise it by more than $2 trillion in order to raise the debt ceiling beyond the november 2012 election. can you elaborate on that point? guest: the budget deficit will be extraordinarily bighis year. estimated $1.60 trillion for this year and another $1 trillion for the fiscal year which begins next october. so, yes, a big number will be

needed. i am not sure they can get to dollars trillion through with one big bite. and i think the republicans, who control the house, may also see this as a way tt they can get leverage to get some of their own initiatives into law. i think they may w want to go >> members of the house are just about ready to get under way with legislative work dealing with the fcc, broadband and internet regulation. that is done all of the c-span -- all of the c-span networks will watch the spending

discussion. live to the floor and c-span. the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by

our chaplain, father coughlin. chaplain coughlin: your word, lord god, calls us to reform in spiritual renewal. where your heart is, there is your treasure. the transformation you ask of us is not a change only of our manners or the way of doing things, it is not a call for a change of language, the bottom line, or even our thinking. rather you, lord, who are hidden from our sight, know the hidden secrets of our heart so you continually seek conversion of heart until at last our hearts rest only in you. if such a changing world unless we are willing to change our deepest desires, according to your spirit of life and love, we will instead be changed by forces around us. so send forth your powerful

spirit, lord, that you may have your way with us both now and forever. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> mr. speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule 1 i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker: the question is on the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor indicate by saying aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. poe: mr. speaker. the speaker: the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and ache a point of order a quorum is not present. the speaker: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed. the pledge of allegiance today will be led by the gentleman from florida, mr. southerland.

mr. southerland: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. southerland: mr. speaker, i rise today in the dilemma we face ourselves in today. i hope i will be address the issue we face. the speaker: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. southerland: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker: without objection. mr. southerland: the constitution starts we the people of the united states in order to ensure a more perfect union provide the common

defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and posterity to ordain and establish this constitution for the united states of america. i have very, very short time here today but i will say that irresponsible spending of the federal government does nothing form a more perfect union. it forms a more imperfect union. it establishes injustice. it ensures domestic chaos. it provides for the uncommon defense. it destroys the general welfare. and it endangers the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. based on this very constitution that i hold in my hand, the direction that we are heading violates the will of the people. it is time for us to stop arguing and get on with the work of the people and protect our posterity or generations to come. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island rise? mr. cicilline: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered.

mr. cicilline: mr. speaker, i rise today to ask my republican colleagues which child pictured here would you deny an early education? why would i ask that question? i'll tell you why. as it stands now the republican budget proposal would kick 218,000 children out of head start and prevent them from receiving an education. some of these children right here on this poster. we'll close 16,000 classrooms, in which they learn. it will fire 55,000 head start teachers. teachers who teach these kids. a budget document, my friends, is not just about dollars and cents. it reflects our priorities as a nation. our children are our future and must be our top priority. head start is a key investment in improving the educational outcomes, but if the republican majority has their way, head start programs in my home state of rhode island would have to cut three kids from each

classroom right now. so i ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, which of these children will you deny an early education to? i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, according to the center of immigration studies report cited in the "houston chronicle," 70% of texas' illegal immigrant families with at least one anchor baby collect welfare from uncle sam. people illegally in the united states should not receive welfare. american citizens shouldn't pay for the welfare of people who violate the law to enter this contry. illegals are also draining our health care system. 60% of the births over the last four years at a public hospital in houston, texas, were by women living here illegally. i was recently in cochise county, as -- arizona, where they have been forced to shut down almost all of the maternity wards because they

can't financially support all of the illegals coming into the country. mr. speaker, illegal immigration is breaking the bang. let's take care of our citizens and legal immigrants first. are you in, mr. president? that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california rise? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. chu: today the republicans want to shut down government. tomorrow they want to dismantle medicare. if the shut down weren't enough, the republican party just released next year's road to ruin budget. an unbelievably the people they have chosen to target are america's seniors. this budget ends the medicare guarantee as we know it. it turns medicare into a voucher system where you would have to put your fate back into the hands of private insurance companies. it results in seniors paying more for medicare. this plan shifts costs on to seniors and cuts medicare at a

