we now go to the floor of the house of representatives. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. god of the universe, we give you thanks for giving us another day. we ask your blessing upon our nation. bless the work of the members of the people's house. may they toil diligently to bring about solutions to the pressing issues of these times. bless all men and women across our country, especially those who work in service to others -- police, firefighters, health care providers, teachers, those who work in local, state and national government and those men and women serving in our armed forces. and bless those who give the ultimate sacrifice of their lives in service from santa cruz, california, to bangor, maine, and comfort those who

mourn their loss. may we all be inspired by the heroes who serve their neighbors. may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory. 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. the pledge of allegiance today will be led by the gentleman from texas, mr. olson. mr. olson: will members, staff and guests in the gallery, please join me in the pledge of allegiance to the united states of america? 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 one-minute requests on each side. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: i ask unanimous

consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker: without objection, so ordered. mr. poe: mr. speaker, in a beatup old spanish mission 177 years ago today, the sun rose in the mist for the last time on a small band of soldiers. the fiery group of texas volunteers stood defiant against dictator santa ana and his group of thousands on this the 13-day siege of the alamo. they came from many states and many foreign countries. 11 were tejanos, texans of spanish dissent. their name was jim bowy, jim bono and william barrett travis. they were killed on march 6, 1836, fighting liberty over tyranny. travis was correct when he said texas would cost more of santa

ana than defeat. mexican losses were so huge that general sam houston rallied a texas army and won on the plains of san jacinto. texas became a republic. the bugles were quiet but all the people should thank the good lord that those are willing to die for freedom rather than live under oppression and tyranny and that's just the way it is. i ask unanimous consent to put into the record the names and states and countries of the alamo defenders. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, i am extremely disappointed that the sequestration has taken effect because republicans refuse to work with democrats on a balanced plan to prevent it.

the automatic, arbitrary and irrational cuts it has imposed could have and i think will have serious negative impacts. it would erode our military readiness and weaken our national security and it could reverse the gains we made in our economic recovery and see reductions in critical programs that help the poor and most vulnerable in our society. sequestration is not a solution. only a balanced approach can achieve the savings we need to get our fiscal house in order and end the uncertainty that is keeping our businesses from creating the jobs we need. it is not too late to act. this republican-controlled congress may not have been able to avert the sequester but it can limit its impact if both sides work together. and i still believe that if republicans were willing to compromise we can achieve the big balance solution to deficits the american people

expect from us. today's vote is on whether you think sequester is rational. the next vote will be on keeping government open and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. olson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. olson: mr. speaker, 177 years ago on this day the alamo fell. every texan fighting for liberty was killed. the letter sent by the alamo commander was pleading for help. to the people of texas and all americans in the world, i have 1,000 or more of the mixans by santa ana. i have not lost a man in 24

hours. the enemy has demanded a surrender of the garrison. if the fort is taken, i've answered that demand with a cannon shot. i am determined to sustain myself as long as possible in dying like a solder who never forgets what is due to his own honor and that of his country. victory or death. lieutenant barrett travis, commandant. god bless the republic of texas. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from the district of columbia rise? ms. norton: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. norton: congress will keep up to a million at home if

sequester cuts are buried in the c.r. no emergency like snow or even the deficit will be responsible. the responsibility lies with the house majority that has advocated its responsibility to govern. the c.r. on the floor today embeds cuts that might be tolerated if pred intelligently and selectively over time. but even if the deficit remanded cutting, for example, the women, infant and children program, there can be no justification for doing it in only six months guaranteeing that over 600,000 low-income women and children are most -- our most vulnerable, will lose basic nutrition. dumb cuts are bad. cool cuts are much worse. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered.

>> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of chairman poe's resolution, condemning the february 9 rocket and mortar attacks in camp liberty in iraq and urge the united states to work with the united nations and refugees to relocate the members of the mujaheddin back to camp ashraf. they can be only be safe and secure at camp ashraf. the iraqi government placed them at camp liberty. mr. cotton: now they must return them to ashraf or return them abroad. i look forward when these refugees can return to iran, once the tyrannical regime has fallen. if president obama stood with brave iranian people in 2009

instead of the mullahs there, let us not make the mistake again. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida rise? >> thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. frankel: sunday, march 3, two days after the failure to stop the mindless budget cuts of sequester that slashed millions of dollars from medical research, i was honored to join bob and suzanne wright and thousands of others as we walked in downtown west palm beach to promote autism awareness, advocacy and awareness. america's fastest growing serious developmental disability, and the wrights will be the first to tell you even with autism speaks and other fine organizations, it will take the investment of the united states of america in science to unlock the mystery of a disorder that cheats our

children and stresses their families financially and emotionally. mr. speaker, the sequester will hurt our most vulnerable loved ones and risk slowing down our economy right when it's recovering. let's come together now and stop the sequester and reduce our deficit in a balanced way. instead of tax breaks for oil companies, let's give an autistic child a chance to be the best that he or she can be. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? >> mr. speaker, i request permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> mr. speaker, the record is clear, the house of representatives has acted responsibly. we passed two pieces of legislation to be able to deal with sequestration, to be able to deal with it in a

responsible way. the question yet to be answered is -- will the senate, will the administration rise with us to be able to meet that challenge? right now an american family making $50,000 a year is taking about $1,000 less home because of the expiration of the payroll tax deduction. that's a mortgage payment, books for school, a couple months' worth of groceries. in fact, they are now under the highest tax burden since the year 2008. families are making sacrifices while government continues to increase spending. mr. tipton: many federal agencies and programs will actually receive more in their budget this year and the government will collect more tax revenue than ever before, $.7 trillion. one of the major -- $2.7 trillion. one of the major problems with the president's sequester is reducing federal spending but it casts a broad shadow of uncertainty on how those cuts will be implemented.

we need responsibility. this house has acted. we call on the senate and the administration to join us. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? does the gentleman ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute? so ordered. >> mr. speaker, i rise today about the recent sequestration cuts to important federal programs that are harmful to our national security, education system, transportation and infrastructure and economy. mr. veasey: congressional democrats worked for months in this chamber to not have harmful cuts but the republicans has not had any compromise. the republican majority has three times blocked the consideration of a democratic bill to end sequestration, has refused to bring any bill of their own to the house floor to end the sequester and instead try to blame president obama

with partisan attacks. the sequester has already taken effect with an immediate $85 billion across-the-board spending cut, and while the worse of these impacts are yet to come, americans will see more teachers laid off, cuts to special education, a loss of four million meals for seniors and debilitating health care cuts for our military families. in my home state of texas, the sequester puts close to 1,000 teaching jobs at risk. over 80,000 workers will lose access to job training. over 50,000 civilian defense employees will be furloughed and 9,700 fewer children will get vaccines for diseases like measles and the whooping cough. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> mr. speaker, last friday sequestration went into effect.

the house has passed two plans to replace the sequestration with smarter, targeted spending cuts. mr. collins: unfortunately the senate has not approved a plan. we desperately need to cut spending, but sequestration is an extremely poor way to do it. where i'm from in upstate new york it means taking an ax to cybersecurity precisely when we need it the most. it means furloughing the men and women who make sure our armed forces get paid and it means slashing education programs that make our country more competitive. we need to make tough, smart choices and reduce spending now so we don't hand our children the most regressive tax there is. and a moral and national debt approaching $17 trillion. there is no reason and should be no reason why both sounds can't agree on cutting $85 billion. .

mr. speaker, we need to replace sequestration with responsible cuts and reforms. let's do it as soon as possible. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? does the gentleman ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute? without objection, so ordered. mr. johnson: mr. speaker, i rise today as a member of the safe climate caucus to demand that this tea party congress take action to stop climate change. scientists agree that climate change is dangerous and for those of you who only care about money, it's also costly. republicans' skepticism of science has delayed action for far too long, but it's not too late to stop the worst effects. the victims of super storm sandy know that we must act now.

i call on my republican friends to reject the extreme right wing and also repudiate your pollution spewing suiters and listen to the facts, the science, and the demands of the american people. we must take action now not during the last term, by the way, when these two measures to avoid sequestration were passed, they are not in effect now, but we need to take action right now . i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma rise? >> mr. speaker, by direction of the committee on rules i call up house resolution 99 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 6, house resolution 99, resolved, that upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be

in order to consider in the house the bill h.r. 933, making appropriations for the department of defense, the department of veterans affairs, and other departments and agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2013, and for other purposes. points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the amendment printed in the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted. the bill as amended shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill as amended are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill as amended, and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the committee on appropriations. and two, one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for one hour. mr. cole: mr. speaker, for the purposes of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from worcester, mr. mcgovern, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. cole: during consideration of this resolution, all time is yielded for the purposes of debate only. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. cole: mr. speaker, yesterday the rules committee met and reported a rule for consideration of h.r. 933, the department of defense, military construction, and veterans' affairs and full year continuing appropriations act of 2013. the rule is a closed rule which provides for the consideration of the fully conferenced department of defense and military construction and veterans' affairs bills, and a continuing resolution for other government programs at the f.y.