time when seniors need health care the most. we must take the target off the backs of our seniors and off of medicare, a guarantee that seniors have earned through a lifetime of hard work. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. every day a courageous young men and women from all over america volunteer to serve our country in the military. they prove them selves as leaders and role models. what is the response they receive from congressional liberals and even their commander in chief? a callous disregard. to further their own political games some of our colleagues would deny them their pay if there is a shutdown of the government this weekend. this is outrageous. our troops, especially those in combat zones, already have plenty to worry about without democratic intransigence adding personal debt to those worries. in february republicans offered h.r. 1 and yesterday h.r. 1363

which ensures, ensures that every member of the armed forces would receive his or her full salary for the rest of the year. republicans support the troops and want them to succeed in their mission. it appears most of the democrats in congress feel differently. our troops are sacrificing to keep us free and are exhibiting leadership. democrats should follow their example and honor our commitments to the men and women of the military and their families. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from maryland rise? ms. edwards: permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. edwards: mr. speaker, there have been a lot of quotes on this floor. so this one goes out to our young people and our seniors and service members and federal workers who stand to be affected by a government shut down. it's a lesson from our republican colleagues courtesy of the white stripes, i guess you have a problem if you want to invent a contraption. first you cause a train wreck. then you put me in traction. first came inaction then a reaction, but you can't switch

around for your own satisfaction. you burnt my house down then got mad at my reaction? it's just you can't take the effect and make it the cause. some of my republican colleagues who want to shut the government down for the effect you cause, you learned this white stripes wasn't first. if you are heading to the grave, you don't blame the hurts, you built the house of cards and shock me when you see them fall. you seem to forget when this started. you can't take the effect and make it the cause. with that i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yield back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas rise? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: thank you, mr. speaker. this morning we pledged allegiance to the flag of the united states. what a privilege and honor. i think it conveys upon this body to tell the truth. and so this morning i raise a question of my friends' comments about holding the troops hostage. we are not holding them hostage. we were able to provide them with their paychecks, but we

wanted to be concerned about their grandmothers and wives and children that were being abandoned by the republican budget. and, yes, can you imagine holding up the pain of the bills -- paying of the bills of the united states because you are against women's health care and family planning and you want to condemn and take away resources to family planning and to planned parenthood? can you imagine taking the oath of the flag and yet not telling the truth? telling the truth about the fact that we had a provision that would allow our troops to be paid. but actuality what we are standing against is eliminating of early childhood education, nutrition programs, housing programs, teacher compensation. yes, there has to be a moral standard for the budget. we are standing on high moral ground. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlewoman will suspend. the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? mr. mcgovern: unanimous consent to address the house for one

minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, it is hard to believe but in less than 12 hours the government will shut down unless congress acts. the republican leadership should bring a clean c.r. to this floor free of all their controversial riders so that we can keep the government running for another few days so negotiators can continue their talks and get a deal. but it is outrageous that today we are not doing that. we are bringing a net neutrality bill to the floor which has nothing to do with anything and we should be spending our time talking about how -- instead how we should save the jobs of hundreds of thousands of people in the balance if this government shuts down. how we should save the social safety net because it's gone if this government shuts down. the republicans should stop holding this government hostage and stop using these controversial social riders as ransom. we need to keep this government going. we need to get a deal. take this net neutrality bill

off the floor today. instead bring a clean c.r. so we can all vote and keep this government running so we can get a final deal. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the house will stand in recess subject to the call of the chair.

>> as you may know, we have not seen the president this morning. we have more coverage throughout the day on our c-span networks. you can't follow the latest statements on our online comportment. -- we heard speaker john boehner speak this morning and we heard remarks on the senate floor from harry reid. >> and as we wait for legislators to return, let's bring you a portion of this morning's "washington journal." of "government executive" magazine out with the new survey on how government employees view their

agencies and departments. i want to get to that in a moment. but let's walk through the process of 12:01 tomorrow morning. if the government does face a partial shutdown, what can we expect? >> all non-essential operations of government will cease at that point. that means everything that's not essential to the protection of life and property, it's a little different definition when it's because of a bad weather say. host: so over 8,000 would be directly impacted. in the 1990's those were paid retro active limit will that happen this time? guest: it's very hard to tell. it depends on congress and what they decide. the obama administration says they support the idea of retro active pay for anyone who is

furloughed. host: in a survey looking at the morale of agencies and departments, and this indicates of those surveyed, federal employees viewing their agency with moderate or low morale -- only 3% say it's high. guest: yes. it's reaching unprecedented lows. they already feel their benefits are under fair to at this point, and now there's the potential for furloughs. host: and the other thing that might surprise people, has your agency shared a plan with you to be prepared for a shutdown? 56% said no. guest: yes. and another 24% said no. but they expect to hear it by the end of today which kicks it up to 80%. this is not just employees but managers and executives, the people who were supposed to be

notified earlier in the week about what the shutdown plans were. host: talking about blackberries, they would have to give those up during a shutdown. one asked how do you get agency information? more than half said email via blackberry, and 28% said meetings with a supervisor. guest: yes. that's going to be an interesting situation. because when the shutdown happens and you're a non-essential employee, that blackberry has to be put away and in some cases they will be taken away. host: if you are a federal employee or retiree, we want to hear from you especially. call us at 202-628-0184. you can join us at twitter.com/cspanwj. you can also send us an email

journal@c-span.org. what's in your view the likelihood we would see a partial shutdown tomorrow? >> it all depends on what happens today. there seems to have been some momentum overnight. and president obama indicated last night that they were close to a deal. i don't think either side really wants to shut the government down, because they cannot tell exactly who's going to get the worst for that blame. so i think there's powerful incentives and the fact that they are close on the dollar figure means it's likely they'll get something worked out today. but we'll see. >> are there lessons from the other sitdown in the 90's that can be applied to this year? >> i think there are a lot of lessons. guest: there have been many of them going back to the mid 1970's. a matter of a few days or a week. that one lasted several weeks.

and it was very chaotic in the beginning. and the planning was very difficult. so i think one of the lessons is you should be better prepared. and agencies are supposed to be prepared and have shutdown plans in place. we'll see. >> let me put on the table, the response divided equally 25% saying republican and 25% saying democrat and others ipt. this is how the government is preparing for a government shutdown. carol joins us from dallas, a government employee. good morning. caller: hi. good morning. i'm actually hoping that they shut it down just to take the bluff off the table. because we have been threatened consistently with the shutdown. so our agency has given us information on what we should do. the morale -- we're just going

to roll with it. but if it means in the long run we take that bluff off the table. we get funding for kids and education and the older people. for health care. then we will sacrifice. as the gentleman said earlier, i am ready for adult conversation and ready for them to stop playing games with the government. we work hard and they try to compare our salaries to other salaries. i have a master's degree at c.p.a. don't compare me with someone that'sal average or someone that has not gained the level of experience that i have. you can't do that, and it's unfair to us. so we've been on the chopping block for so long, and it's getting frustrating. but it -- if it means we will move forward with the budget, i'm ready for it. >> can you share with us what agency or department you work for in dallas? >> i work for c.m.s.

host: thank you. guest: that's certainly what we're hearing from a lot of people. certainly frustration with how the process has gone on and the feeling that federal employees are being targeted. freezing federal employee pay, one of the very few things the democrats and republicans agreed upon in this whole process. we are hearing more from employees that they are irritated by the property of being out of their jobs and unsure about whether they will be out of their jobs, so there's a lot of that feeling of the sort of bring it on and what we're hearing more is genuine anger about what the ramifications of this might be. host: good morning. caller: good morning. i was just calling for your guest to let us know exactly how we got boo into this situation with the amount of money we spent just since democrats took control and fast