2012 levels. this rule provides for one hour of debate equally divided between the chairman and ranking member of the committee on appropriations. in addition the rule incorporates a purely technical amendment to the bill by chairman rogers. mr. speaker, h.r. 933 accomplishes several key objectives. first it preserves military readiness and national security capability while maintaining core commitments to our troops and veterans. second, it ends the current uncertainty of the fiscal year 2013 budget. it seems over the past year we have moved from fiscal crisis to fiscal crisis, thanks to the leadership of chairman rogers and chairman sessions, we are able to consider funding the federal government through the end of the fiscal year at this point, avoiding the threat of a government shut down. additionally by consideration a full year d.o.d. and milcon v.a. bills, we are able to establish

a baseline for the department to act upon as opposed to having them rely on fiscal year 2012 priorities. this bill aligns the appropriations accounts for the department of defense and the milcon and v.a. to better reflect the fiscal year 2013 execution rather than the fiscal year 2012 levels carried forward in the c.r. mr. speaker, this legislation operates under the caps of the budget control act of 2011 as modified by the american taxpayer relief act of 2012. there are across-the-board reductions in security and nonsecurity spending to reach the caps of it one trillion, 43 billion. additionally there is a provision that assures the funding will be reduced to the post sequester level of $982 billion in total spending. a reduction of $85 billion in

overall federal spending for fiscal year 2013. finally, mr. speaker, i want to spend a moment discussing the anomalies in the bill. let me assure my colleagues on both sides of the aisle that none of the anomalies in this legislation are net do anything to raise the cost of the bill above the statutory budget control act caps. some of the anomalies in the bill are things like turning off the $100 million in convention funding for charlotte and tampa, and turning off $31 million in funding for the eisenhower commission for funding -- where funding has been delayed indefinitely and no fund have yet been extended. these anomalies are limited. there are only approximately 80 in the entire bill. for reference in the last full year continuing resolution, there were over 600 anomalies. the appropriations committee has been judicious in its use of anomalies only providing them in cases where the mission critical operations might be impacted. mr. speaker, this is a good

bill. i support -- urge support for the rule and the underlying bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i want to thank the gentleman from oklahoma, my friend, mr. cole, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, we are here to krt rule for h.r. 933, the continuing resolution for the rest of fiscal 2013. this is a disappointing bill, mr. speaker. and this is a disappointing process. this continuing resolution, quite frankly, is inadequate. it does not meet the needs of our people. and because it does not address sequestration, it actually will hurt many millions of our people. the department of defense and the v.a. have given some flexibility to deal with the devastating sequestration cuts, but no other agency is given that tool.

this is clearly, in my opinion, a tacit statement by the majority that they are going to keep this harmful sequester. one of the stupidest things ever to come out of congress. and that, mr. speaker, is a disappointing part of this entire process. the majority has had plenty of opportunity to address the sequester. time after time after time after time democrats through the efforts of the ranking democrat on the budget committee, mr. van hollen, have offered a sequester alternative and time after time after time after time the republican majority has blocked this amendment from being debated and voted on the house floor. if the republicans in congress have yet to put forth a sequester alternative. they'll say they passed two different proposals, but that was last congress. as many of my friends on the other side of the aisle know so well, legislation dies at the end of each congress. every two years congress repop pew late and every bill must start over. there's no carry over from one congress to the next.

we all learned that in the most basic political science class. politics 101. this claim that we did something last congress is irrelevant to addressing the sequester that the republicans let take effect last week. let's remember the context of those two bills the house republicans are so proud of. they were the result of, once again, the republican leadership walking away from difficult bipartisan negotiations just at the moment when the deal seemed to be within reach. they both were completely partisan bills, and they both were dead on arrival in the senate. so they were not genuine efforts to solve problems. they were all for show. they were simply political theater. on the other hand, at the end of the last congress the house and republican leadership had a bipartisan, bicameral negotiateated appropriations bill that would have taken us to fiscal year 2013. the results of hundreds of hours of careful bipartisan negotiations.

but the house republicans would not let that bill come to the floor for approval. a bill that would have passed the senate and gone straight to the president's desk for signature. instead, they chose to waste the houses -- house's time on two highly partisan budget bills that went nowhere. as i said, mr. speaker, that was the last congress and we must now start all over to address the sequester and providing -- provide funding for the remainder of the fiscal year. frankly, i don't know what the republicans in the house are scared of. speaker boehner seems to have moved past the hastert rule, which is the silly rule the bill must pass if it has the majority of the majority and replaced it with selective bipartisanship. that's right, speaker boehner clearly believes the house should operate under a prosselves selective bipartisanship. this means he turns to democrats when he needs the votes to pass important bills, like he did for vawa, the fiscal cliff, and

hurricane sandy relief. when only 49 republicans, only 49 republicans out of 232 voted to help our fellow citizens on the east coast who were devastated by that storm. the speaker should do the same thing with the sequester and allow the house to debate and vote on the van hollen amendment. finally, mr. speaker, this is a -- this is part of a broader republican economic plan that is to put it mildly extremely disappointing. first, republicans brought us to the brink of economic mayhem with the fiscal cliff. the last minute the senate swooped in to save the day with leadership and help from the administration. then house republicans allowed the sequester to take effect. once again playing russian roulette with our economy. now we are going to consider this hybrid c.r. that just doesn't pass muster despite the best efforts of the appropriators. no one, no one wants a government shutdown and we all know that some kind of bill funding the federal government

for the end of the fiscal year will pass before march 27. the real fights are going to come in the next few weeks and months when the republicans outline their budget priorities with the new ryan budget and when the debt limit once again needs to be raised. what's clear is that the republicans are hellbent on cutting spending just for its own sake, no matter how mindless or senseless. we know that the economy is slowly rebounding. we also know that these cuts in government spending, federal, state, and local are taking a toll on the economy. fourth quarter growth last year was reduced only because of reduced government spending. the cuts to cops -- c.o.p.s., firefighters, teachers, other workers. when that showed up in the economic report. now they see a republican budget that supposedly eliminates the deficit in 10 years. call it the ryan budget on steroids. it's going to cut medicare, food stamps in nearly every nondefense discretionary program funded by the federal

government. and during the debt ceiling debate we'll see another attempt to arbitrarily cut these programs. mr. speaker, this is not a responsible way to govern. the continuing resolution before us today is just one more example of how the house republicans are leading with their heads in the sand. instead of working to jump-start our economy. instead of engaging in true bipartisan negotiations, house republicans continue to plush on with this misguided and ill-conceived budget cuts that do harm for no good. like i said, this is a disappointing bill and disappointing effort. we should be considering an omnibus appropriations bill. we should work to replace the see quester. we should be thinking long-term about economic recovery. we should be putting country aheffed political party. in-- ahead of political party. instead we are playing games with our economy. this is no way to run a government. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: thank you, mr. speaker. i just want to make a few quick comments in reference to my good

friend's remarks. referred to an interesting phrase, selective bipartisanship. i would suggest to my friend that we probably practice that more in two months than they did in two years when they were in the majority. these were major pieces of legislation and we did move in a bipartisan fashion as my good friend knows. i helped on all three of those occasions, was happy to do so. i'm sure the speaker will continue to try to work as would the aisle whenever he can. my friend also referred to the nature of the cuts. let me assure him of this, these are cuts and they are going to occur. but we have repeatedly told our friends and the president and the senate that we would be more than happy to redistribute where the cuts are going to occur. we did that twice in may of last year and december of last year after the election in good faith. in either case the senate picked that up or the white house respond with a serious offer. now my friend is asking us to do it for a third time in the hopes it will be different. perhaps this time you should go first. perhaps the senate should actually pass a plan or the