1997 budget which we were off balance. democrats took control with the 1998 budget from there. could we just explain a little bit about how much we spent in the bush years and eaven year, i know we spent a couple hundred billion extra compared to the money we're spending now. last time we had four years of surplus. and i'm wondering, i know we've overspent in the last couple of years in comparison to the clinton years. but is there any way to have a closing of government and cutting, and the other thing, the last debt was just, you know, using the same things they used in 1995 but what was it cincinnati and we're going to dill everybody? and did anybody die back then? i think it will be a good thing to close down the government. what do you have to say? >> i don't think it's likely much money will be made by closing down the government itself.

there will be some employees that are upset. it is a very different situation, and that's -- to get to your point, that's what caused us to be where we are today in terms of both sides really digging in their position both sides agree this is not the real debate over federal spending. it's the beginning of the debate which does not bode well for the future debates, because in a sense, this is not a difficulty debate. this is the easy part. host: cary, good morning. you're on with tom shoop the editor in chief of "government executive" magazine. >> thank you. caller: thank you for taking my call. with senator john mccain and maria campbell, the glass

ceiling attempt was voted down with the bailout and here from massachusetts. and interestingly enough, when they first said it should be re-enacted, they comp flavent it would shut down the -- the system has bankrupted this country in the tens of trillions of dollars. and we would be able to take that and put it into things that we need to like nasa, noapa. types of programs that would put millions of people back to work in high-tech jobs and put this country back on the global leadership that we need. sort of bailout us. guest: i can't claim to be an expert on that. but clearly there are options

on the table involving trillions of dollars of federal spending that are not being addressed right now. what we're talking about right now is settling on much of a piece of the pie. >> next is a call for bill online in south carolina. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was an employee at the v.a. hospital since 1981. during the 1995-1996 shutdowns. they had two shutdowns. and the federal employees were still paid. furloughed people were still paid. even though much of us, many of us came to work. i work at a v.a. hospital. and you know, you have to have nurses and doctors, and they were there.

the v.a. m always works and takes care of their veterans. and the $400 million was spent evidently on people that were furloughed and went home, and i did see people going out of the gates that were happy like the fourth of july that they had the day off. and they were gone, and they didn't come back. they didn't do their jobs, and we kind of wondered what they were going in the first place. host: thank you. as he was weighing in a comment from gary saying the problem with government is that it has no nonessential employees, so if you don't contribute to the bottom line, you are gone. to both of these points, your response? guest: there was definitely a sense in 1995 and 1996 that people who went away were pretty sure they were going to get paid retro actively when they came back. there's less of a sense of that this time. i think.

and as for just the specifics of the v.a., the v.a. will be in operations almost entirely duringing this shutdown. because that's a change from know-1996. first of all, a lot of v.a. is essential for life and property. everything associated with that. now the v.a. also gives advanced appropriation. s so they actually have their funding in place. so they will be open question of who is essential and who isn't is a difficult question for agencies to address. and there are people who i would say in the short term may not be necessary to be there if the government shut down. but i think it's a little bit of a stretch that if you see people are not distressed, there's a question wove of whether they should be there or should have been there in the first place. caller: i hear y'all talking

about shutdown. shutdown. we have the gentlemen out there fighting for their lives. it's not just them. it's everything manned fighting for their lives. the workers and the other guys saying the nurses and doctors. what about all of these people? and what about the previous medicare and all that kind of stuff? and if it does shouth shut down, how long will it be shut down and who all is it going to hurt? it's saying it's going to hurt the billionaires out there whose got more money than anybody. >> thank you for the call. let me pick up on her point of how long the government could shut down if it does close down tomorrow. >> the likelihood that it will be shorter rather than longer. people refer to the 1995-1996 shutdown, but that was in itself an anomaly being three weeks or so. most shutdowns are not that

long, and this one seems less likely that it will be that long. the pain will be felt in a matter of weeks. that's in the ways of payments not going out the contractors and facilities being closed and visa and passport applications will be affected very quickly. so i think another thing we can't forget is that methods of communication are much quicker and stronger than they were then. the members of congress and the obama administration are going to hear complaints much more quickly than they did in the 1996 shutdown. host: she also asked about military employees and personnel as we heard from defense second -- heard from defense secretaries.

>> for ewan formed military personnel, they do get paid in the event of a shutdown. they are essential to the protection of life and property. they are expected to work, and they will get paid. but the pay will come retro actively. so there will be a hiccup in when they actually get their pay checks. host: jordan expected to see a compromise this morning. why is the house and senate still playing games? guest: i think that it's this sort of friendsied-end games is not all this unusual, and the stakes are very high, and both sides have dug in position and get the maximum of what they are going to get. that incentive advises them toe go right to the brink. host: good morning. the editor in chief of "government executive" magazine.

good morning. caller: good morning. i'm just going over some figures here. i understand since november that we went in debt $830 billion. and against, well, we have a $14.2 trillion debt. and the democrats and republicans are talking about $33 billion and $39 billion is where their problem is. that's a drop in a bucket compared to 13.4 trillion dollar debt. so really if they didn't decide to agree on between $33 billion and $39 billion. that really doesn't mean anything, does it? guest: it doesn't mean much in the overall scheme of things. you're correct that it is a relatively small amount of

money, which indicates a couple things. i think first of all, any debate over federal spending is very contentious at this point. and certainly on the republican side, they want stow demonstrate that they are here to cut spending and they want to take every opportunity to do that. what it means in the overall picture is that if the debate is this difficult over this splice of the pirkse imagine how difficult a link is available on our website at journal@c-span.org or you can log on at -- some -- guest: i think we're hearing a shutdown, and there's no guarantee at retro active pay either. and for federal employees on

the lower end of the scale, and there are many of them, and many of them likely to be affected by the shutdown. there's going to be a real short-term problem for people living paycheck to paycheck. host: 202-628-0184 phone if you're a federal worker or employee. caller: i've been a public employee working for the department of defense for 23 years. same building, same base. and i believe this potential shutdown is a continuation of the war on public workers, and it's going to possibly save money. to sacrifice active duty pay because of the tea party and their insistens on policy issues rather than them wanting to get to the other issues, which is deplorable, there's

talk about retro active pay, but that won't help many living payday to payday. it's going to trickle down and it will affect more than just federal workers. i'm more concerned that if these congressional leaders can't agree on $33 billion for one week, how will they ever get an annual budget passed? but i don't know that they intend to. i think their intent perhaps is to cripple the administration, stop the recovery, and i remember early on in this president's administration, we heard i want him to fail, and i believe the folks that are silent or joined in on that are with us today interactive, and they have no intent to help get this weeklong emergency situation over. and i don't know how they'll ever agree on anything.

they are just putting issues way before the needs of the financial recovery of this country, and i think it's pretty bad. host: connie, thank you for the call. tom shoop? guest: i think to pick up on what the caller said, i think first of all, the perception of public employees, government workers is very different than what it has been in the past. that changed because in the last shutdown there was a sense of solidarity between government workers thrown out of their appear places. a sort of feeling that among some people, federal employees have privileges regular people don't. so i think there's been a shift in public opinion that may affect this. to the question of what this opposed for the future budget snow,s, i think that's right. even if a shutdown is averted today, and i think there's a fairly strong, and when the

bigger easyness of shutting down the government comes, it will be not as hard to do so. things would have to go on a long time before funding to yustes from the federal government would be affected. host: and in terms of applications you would be sending in through loans or grants? guest: that will be slowed down. the education department, virtually everyone at the education department will be furloughed. so i think all that sort of processing is going to come to at least a temporary hault. host: and that issue, sara saying if the military or governmental agencies are not funded or paid, congress should not be paid. guest: that is certainly a popular opinion among federal employees. that's an idea that several members of congress have