president actually lay one out. i don't think we have really seen that. again, if we see that we'll be willing to work with our friends and try and redistribute the cuts. don't have any illusion we are going o eliminate them. we are not. anymore than our friends eliminated the idea with the bush tax cuts when they ran out. this is what we feel is the first step in getting our fiscal house in order. let me remind my friend as i know he knows, this bill in itself is an effort to work with the president and the administration. the president has said, and i think quite correctly, we need to avoid a government shut down. . mr. rogers are acting early and in a responsible manner to put a vehicle out there and move through the process. we are more than willing for the senate to do the same thing. we expect they will. they may add other departments. frankly, speaking only for myself, i hope they will. i hope they recapture a lot of

the appropriations work for the fiscal year 2013 and lost during the c.r. process. and i think we can have a good negotiation going back and forth between the two parties. this is the beginning of a process. it's the beginning of a return to regular order and it's an opportunity to work, i think, in a bipartisan fashion. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. mcgovern: i have great respect for my colleague from oklahoma. quite frankly, you know, the leadership of this house has not adhered to regular order. we have not seen regular order in a long time. when he talks about trying to find an alternative to sequestration, i would remind my colleague that mr. van hollen, who is about to speak, has tried on four occasions, on four occasions to be able to

come to the floor and offer his alternative to sequestration that the democrats support. i think some republicans would support as well to have a debate and to have an up or down vote, to avoined these mindless, senseless, across-the-board indiscriminant cuts. he's been denied all four times. by contrast, the republicans have had zero alternatives. that's right, zero. they have brought nothing to the floor in this congress to avoid sequestration. we're in march. january, february, march. we're in march. so we have had an alternative that we were not allowed to be brought to the floor. the united states senate did pass an alternative with 51 votes. that's a majority. unfortunately partly due to some of the house leadership here, the republicans said, no, you need 60 votes to get that thing through. so we've been trying.

the white house has been trying. the fact that we are here, you know, and my republican friends have allowed sequestration to go into effect i think is quite frankly unconscionable. we should not be in this mess. you know, sequestration took effect last week. we should have stayed in session all week and tried to figure this -- and try to figure this out. my colleagues recessed the house thursday. no urgency, no nothing. and meanwhile these indiscriminant cuts are going into effect that will impact everything from w.i.c. to medical research to education funding to funding for roads and bridges. it will impact in a negative way jobs. people will lose their jobs. this is not a good deal. this is not a god deal. and quite frankly we should be here today trying to find an alternative. and with that, mr. speaker, i would like to now introduce the gentleman from maryland, the

ranking member on the budget committee, mr. van hollen, for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for three minutes. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker, and i thank my colleague, mr. mcgovern, and thank my colleague, mr. cole, for his efforts. but this bill falls short in a number of areas, but most of all it falls short because it does nothing to prevent the loss of 750,000 american jobs that will result because of a sequester. sequester is just a fancy washington name for hundreds of thousands of american jobs lost. that's going to squeeze middle-class families. it's going to squeeze small businesses. and that 750,000 jobs lost number, he has not the president's number. that's not my number. that's the number from the nonpartisan congressional budget office who have told us that if the sequester stays in place until the end of this calendar year, you'll have

750,000 less americans working at a time when we have a very fragile recovery going on. just last week, the chairman of the federal reserve said that it would reverse economic growth this year by 1/3. why would we want to do that if we have an alternative? as mr. mcgovern said, we have now tried four times to have an up or down vote on the floor of this house on a plan that would replace the sequester in a balanced way. so it would achieve the same amount of deficit reduction as the across-the-board sequester, but without the massive job loss that comes with the sequester because we do it in a targeted way over a period of time, we reduce overpayments in subsidies in the agriculture area which there's consensus on, but we also close some big tax loopholes. we say big oil companies no longer need big taxpayer subsidies, something that president bush proposed. and yet our colleagues are so

insistent on protecting those special interest tax breaks and not allowing those funds to be used to reduce the deficit that they haven't even allowed a vote up or down here on the floor of the house. as my colleague, mr. mcgovern, said we have tried four times. how many times have our republican colleagues put forward a solution to replace the sequester this year? zero. zero when it counts. so this is a very simple question. as part of this bill we should have an up or down vote in the people's house on a choice. we're not asking our colleagues to vote for it, but i think if we look atsur vase from the american people, the overwhelm -- if we look at surveys from the american people, the overwhelming number of people

should not be misled of the different funding categories in this bill. that will mean fewer researchers looking for cures and treatments to diseases. nor nurses taking care of our veterans at hospitals. mr. speaker, we just ask in the interest of openness and transparency, give us a vote, give the american people a vote on an alternative to the sequester so we don't lose hundreds of thousands of jobs. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: just for the purpose of response, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. cole: i appreciate my good friend's offer in station in session last week. it would have been nice if we dealt with this 18 months ago. we've known it's been coming. we tried to do that twice. i'm not sure the president would have been around last week. frankly, he spent the last six weeks crisscrossing the country campaigning, you know, and indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. oning people as opposed to having a dialogue. he -- crisscrossing the country campaigning, you know,

bludgeoning people as opposed to having a dialogue. there wasn't a great deal of interest, in my opinion. this process will allow this to occur. we are going to advance this bill into the chamber. it will require some work in the appropriations process. it will help the defense department a great deal. we're waiting for our friends in the senate to do the same thing. they will add some things. i think we'll end up in a great place, but we will preserve the spending reductions of the squester in the final product of the bill. revenue is off the table. you had revenue about six, eight weeks ago with no cuts. this time i suspect you're going to get cuts and no revenue. with that i yield four minutes to my distinguished colleague, classmate and distinguished physician from the great state of texas, mr. burgess. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for four minutes. mr. burgess: i thank the

gentleman for yielding. this is an important bill that we are considering today. it's not a perfect bill. it's not the bill i would write if i had the power to write the bill, but it's a important bill and as a conservative i am going to support the rule and i am going to support the bill. mr. cole already referenced the most important thing that's happening this morning is the savings that began last friday are locked in in the continuing resolution. these are savings that have been anticipated for years, delayed for months, finally arrived last friday. the market responded yesterday with an all-time high. it does allow the department of defense the flexibility that they asked for, to be able to manage their business with the reduced level of funding. and i think protecting our soldiers, i think protecting the pay of our soldiers is one of the -- one of the highest functions, one of the highest constitutional functions of this body and one we should

take seriously and i believe this bill does that. this bill also protect funding for our veterans which is also important. look, i know a lot of people on my side are concerned because the president's affordable care act, the president's government takeover of health care is not damaged in this exchange. in truth, some of the funding for implementation is reduced because it's kept at last year's levels and it is affected by the savings in the sequester, but to those on my side who says it doesn't go far in restricting the affordable care act, i would say we are going to get opportunities to fight that fight, multiple opportunities in the few short weeks ahead. where will they come? they will come on the budget. they will come on the appropriations bills. the appropriations bills in the house at least will be run in an open fashion, open appropriations bill and labor-hhs will demand of the

federal agencies involved with implementation that they share with us the data about how this thing is supposed to start october 1 when they've really been reticent to share anything. how about the rules that have now come forward since november 6? no wonder the governors were reluctant to accept the exchanges. no wonder the governors have held off from accepting the medicaid expansion because they weren't told what the deal would be until after the president's election was reassured. that's pretty disingenuous of the administration to run things that way, and i believe they should be held to account. and more importantly, in the six months between now and october 1, when every american who wants to buy in the exchange is supposed to be able to go to their computer and buy in the exchange, i don't believe they can build that system in the time required, regardless of how much money we give them. so it is important to hold those agencies accountable.

our committee work will do that. as an oversight committee on the authorization side we will continue to do that and that's important work. i ask conservatives to join in that fight as we go forward. let's fight this on the budget. let's fight it in open rules on the appropriations process. today is an important bill. not a perfect bill but important bill. protects our soldiers, protects our veterans, locks in those savings for the long-suffering taxpayer that they have waited for for so long. i urge support of the rule. i urge support of the bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. mcgovern: just so there is no confusion, i think it's important that i point out to my colleagues that we have had three rounds of cuts to one round of revenue increases. the cuts have been overwhelmed the revenue increases. so the notion that somehow that we've engaged in a balanced

process, i don't think is the case. and the notion that somehow closing these tax loopholes and corporate tax loopholes that even mitt romney and george bush at one time supported in order we don't cut medical research, research aimed at trying to find cures to alzheimer's and parkinson's and diabetes, not only will we prevent a lot of human suffering, would save a lot of money. we're pushing father off the date that we'll find breakthroughs in order to protect taxpayer subsidies to big oil companies that are making zillons of dollars, really? they need a handout from the united states taxpayer? you're cutting medical research, you're cutting head start, you're cutting programs that help people get an education that protect our communities, our law

enforcement officials, environmental protection, we're cutting all those things mindlessly in order to protect these corporate tax loopholes. this is crazy. i really believe that outside of this little bubble here in washington there is a bipartisan consensus that what we're doing here is crazy. this doesn't make any sense. this does not make any sense. mindless, senseless, across-the-board cuts. no urgency. we are going to go home today. there's a little snow on the ground. we can't really go anywhere until it reopens. we ought to stay here and find out an alternative sequestration. mr. speaker, at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from vermont, mr. welch. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from vermont is recognized for two minutes. mr. welch: i thank the speaker. mr. speaker, this is not a perfect bill. this is a disgraceful bill. and this process is not on the level. . yesterday wall street celebrated

its highest close in history. today it's going higher. and you know what a few years ago they came here hat in hand insisting on a bailout. they got a bailout paid for by main street who didn't cause the problem and suffered the consequences, and the middle class who didn't cause the problem but suffered the consequences. now we have a budget that is doubling down on grinding down on the middle class. what economic philosophy is at work here? america has always been at its best when it has had budgets that promote economic growth in middle class opportunity. this budget has adopted a notion that austerity is a goal in and of itself. and how will we get to fiscal balance without economic growth in an expanding middle class? our colleagues say in this budget it will be by putting the heel of austerity on the throat of middle class opportunity. that is wrong. 44% of the cuts are focused on

14% of the budget. that's kids going to college. it's little kids showing up in school hungry who can get a meal. it's t.s.a. workers who are going to get furloughed and who pay their bills month to month. this is disgraceful. and it is also a repudiation of what has made america great, a confidence that we are all in it together. if we have a budget where we share the pain and we share the opportunity will be the better for it. wall street has the second reason to celebrate today because this budget is absolutely doubling down on promoting the well-being of the haves at the expense of the middle class in the great american tradition of middle class opportunity. profits in this country are the highest they have been since 19 50. wagets are the lowest -- wages are the lowest they have been since 1966. we need to stand up for the middle class.

i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. cole: listening to my colleagues i'm reminded of that old saying that washington, d.c., is 10 square miles surrounded by reality. let's talk a little bit about the definitions we use for cuts. first of all, the government will spend more money this year than it did last year. just as last year it spent more money than it did the year before. we are not cutting anything. we are slowing down the rate of growth. parts of the budget there are real cuts, but overall, in thames of overall spending it's ever and ever higher. according to the much quoted, much loved congressional budget office, this year we'll have the highest level of income for the federal government in history. in the history of the united states we will have more money to spend than we have ever spent before. and yet that same c.b.o. estimates it will run a budget

deficit if we keep sequester, if we allow the revenue that occurred in january of over $850 billion. now, at some point you have to reconcile the highest level of income and at $850 billion deficit. we don't have a revenue problem here. we have a spending problem. of historic and massive proportions. this is one small step in the right direction to try and get that under control. we look forward to what our friends in the senate do. we look forward to what the administration does. and we look forward to having a conversation over not just this bill but the next several months. we are going to have that opportunity when the senate finally presents a budget. we'll present a budget. the administration for the fourth time in five years will be late but shorely will at some point present a budget. the american people can look at all of those. we'll have an opportunity for a great debate and you suspect we'll continue to try to adjust

things as we move forward to get ourselves more in balance. let's recognize the reality. we have had $4 trillion deficits in a row. we have with these cuts and with additional revenue an $850 billion deficit at the minimum in front of us. maybe that ought to be the focus. i can assure my friends we all talk a lot about polling and what the american people think. i can assure you i have done a lot of polling in my lifetime, they think the federal government is too big. they think it spends too much. and they would like us to take less of their money, not more. if we get into a real debate here, i suspect the american people will say figure out a way to live within the highest level of income in american history as opposed to coming up -- to us and asking us for more. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, last night the f.a.a. announced that

173 air traffic control towers will be closed by april 7. so i would say to my colleague, tell the communities whose economies will be devastated by the fact they will no longer have air service this is not a cut. they will be losing an esection service -- essential service that is vital for businesses to thrive across this country. that is a cut. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. butterfield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. butterfield: let me thank the gentleman for yielding time this morning. let me associate myself with the last comments made by mr. mcgovern. he's absolutely correct. the american people are beginning to feel the impacts of sequestration. my friends on the other side of the aisle are always talking about we don't have a revenue problem, we don't have a revenue problem. we have a spending problem in this country. mr. speaker, we have a deficit problem in this country, and there are two ways at least where we can address the deficit.

we can address it with more revenue, which is what i strongly recommend, and we could also address it with very important cuts. we've got to have a balanced approach to deficit reduction. and so i have come to the floor today to strongly oppose this rule. mr. speaker, i don't like the way h.r. 933 evolved. we read about it in the news media this weekend. we returned to washington on monday afternoon and there it was posted. we were told the rule would be taken up today and we would be voting on it tomorrow. then a snowstorm came into this capitol city and now we are vote -- capital city and we are voting on the rule and c.r. today and leaving town. that is not the way to do it. the republican majority has been elected to move with the bill that provides new funding levels and flexibility to just the department of defense and military construction and veterans. while keeping the antiquated funding levels for the remaining 10 appropriations bills. mr. speaker, i believe that if

we got serious about this and rolled up our sleeves, we could make it happen. i cannot help but to remember the days when i was a trial judge back in north carolina, from time to time, mr. speaker, we would have difficult cases, but we would send the jury in the room. we would lock the door. and we would make them deliberate and more times than not they would come out with a verdict. that's the way we need to engage in this business. this is too serious, mr. speaker, to have a political dimension to this debate. we've got to have common sense. we've got to make it happen. i urge my colleagues to oppose this rule and i urge its defeat. we must get to the real work of governing in this country and stop the political theater. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cole: getting back to the big picture for a moment. as my friend know we are going to spend about $3.5 trillion this year in the federal budget.

these dreaded cuts in terms of the total budget amount to 2.4% of all spending. 2.4% of $3.5 trillion. i suspect the american people think you could find a better way to distribute those cuts than closing our towers. i agree with my friend, mr. mcgovern. one of those towers is in my district. i certainly understand t i have 20,000 federal defense employees in my district. so i'm quite aware of the problems with the distribution of the cuts. i'll leave it to my friends on the other side of the aisle to argue whose idea this was. and what purpose and how it was constructed. but it's hardly as if the president of the united states, our friends in the senate, were innocent bystanders in all of this. we tried twice last year to sit down and renegotiate. we moved something through. we have said repeatedly this year we are willing to sit down

and renegotiate the cuts. to me that's compromise. the president talks a lot about a balanced approach. two months ago he got a lot of revenue. that's his side of the equation. this time it should be cuts. that's an appropriate balance. we'll sit down and renegotiate where they should come from. we think we have got some great ideas. but they are going to occur. and they are the first and appropriate step for getting our fiscal house back in order. so when my friends want to work with us about the distribution, i know they'll find a willing negotiating partner in the speaker, and until such time we'll follow the course that the president laid out, advocated for, and signed into law. if he wants to revisit that, we agree with him. let's revisit it and redistribute it. but the cuts are going to occur. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas is

recognized for two minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the distinguished gentleman for his words. i associate myself with mr. mcgovern. but also i do acknowledge mr. cole, good friend. one that you have certainly joined us on bipartisan issues as has already been stated. i thank you for that. but i do want to in essence gently correct the gentleman on whether or not the president got his, it's now time for us to get ours. i think what we have missed is this is an ongoing process. an ongoing process to find the right balance of revenue and the right balance of cuts. let it also be on the record that we have cut over $1 trillion already. and i can tell you that it's come out of the backs of poor people. let me give you a resounding excitement breaking news. the dow hit the highest amount yesterday in points, 14,253.77. the highest in history. wall street is celebrating while the backs of poor people are

being broken. this is not a rule that should pass today. we should remain snowed out. we shouldn't even be here. snow us out until we can get the right kind of balance. this is the bill that we received in last than 24 hours and they are asking us to vote on it. and while we are asked to vote on it, let me suggest to you that the long-term unemployed will be particularly impacted. they will suffer $130 a month will come out of their unemployment. it will be brutal to government workers and job training programs. those that we slash an burn, but these are the men and women that work and do the business of government. women who are caretakers, they'll find 50% of them are more likely to hold government jobs will be impacted. $725 million will come out of poor people, children's education, and then those of us who support community health clinics, $120 million of federal support for community health centers will drop. and 900,000 patients will not be

served. 540,000 doses of vaccine will not be there. the point is that when it comes to the backs of those who will bear the brunt, it will be those who need clean energy, education, research, and development. i introduced h.r. 900 -- the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma. the time of the gentlelady has expired. ms. jackson lee: it is on the backs of poor people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume for the for other purposes of response. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cole: thank you. first i appreciate my good friend, who i have worked with on a number of things, most recently the violence against women act, where she certainly ably represented the bill in the rules committee and on the floor. i appreciate that very much. i'm going to gently correct in return, when we talk about cuts that were previously agreed to, with all due respect to my friends, most of those cuts still haven't even taken place.