actually pushed, and i would not at all be surprised to see that happen. if there's a shutdown, i think it will be difficult for members of congress to say we're going to accept our own pay for that period. host: good morning. republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. it's interesting, and i was going to say something regarding the very last twitter that you got about the congressman snarkts and our president getting paid. they are going to get paid whether the country can afford to finance itself or not, because that's the way the laws are written. and in regards to them not taking their pay, i don't believe that they would do that. i mean, when they wouldn't giver civil workers and military retirees and people on social security, when they wouldn't give them their -- they still took what amounted to a 5% raise which in some

cases is well over $500,000. so i think what really has people upset here is not only is this lack of government finance going to affect each individual in our country. but it also seems to be that it's only affecting the citizens in this country. it is not going to affect our elected leaders. that's the big issue here. it always seems like our government separates itself from the citizens and actually has different laws that apply to them that apply to us. guest: it's certainly possible that it will have is much less, if no impact on elected officials than it does on rank and file federal employees. there's no question about that. and i think that it's very possible that members of congress will say we'll keep our pay.

and i think it's certainly true that the president will continue to be paid in the event of a shutdown. members of congress, i believe, if i'm not mistake have frozen their own pay in the last couple of years -- host: if you're listening on c-span radio, our guest is tom shoop the editor in chief of "government executive" magazine, and we're talking about what to expect if the government shuts down beginning at midnight tonight. we expect to hear from the president later today. he did brief reporters about 9:30 eastern time. he did cancel his trip to indiana. the house and senate remain in segs today. the president scheduled to be in williamsburg, virginia for a weekend with his family, but that appears to be in limbo as well. next is jim joining us from fort ladder detail, florida. good morning.

caller: good morning. i live in a warehouse. ok? i live in a warehouse. i've had two businesses. i've contributed so much money to this government, and i'm watching these politicians outright lying to the country. executive magazine? i was paying for this? host: this is a private publication. it's not funded by the government. we should be clear about that. caller: forgive me. i work in the state of new york. i left a job because there was so much waste. and this was 25 years ago ago. too much waste. waste. the post office, we can go on and on. it's a disgrace. the people of america, we the people are tired of it. and i don't mean to tell you i was a die-hard democrat at one time, but i just can't take it anymore the lies being told and

the poor this and poor that, i am poor now. i cannot believe what's happened to our country, my country. we are all americans. it's a disgrace that they can't tell american people the truth. numbers do not lie. people do. i know i'm mad. let me give you a couple examples. they want to give me $5100 to go to school. a grant? we don't have it. i paid for my last education myself. i worked two jobs to do it. i raised a daughter doing it. i don't want to pay for somebody else's child if they are irresponsible, their children -- they should pay for their own children. i don't want to pay for some lady's one nightstand. host: but his sentiment is that shared be my. >> yes. there are a lot of people throughout frustrated with the

way government is operated. i think this is an issue with members of congress that in this kind of situation, they are sort of jockeying to see who's going to win and who's going to lose in this situation. and i think they are -- all elected officials are going to lose if this happens. host: this is from daniel who says, do we have anything in design of our government stop the quarrels like this and get them working together or do we need to add? i think he's talking about the budget. basic live his sentiment is how can we stop the quarrels and get them to get something done? guest: i think at this point it's extremely difficult. i think there's a very serious question about whether congress has the capacity to dealt effectively with these issues. and they were only going to get more difficult.

host: anna on the democrats line good morning. caller: good morning. i feel like some of the others. you know, if they are going to have a shutdown, congress and several of the other high-paid officials, they shouldn't get their paycheck. let them live i like the people that are on social security. and all those ethreast are living. and let them see what it's like to live like we do. host: thank you. guest: i think that's certainly a possibility that they will not get their pay checks, and it will not be good for members of congress or the president if they continue to be paid at a time when other government employees are not. host: st. augustin's florida, what do you do? caller: i work in traffic transportation for almost 20 years, and i was injured on the