you look at them they are far in the future in the 10-year window. these were not cuts, by the way, that the two sides found contentious. this was the easy stuff they all agreed to right up front. it wasn't as if it was some concession. the real discussion was in the next round of cuts where the supercommittee wasn't able to come to an agreement. even there there were 600 or $700 million in agreed upon, quote, cuts, that both sides acknowledge. there just wasn't agreement about revenues, so the cuts didn't occur. we are here today. and just as the tax increases were written into law, effectively, with the bush tax cuts sunset in january, these cuts are also written into law. again, since they are written into law they are going to occur. we are willing to sit down with our friends and redistribute where they come from, we think that would be the prudent thing to do. we tried to do it twice last year. didn't work out. nobody was interested in talking to us last year.

the president wasn't interested in putting a proposal on until -- if anything recent days. i really couldn't still tell you what it truly is. i will finish my point and be happy to yield to my friend. i think that the reality is we ought to recognize, i urge my friends on my side of the aisle recognize as we aproshe the end of the bush tax cuts -- approach the end of the bush tax cuts, they are going to end. whether we like it or not, that's the case that's going to be that way. that's what's going to happen here. we would rather renegotiate, minimize the harm, spread that 2.4% over the entire $3.5 trillion budget. i suspect our friends would like to do that, too, over time, and hopefully we can arrive at that. i look forward to continuing the dialogue. but the cuts are going to be secured. this legislation will move through the house, and then i'm

sure something will move through the senate and we'll sit down and negotiate in a bipartisan, bicameral manner w that i yield to my good friend from texas. . ms. jackson lee: all of us want to engage in this kind of civil discussion. i assume if we all got locked up in a room we would find the compromise. let me indicate that revenues and cuts you just spoke about are over a 10-year period but are still cut. this bill not only adds to that but the sequester adds to that as well. this will have a heavy, heavy impact on vulnerable and innocent persons. the cuts are going forward and so my question is why can't we continue the discussion on how we balance cuts and revenues? we must operate the government. mr. cole: reclaiming my time, if i may. i think the gentlelady asks a good question, and i look forward to working with my friends on the other side of the aisle. i actually think today is the beginning of a process where

that will happen. one of the reasons why i commend chairman rogers for moving early. we are not in a last-minute crisis atmosphere here. we are not trying to jam our friends in the senate. we want them to move as quickly and expeditiously as we can. we'd like to move toward the discussion and talks with them. i'm sure the administration will be involved in that. this is regular order. while that's going on, we can engage in a normal appropriations process for fiscal year 2014. so as difficult as this is, and we've been through a difficult time in recent months and over the last year, plus, honestly, this may be the first step back in the right direction. again, i respect my friend has a different point of view on this, but i'm talking what i would view as political reality in just as my friends on the other side of the aisle a few weeks ago. let's just be reasonable and rational about how it is. we are going to have a lower deficit because of that. i think that's one of the

reasons that wall street's doing well. but who knows. always hard to predict what's going on there. ms. jackson lee: if the gentleman will yield? mr. cole: with that i'm going to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. mr. connolly: i thank the speaker and i thank my friend for yielding. it's really a shame we've come to this point where the dysfunction of this congress is going to inflict harm on families, on the military, on communities throughout america. i have great respect for my friend from oklahoma. he has reached across the aisle. he has tried to work with us to find common solutions. but he knows the truth. the truth is that discretionary domestic spending, as a percentage of our g.d.p., is at the lowest it's been since the eisenhower administration. he knows that the federal tax

burden, the revenue side of the ledger is the lowest since harry truman was in the white house. he knows that the gap between spending and revenue is -- has grown since the last time we balanced the budget under bill clinton when it was much closer. we have to get our arms around spending but not in a mindless meat ax way. it's going to hurt america, and to bake it in this continuing resolution, in my view, is a terrible mistake. and if the republican side of the aisle wants to embrace sequestration as its own with this fairy tale that it's just a haircut, it's not much, especially when you look at the overall size of federal spending, that will come as news to communities, to travelers, to consumers, to the american public who will fact will feel the brunt of the sequestration in this continuing resolution. the other aspect of this continuing resolution and why i oppose this rule, mr. speaker, is that once again we treat the

federal employee like a punching bag. for the third year in a row we freeze their salary. they've already contributed and they were the only one that contributed to the federal reduction to the tune of $100 billion in lost wages and benefit cutbacks. we use the freeze on congress as a subterfuge to get at their own colleagues. i ask my colleagues to support my bill, to freeze the congress salaries, h.r. 366. i have people that have co-sponsored it. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to agree with my good friend from virginia on his point about discretionary spending. this is probably an area that he and i would find a considerable amount of common ground in. we do think, i certainly do think that far too much of this

is coming out of discretionary side of the budget. particularly -- i would say across the board. i have indian health facilities in my district that will be hit. i have the national severe storm laboratory in my district that will be hit. i understand why my friend makes those points. he's making a very important point. we've been willing to go where no man's gone before, the nondiscretionary side of the budget. the ryan budget, which we may like or not like, or the ryan plan on medicare, is a real attempt to deal where we all in this room know where the real problem is and that's on the nondiscretionary side of the budget. i hope that our friends put their ideas out there. the president has put -- sometimes withdrawn -- but put interesting things on the table. we never seem to get there. whether it's change c.p.i., raising age gradually in our programs. the distinguished minority leader has refused to ever do

that, whether it's social security, medicare, medicaid. it's been we're going to defend this ground. we're not going to make any changes. at the end of the day that's the kind of thing that we're going to happen to deal with. as an appropriator, as somebody who, like my friend from virginia, sees the impacts of these discretionary reductions and the squeezing down, you know, i think that is the solution. i think that's at least a big part of the solution. so i hope, and i have no illusions we are going to settle all our deficit problems with this bill, but we are taking a step in the right direction and hopefully our friends and our side as well will expand the dialogue to include the nondiscretionary side of the budget in the weeks and months ahead and we can begin to arrive at common ground. but we can't simply allow social security, medicare, medicaid, food stamps, farm programs -- i'll put some of our say credit cows on the table as well -- to expand by a matter of law without any

effort to look at them. we've offered to do that. we've actually written a budget to do that. we've gone through the political fires. i can assure my friend you can do that and still survive as a majority and we're anxious to do that going forward. and if we can find willing partners in that, both on the other side of the aisle, the other side of the rotunda and at the end of pennsylvania avenue, i think we're going to be on the road to doing something. with that i reserve the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. andrews: at least over time 750,000 people will lose their jobs as a result of sequester. who are these americans? they are federal employees who inspect our food or who inspect toxic waste dumps or who work in the federal court system or for the f.b.i.