job in 2007. i was misdiagnosed by workman's comp and we're still fighting for my pay, so i had a shutdown in 2007. i see that everybody that has time off should watch c-span, and watch the congress in action. and watch the crying and whining and whaling and nashing of teeth of the democrats, because people we sent to washington to cut this budget before there is no money for anybody for any federal employees for any federal program, and the bank is going to have a big red star on it. and we're trying to cut a few harris off an 800-pound gorilla, and i have never seen more people crying, plant ining their fist on the floor like they are 2-year-olds over a

couple hairs off an 800-pound gorilla. it's not george bush's fault if you have a flat. host: goes back to your earlier point about the debate. the debt ceiling debate that will come up in may in 2012. guest: right. it's not a good sign that there's this level of argument over such a small portion of the government. but as your previous guest said, one of your problems here is that it is the portion of the budge it that affects a lot of people and there's a debate over the policy riders that have been attached to this legislation. so those are issues too. there are other issues at play that are causing this sort of contentious debate. oonched i think both sides have an incentive to take this right up to the brink and to show their side that they've done everything they could to defend

their position. host: if there is a government shutdown hypothetical that shuts down next week, april 19th is the deadline this year for taxes, do the citizens have the ability to delay their taxs? guest: you are still required to file your taxes by april 18. it's a bit unclear what's going to happen. the i.r.s. said it will not be processing paper returns, because it doesn't have the staff, but paper returns are only 30%. but what was with the other 70%, they would continue to happen, because those are essentially processed automatically. so, but there has to be a time when it becomes difficult to do that if this goes after tax day. >> it could delay your refund.

>> absolutely. host: linda is joining us from laurel, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. my latest complaint has to do with why people want to punish quote-unquote the federal workers. i used to be a federal employee. my husband is currently a federal employee. i know we have worked hard in the government. and looking at private sector, i don't think we get any quote special kind of -- significant special incentives that anybody else does. the jobs that we had get paid a lot less than private sector equivalents. and i don't know where this whole avalanche of being against federal employees started. but i am -- that really bothers

me. guest: i think that in terms of public opinion, it all goes back to the economic crisis starting in 2008. when that hit, they caused a tremendous amount of uncertainty. a lot of people were thrown out of work. and some of them end to see government work as more stable and relatively highly compensated. now the numbers on that are all over the map. there's some datea indicating federal employees are underpaid compared to their private sector counterparts and others indicate they are overpaid. so that's something the office of personnel management is trying to work out right now. but i think it's a hot button issue and certainly goes back to the concerns of the country. host: good morning. caller: good morning. host: go ahead, jeff, turn the volume down on your set and go

ahead with your question. caller: i just don't understand how the federal government can dish out money to the banks and bail out the banks and mortgage companies and so on and pass out grants all over the country, and pass out money in, and if they injury people over, this they are just passing cash out. but the men and women over there need to focus on survival in a dangerous situation. 245eu6 don't need to be worrying about their families back at home, if they are going to have a hiccup and in the payments if they are going to be able to make their bills. i see it daily. everybody is so spet there's just no jobs. there's -- everything is in turmoil across the whole country. to just not pay our federal employees and to pay people that are protecting us, national transportation people, just everything, you know?

host: we also got a twitter comment saying if there is a shutdown, i will eat thank god, but there are several who will suffer. my heart goes out to them, the children. guest: this is not going to make anyone look good and there's a bipartisan sentiment throughout that this is no way to run a railroad. host: let's go to kevin in battle creek, michigan. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a question and a comment. my comment is this. like one of the callers, everyone is beating their hands because government might shut down. it's all a big myth to me, because i've been following this for a while watching c-span and watching the different news networks. can you just talk about how -- america is not broke. if we decide to take back

everything that we give to everybody across the world, and we stop providing all these services we provide. talk about how china and all those other big countries would be affected. >> it certainly is true that america is not broke. largely because we have pretty much unlimited capacity to borrow money. what the caller might be getting at is the amount of foreign aid we sent to other countries and how much of that we could get back. a lot of people are under the impression that's that's a huge part of it. host: the majority of americans are calling for jobs. why is washington talking about cutting the budget now? guest: i think center talking about cutting the budget now because the government is in a very large deficit situation. and there is that balancing act between what's going on in the