but they're also people in small businesses around the country and big businesses. it's the woman who owns a software company who has a contract with noaa, the national weather service, that gets canceled or cuts back. it is the small business person who's a utility contractor on a transportation project to be funded by federal dollars. these are real people who over time will be very badly affected by this. we have a plan that would save these jobs but continue to reduce the deficit. it's mr. van hollen's plan. that plan says we should save an equal amount the sequester would save by cutting back on corporate welfare to huge oil companies, by cutting back on corporate welfare for huge agri businesses that own land and get payments from the federal taxpayers through the ag department, and that anyone who

makes more than $2 million a year should have to pay at least 30% of their income under the tax code and not exploit loopholes and deductions. today would be the right day to take a vote on that plan. my friends on the other side would probably oppose the plan. that's obviously within their right, but the house has not yet taken up any proposals to save these 750,000 jobs. that is wrong. you can disagree with our proposal. you can try to amend our proposal. you can try to do better than our proposal, but for the house not to take one vote on saving these 750,000 jobs is wrong. we will have an opportunity on the previous question vote to remedy that wrong. a no vote -- i thank my friend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. andrews: a no vote on the previous question would mean that this body could take an up

or down vote on whether or not to save these 750,000 jobs while still reducing the deficit in the ways that i just talked about. look, the basic job that we have around here is to make decisions and take votes. if you vote with us, that's fine. if you vote against us, that's fine. that's democracy. we should celebrate it. but to fail to take a vote is to avoid that responsibility. let's accept our responsibility to turn off the sequester, save those 750,000 jobs and vote no on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: thank you, mr. speaker. just very quickly, if i may yield myself some time -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cole: i want to thank my friend and i can assure you that we take this very seriously as well. have lots of federal employees, and the real job loss won't be there. they will be furloughed.

the real job loss will be in the private sector. that's why we need to sit down and talk about entitlement costs. with respect to my friend, mr. van hollen, my friends on the other side of the aisle, i don't think that proposal would pass. i certainly wouldn't vote for it. i want that very much in the record. but if our friends want to do something, they do have control of the united states senate. that's a body that can do whatever it wants to do. we'll see what happens going forward. but again what i'm pleased with, i think this is the beginning of a real discussion, the beginning of a real dialogue. we are going to do some good things in terms of giving flexibility to the defense department and our friends that deal with military construction and v.a. we're anxious to hear ideas on the other side, but we are going to reduce spending and we're going to reduce it not by an extraordinary amount but by 2.4% of the entire $3.5 trillion federal budget and we're willing to renegotiate

where those cuts come from. i think that's a pretty reasonable -- mr. andrews: if the gentleman will yield? mr. cole: i will certainly yield. mr. andrews: i'm not sure anyone has control over the united states senate. but i am sure of this. last week a proposal very similar to the one that i just talked about would save those 3/4 of a million jobs, got 51 votes on the floor of the senate, a majority, but of course under their peculiar rules it required 60 votes to go forward. so understand this. a majority of the united states senate in fact adopted a plan that i talked about. we should get a chance to do the same thing. mr. cole: well, reclaiming my time. i'd be happy if the united states senate decided to operate collectively instead of individually. i didn't write their rules. we sent a lot of our friends over there and neither of them seem to be willing to sit down and change the rules to make them a more functional body.

but i'm glad we moved a discussion to where we both agree away from our adversaryial discussion -- adversarial discussion. to senator reid and senator mcconnell, i think they'll produce a product to make sure that something will happen that shouldn't happen. i don't think the president wants the government to shut down. i don't think our friends in the senate want it to shut down. this is actually a pretty good day. it may not be a perfect bill from my friend's standpoint. it may not be a perfect bill from some on my side's standpoint. mr. andrews: if the gentleman will yield? mr. cole: i will in a moment. we will leave open an avenue of discussion with our friends in the senate. i'm sure the president will be

involved in the discussion at some point. with that i yield to my friend from new jersey. mr. andrews: mr. speaker, my friend reflected on criticism of those in the senate. i agree. the senate did something we've not done. they put a republican plan on the senate floor to end the sequester and save those 750,000 jobs and a democratic plan on the floor to save those 750,000 jobs. i think we owe it to our constituents, to our country to do the same thing. this is the opportunity to do that. mr. cole: well, we'll have an opportunity. reclaiming my time. we'll have an opportunity in the previous question. we'll see how the majority shakes out on that issue. i'm sure my friends will regard that as effectively a vote on their proposal. with that i reserve the balance of my time, mr. speaker. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: can i inquire of the gentleman if he has any additional requests for speakers? mr. cole: i'm prepared to close. mr. mcgovern: i'm prepared to close as well. mr. speaker, i would say to my friend, the gentleman from

oklahoma, the time to act has long since passed. we are now in sequester. budgets across the board and mindless, senseless way are being slashed. air traffic control towers are being shut down. that will result in adverse impact on local economies, we will lose jobs. you have heard over and over that we are told that we should expect a job loss of 750,000 people. what do they do? they lose their job, and where is the future? where is the savings that my friends were talking about when you throw people out of work. my friends talked about tough choices. off to have -- i assume tough choices. health clinics are going to be reduced in their funding. you are going to have transportation projects reduced in their funding. you have cuts in w.i.c. cuts in head start.

you are going to have cuts in programs that benefit the most vulnerable people in our community. none of us in this chamber has to absorb a tough choice. it's the people we represent. it's the people in this country who are getting -- going to get -- getting shafted as a result of this sequestration. and so we are -- the time to act has long since passed. mr. van hollen time and time and time again, not once, not twice, not three times, but four times tried to bring an alternative to the house floor. all he's asked for is that we have an up or down vote on his proposal. and four times he has been rejected. by contrast this year my friends have brought up not a single alternative to avoid sequestration. all we are asking for is a little democracy here on the floor of the house of representatives. a chance for us to debate and have an up or down vote not on a procedure, on a procedural motion, but on the actual

legislation. up or down. and we have been denied that. my friends, if they have an alternative they want to bring, fine. bring that up, too. we'll have two votes. and we could debate our priorities so the american people know where we stand. mr. speaker, if we defeat the previous question, i'm going to offer an amendment to the rule to ensure that the house votes on mr. van hollen's bill to replace the sequester and on mr. connolly's bill to freeze pay for members of congress for the next two years. i ask unanimous consent to nsert the text of the amendment in the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. mcgotsche: i just want to again -- mr. mcglovepb i just want to again say to -- mr. mcgovern: i just want to say again to my friend it is important for them to appreciate the devastation of the cuts. head start, it will cut $400 million, resulting in potential loss of 70,000 head start slots.

job training programs, the c.r. will allow sequestration to cut $282 million, results in hundreds of thousands of unemployed adults, dislocated workers, veterans, young adults, and students losing access to employment services. title 1 grants education of the disadvantaged. the c.r. will allow sequestration to cut $730 million which is the ecivilent of cutting the extra instructional services for more than 2,500 schools serving more than one million disadvantaged children who are struggling academically. special education grants. the c.r. will allow sequestration to cut more than $580 million which is the rough equivalent of shifting the cost of educating nearly 300,000 students with special needs to states and local education agencies. this also may result in more than 7,000 layoffs or teachers aids and other staff serving students with disabilities. childcare, the c.r. will allow sequestration to cut $115 million which would cause roughly 30,000 children to lose

access to childcare, further exacerbating the fact that only one in six children eligible for federal childcare assistance receives it. cancer screenings, the c.r. will allow sequestration to cut funding for cancer screenings resulting in 25,000 fewer breast and cervical cancer screenings for low-income women. i could go on and on. here's the choice. the choice is either this process which my republican colleagues have embraced or the one that mr. van hollen has outlined. one that would say we are not going to balance the budget on the backs of the most vulnerable, on the backs of the needy, on the backs of the middle class. you know what? we are going to get rid of some of these corporate loopholes that my friend on the other side used to be in favor of closing. we are not going to continue to have taxpayer subsidies to big oil companies. we are going to have some balance in our approach to dealing with our deficit. the problem with the approach my friends have outlined, the problem with sequestration is it is not balanced. it is wrong-headed, it is mindless, it is senseless, and

it is cruel. i urge my colleagues to vote no and defeat the previous question and i urge a no vote on the rule and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for three minutes. mr. cole: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to begin by frankly agreeing with my friend. the time to act has long since passed. we tried to act a long time ago. we tried to act in may. nobody in the senate chose to pick up our bill. send us back something different. didn't do anything at all. we tried to act in december. nobody did anything in the senate then. we offered to negotiate with the president for weeks. instead we saw a six weeks, eight week campaign all over the country, no time evidently in the president's busy schedule in city after city at photo-op after photo-op to get on the phone, call the speaker, and say how would you like to come down and talk until the very last day

before sequester when it had became evident this type of political bullying wouldn't work. we believe the time has passed to afpblgt that's why we are acting today. we are actually going to secure the cuts in the legislation that the president advocated for. he originated it a version of that and he signed it into law. and he had 18 months to do something about it. we offered two opportunities in that time frame to do something, and the speaker has always been available to sit down with the president and do something. but we are going to take a small step in the right direction. let's not overestimate what we are doing. we could probably take more pride in this than is warranted. our friends i think are shouting more alarm than is necessary. this is $85 billion in a $3.5 trillion deficit. 2.4%. ought to be able to do that in

our sleep. quite frankly we are willing to sit down and renegotiate with our friends where they come from. we are not willing to renegotiate the total amount of the money involved. over time it does add up to $1.2 trillion. that's a lot of money. that's a lot of money. but it's not anywhere near what it's going to take to get our budget in balance. i look forward to the debates we are going to have on that in the budget discussions ahead. and -- let's right now while we have that debate, while we go through that process, take the responsible step the president urges us to take and we all agree on. make sure the government doesn't shut down while we have our discussions and sort out our differences. i applaud chairman rogers earn chairman sessions for making that possible. particularly for bringing this bill in a timely fashion. giving us enough time where we are not going to be jammed. i know our friends in the senate are going to try to do the same thing. they are going to produce no doubt a different product. that's fine. we'll negotiate it out. we'll avoid a government shut

down. we'll secure these savings for the taxpayers of the united states. and we will take the next step in a longer discussion. mr. speaker, in closing i'd like to say i believe we have had a good debate on the rule. i believe the underlying bill provides the american people with the hope that we can do the basic functions that we were sent here to accomplish. funding the government. to close i would urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time has expired. the question is on ordering the previous question. as many as are in favor will signify by saying aye. those opposed will say no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of ordering the yeas and nays will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote.

pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of adoption of the resolution. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 227. the nays are 188. the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it much the ayes have it. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those in favor of a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 212. the nays are 197. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will come to order.

the house will come to order. the house will come to order. business will not start until the house is in order. the house will be in order. members will clear the well. take your conversations off the floor. for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous

consent that the committee on house administration be discharged from further consideration of house concurrent resolution 14 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the house will be in order. the clerk will report the the clerk: house resolution providing the use of the rotunda in the capitol. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the concurrent resolution? without objection, the concurrent resolution is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi rise? >> i ask unanimous consent that the committee on house administration be discharged from further consideration of house concurrent resolution and ask for its immediate consideration in the house.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the house will be in order. business will not resume until the house is in order. members will take their conversation off the floor. the clerk will report the concurrent resolution. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 20, concurrent resolution permitting the use of the rotunda of the capitol for a ceremony to award the con fregsal gold medal to professor mohammed yunis. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the concurrent resolution? without objection, the concurrent resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the

gentleman from kentucky seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the consideration of h.r. 933 and that i ama -- and that i may include tabular material on the same. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> pursuant to the rule adopted earlier, i call up the bill h.r. 933, a bill making appropriations for the department of defense, department of veterans' affairs and other departments and agenciers in fiscal year ending september 30, 2013, and for other purposes and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 933, a bill making appropriationers in department of defense, the department of veterans' affairs and other departments and agencies for the fiscal year

ending september 30, 2013, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 99, the amendment printed in house report 113-12 is adopted and the bill as amended is considered read. the gentleman from kentucky, mr. rogers, and the gentlewoman from new york, ms. lou re, will each control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rogers: i rise to present h.r. 933, the department of defense and military construction and veterans affairs appropriations and full year continuing resolution for fiscal year 2013. our nation faces a three-pronged threat to its finances. as we deal with sequestration, the debt ceiling, and most immediately, a looming government shutdown.

this bill takes the risk of a government shutdown off the table. funding the government for the remainder of the fiscal year while helping maintain our national security and providing our troops and veterans with consistent, adequate funding. first and foremost, this bill contains fiscal year 2013 appropriations bills for the department of -- department offings defense an veterans affairs. these bills crafted by chairman bill young, chairman of the defense appropriations subcommittee, and very handily done, these bills passed the house with broad, bipartisan support last year, they've been negotiated on a bipartisan basis by the house and senate and agreed to by the senate committee. they do not add a cent to the

overall top line of the c.r. and i want to take a minute here to thank bill young and his subcommittee who did such a tremendous job of balancing the interests of the country but with the overriding concern for the security of the country as they drafted and passed on a bipartisan basis the defense appropriations bill. last week, i had the opportunity to ask the joint chiefs of our military if they supported this c.r. package. and the answer was an absolute, whole-hearted yes. in fact, each one of them was asked if it was critical and each one of the joint chiefs said, this is critical. -- critical to the defense of the country. this legislation addresses severe funding constraints that

would put our national security in dire straits. military hospitals would not be built, veterans would not be cared for adequately, and our readiness would be seriously jeopardized. with sequestration now in effect, this bill allows the pentagon some leeway to do it best with what it has. the bill provides $518 billion, the same top level -- top line level as last year. within this top line, accounts have to be reprioritized to ensure adequate investment in critical programs such as operation and maintenance while finding savings in lower priority areas. the legislation right sizes

spending that would otherwise have been wasted. for instance, we eliminate funding for unneeded spare parts and save funding from outdated programs and projects related to operations in iraq. -- in iraq no longer needed. in addition, the bill provides $71.9 billion in discretionary funding for military construction and veterans affairs. to ensure that our veterans get the care they've earned and that the quality of life in our military is continued. this includes an increase of about $2.5 billion in veterans funding, offset by savings in military construction. the remainder of the bill, mr. speaker, funds the rest of the federal government until the end of the fiscal year on september 30. nearly all funding will remain consistent with current levels,

except for the very few exceptions that are needed to prevent catastrophic changes to government programs or to ensure good government. these include provisions allowing critical law enforcement entities to maintain current staffing levels, additional funding for embassy security, and critical weather satellite launches and an extension of the current pay freeze for federal employees including members of the congress. we've also required every single federal agency to provide spending plans to congress to ensure transparency oversight of taxpayer dollars. nearly all the funding in this bill is subject to the president's sequestration bringing the grand total for discretionary spending to around $984 billion.

the bill is designed to help with the damage caused by continually putting off the regular annual appropriations bills but it does not solve the many serious problems caused by these automatic spending cuts in sequestration. a full year continuing resolution is not the way this congress should be appropriating taxpayer dollars. each year, we should assess the needs and excesses of our government and make decisions accordingly in the regular appropriations process. we must return to regular order , pass individual spending bills on time and fulfill our constitutional duty to fund government programs wisely and effectively. to do all of this, we have to have a partner in the senate and we have not had that for these several years. our hope springs eternal that

the senate will help us get back to regular order. in light of the circumstances we face, we must make a good faith effort to provide limit bud fair and adequate funding for vital government programs and services through the end of the fiscal year. it's up to congress to make these decisions to set the course for our financial future. we must act now to make the most of this difficult situation and that starts with avoiding a government shutdown on march 27 and providing for our national defense and our veterans. this c.r. package is the right thing to do, the right time to do it, and it's the fair thing. so i urge, mr. speaker, my colleagues, to show our nation that we can get our work done by supporting this bill.