economy and not jeopardizing the economic recovery, and in making sure spending doesn't get out of control. host: dan. we have a quick moment from dallas, texas. what's your point? caller: i'm sorry. i'm active military. if i don't get a paycheck or have a hiccup in my paycheck, i think the president shouldn't get paid. capitol hill shouldn't be paid. i spent 116 days in iraq and if this was happening while i was overseas, my wife wouldn't be able to pay the bills. host: quick comment? >> i think that gets -- >> we expect them to work on

the fcc internet broadband tax -- practices, however house democrats have called for of vote? while republicans are considering that bill in the face of a government shutdown. off of the floor, and off-camera this afternoon, we believe negotiations are contributing -- continuing on the spending issues. a couple of hours ago outside of his office, we heard from speaker of the house john boehner. >> good morning, everybody. there is only one reason we do not have an agreement as yet, and that issue is spending.

we are close to a resolution on the policy issues. i think the american people deserve to know -- when will the white house, senate democrats, get serious about cutting spending? a bill that fails to include real spending cuts will hurt job growth and signal that washington is not serious about dealing with its spending addiction. i hope the senate will follow the house leader and test the true funding bill, and do it today. i also think the president should sign the troop funding bill into law. this is the responsible thing to do to support our troops and keep the federal government opened. thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> a short time after we heard from speaker bidder, minority whip steny hoyer took to the fore of the house and the for these remarks. ck. the chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer, for five minutes. mr. hoyer: thank you, mr. speaker. isn't it a shame, i tell my friend who just spoke, that his colleagues objected to unanimous consent request yesterday which would have taken care of the problem he raises today? there's not a person on this floor that doesn't want to make sure that our men and women in harm's way and in uniform ready to be put in harm's way are paid on time, but we're playing a political game here, a game of got you, a game of my way or the highway, not a game of coming together from all over the country and trying to make laws for our country that require compromise.

henry clay, one of the first speakers of this house from the state of kentucky, said if you can't compromise you cannot govern. that's why we are on the brink of shutting down government. we ask for unanimous consent, i'm going to tell you we're going to ask for another unanimous consent that will accomplish exactly what the gentleman from texas wanted to accomplish. i hope that none of you object. i hope that all of you will say, yes, enough of these games, let's do what republicans and democrats have historically done when they reached an impasse at this time. they said, well, we'll keep things in place and we'll create a bridge across which we can all pass to get to compromise, to get to agreement. that's what the american people expect us to do. mr. speaker, i understand some in this chamber shutting down the government is a way of making a point. that's why they have included in this bill to fund the troops some of their social agenda.

that's why they want to shut down the government, because they want to force the president to do something he has told the american people he would not do. now, ladies and gentlemen, when the democrats were in charge of the house and senate and we disagreed with george bush, we did not shut down the government. we said, mr. president, we understand. you disagree with this. so we can't do it. not because you won't do it, mr. president, we'll shut down the government. that's what's happening here. it's not about dollars and cents and it's not about funding the military. that's the image that's being created because we are all sympathetic and committed to funding our men and women in harm's way. that's the right thing to do. it's the moral thing to do. it's what we ought to be doing. i hope when i ask for a unanimous consent to do that today, that unlike yesterday the republicans will not object.

i want every member to be aware of the consequences for millions of americans of shutting down government. a shut down would put my economic recovery, our housing market, and paychecks at risk. and, yes, every person listening to me will be affected in one way or another. it's the wrong thing to do. who said it was the wrong thing to do? speaker john boehner who said it would cost more to shut down the government than to keep it running. he is absolutely right. goldman sachs has estimated that i quote if a shut down lasted more than two days, it would shave .2 of a percent for every week it continues. what's that mean? it means jobs. we have been here for 90 days. we are in our third -- fourth month. with no jobs legislation. goldman sachs went on to shea when the government shut down for 20 days in late