i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. low -- mrs. lowey: before us contains a defense bill and a military construction veterans affair bill adjusting the f.y. 2012 funding levels to meet f.y. 2013 needs. it is unacceptable that federal agencies and departments covered by the 10 remaining bills would be forced to operate under full-year continuing resolutions based on plans, spending levels enacted 15 to 18 months ago. congress' failure to do our job and pass responsible annual spending bills limits our ability to respond to changing circumstances, implement other

laws enacted by congress and eliminate funding that is no longer necessary. specifically, this bill will delay implementation of the affordable care act scheduled to begin enrolling participants in october. without i.t. infrastructure to process enrollment and payments, verify eligibility and establish call centers, health insurance for millions of americans would be further delayed. last year's levels will hamper enforcement of dodd-frank protections against improper practices in the financial sector. the bill underfunds head start, child care, essential for many working parents who would otherwise have to quit their jobs. the bill fails to strike outdated language allowing h.u.d. to use public housing

agency reserves to fund operations or provide a requested increase to make up for the shortfall resulting in the lowest per unit operating subsidy since 2007 despite rising housing costs. the bill we consider today even denies increases for health care fraud and abuse control and social security disability reviews and s.s.i. eligibility determinations, both of which return more money to the treasury than they cost. and the continuing resolution excludes loan guarantees for jordan necessary to help an important ally stabilize his economy. the effects my colleagues, of these outdated plans and spending levels in the continuing resolution are

compounded by congress' failure to replace sequestration with a balanced, responsible, long-term debt reduction plan. the congressional budget office estimates that sequestration would cut economic growth in 2013 by a third. that's jobs, that's people's lives. last year, our fragile economy struggled to create a total of $2 -- of 2.2 million jobs. c.b.o. says sequestration will wipe out, get rid of, 750,000 jobs, more than a third of all the jobs created last year. now i want to make it very clear, my colleagues, this bill reaffirms sequestration. the terrible impact of those indiscriminate cuts will begin

to take effect. this summer, we can expect significant flight delays, long lines at airports due to furloughs and air traffic controllers, and a hiring freeze and reduced hours for transportation security officers. yesterday, the labor-hhs subcommittee heard testimony from the directors of the national institutes of health and c.d.c. on the detrimental effects these irresponsible cuts will have, include degree clining medical research. fewer child vaccinations, reduced protections against epidemics, just try and explain that to dear friends and neighbors who have children with autism. seniors who are dealing with alzheimer's. friends who have heart, cardiology issues. just try and explain what the national institutes cuts in

research will do in addition to the impact and research on these issues. these are real people who are going to be laid off and impede our future research. all americans rely on timely and accurate weather warnings and forecasts from the national weather service, reduced resources will compromise critical satellites, radar, computer analysis, and modeling. now i am pleased that two bills, the defense bill and the military construction and veterans bill, are the f.y. 2013 bills that were agreed on by the house and senate but my colleagues, let's not forget that sequestration will still strike our national defense even if this bill is enacted. another $46 billion will be subtracted from defense spending. most of the civilian work force

will face significant furloughs, readiness will still face cuts, and defense health care will need to make some very tough choices with scarce resources. mr. speaker, i cannot mr. speaker, i cannot support this bill because it fails to take responsible steps to support the middle class and really -- in really tough economic times or responsibly address the long-term fiscal health of our nation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady from new york, mrs. lowey, reserve? the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: i yield three minutes to the very distinguished and hardworking chairman of the house armed services committee the gentleman from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for three minutes. >> i thank the gentleman, the chairman of the appropriations committee, for yielding, and

thank him for the great work he's done for getting this bill to the floor. likewise the chairman of the defense appropriations subcommittee. they have done yeomen work to help provide for a national defense. mr. mckeon: i agree with much of what the gentlelady from new york, my good friend, said. sequestration is bad. and if we don't pass this c.r., we'll feel worse than the effects of the sequestration, we'll shut down the whole government. nobody wants to see that. and so i commend her for what she says. this is not perfect. but it keeps a lot of people working. i think it's very, very important that we get it done. as chairman of the house armed services committee, i'm happy to see us voting to include a full year appropriations -- defense appropriations bill, as well as full year military construction and veterans affair bill. this is very important. at least we have one committee

that can do regular order still, and i think that is very important. enacting a full year d.o.d. appropriations bill is the first step toward restoring funding for our military which has been whip sod by the dual combination of the sequester and the c.r. we are operating under. none of our currently serving overseas, the chief of the army, navy, air force, marines, including the chief of -- all of the services, in their time have ever operated under a real budget. most of the members of congress haven't served under regular order in seeing how we have really done. so this is a step forward to get us back to regular order. a full year appropriation will allow the service chiefs to cancel programs that we have already canceled in the defense authorization act. it allows them to restore

critical shortfalls in their operation and maintenance accounts, and add back a certain amount of training and flying hours. this legislation does not by any members solve sequestration, but it gives our commanders much needed flexibility and gives us time to work on a house budget that restores funding for our military. let me give you just a couple of quick examples of why we need to pass this package and encourage the other body to return to regular order. because a straight c.r. still pipes funding in certain accounts, the chief of staff of the army is looking at having to curtail 37,000 hours of flying for helicopter pilots at forerutger in alabama where our helicopter pilots go to be trained. that's about 500 to 750 pilots who will not be trained. units preparing now to deploy to afghanistan are not receiving the same training as those who are there now fighting.

that is shameful. we need to restore those accounts. this puts those who are preparing to go at greater risk once they arrive in theater. a full year d.o.d. appropriation which we'll be voting on today, the general will have the authority to restore a lot of those flying hours and critical training for those who are preparing to deploy. just another little example, admiral greener, chief of naval operations has said that if he had the funding that would come from the appropriations bill that we are voting on, he would have the flexibility to move money between accounts. and the navy would be able to keep a carrier strike group and amphibious ready group in the middle east and the pacific through next year. that is crucial to our national security.

i would encourage all of our colleagues to support this bill. it's not the perfect but it takes us a long step toward helping secure our national security. i thank the chairman and the chairman of the subcommittee for their great work, yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: mr. mckeon, i just want to emphasize again that the general and the recent appropriations hearing on the defense bill testified that sequester would be a disaster for the military, and it's unfortunate that we are not ridding ourselves of the prospect of the disaster that the sequester bill will result in. i'm delighted to yield two minutes to my distinguished leader, mr. hoyer. the speaker pro tempore: members are reminded to address their comments to the chair and not to other members of the house.

the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hoyer: i agree with the gentlelady who has just spoken. i want to say to my friend, mr. mckeon, this is neither regular order nor rational policy. it ought to be rejected. this c.r. does nothing to address the irrational cuts to defense and nondefense that the sequester will require. it could be very harmful to our economy and to our national security and place the most vulnerable in america at great risk. we should not allow, my colleagues, our government to shut down. but we cannot do business this way. lurching from one manufactured crisis to the next. when we make agreements, we ought to stick to them. and the agreement was, as the chairman has tried to put forward, and i want to

congratulate him for that, that we would spend on the discretionary side of the budget at about $1.43 trillion. that is not what this bill cost. -- does. it breaks the deal. nobody expected sequester to take place. and we ought to obviate it because it will hurt defense, our national security, and our domestic security. mr. speaker, we made an agreement. we ought to keep it. that's not what we have in this c.r. while the defense funding in this package is something i would like to vote for, and the procedures incorporated in the bill i would like to vote for -- let me say as an aside, that is regular order. because when we usually pass c.r.'s, we do it for house passed bills levels, senate passed bill levels, conference levels, but not at a level a year ago. the reason they amended defense and veterans and milcon is

because it is irrational and they recognize it's irrational as it relates to the national security. you ought to recognize the irrationalness of the rest of the budget. i ask for another minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for a minute. mr. hoyer: while defense funding in this package is something i would like to vote for, it would continue to support the critical national security programs, important in my district but more important than that, important in our country. if congress face to face every manner of manufactured crisis every other month, we cannot govern rationally and it will hurt our people, our economy, and our security. when dysfunction rusts the wheels of congress, it is the american people who suffer. our defense community and the industries will also suffer greatly from the uncertainty that result. i want to vote for appropriation bills that keep the promise we made to each other. i want to vote for appropriations bills that enable

us to limit the negative impact of sequestration on our defense community and the most vulnerable in our society, but this c.r. does not do that. this vote will do nothing to lessen the effects of the see quester whose impact is already being felt -- sequester whose impact slr being felt in my district and throughout the country. that is what tells me to vote no on this c.r. i represent 62,000 federal employees, i do not want this government to shut down. that is an irrational policy even in see questions her. -- sequester. may i have additional 30 seconds. it demands we vote no on this and pass a c.r. that object veeates sequester. i urge my colleagues to defeat this c.r. so we can send a message to those who control this chamber that we have a responsibility to our country and to our people to adopt a balanced fiscal plan to reduce our debt and deficit, invest in the growth of the economy.

that is not what this bill does. i urge its defeat. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: mr. speaker, i now yield four minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. culberson, the chairman of the military construction and veterans' affairs subcommittee on appropriations. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas, mr. culberson, is recognized for four minutes. mr. culberson: thank you, mr. chairman. why are house conservatives so determined to cut the budget and move towards a balanced budget? every five years the chair of the joint chiefs of staff get together and they do a strategic review of the threats facing this nation. the last review they determined that the greatest threat facing our nation was the national debt. that it would ultimately consume us and cause its collapse. just a few days ago celebrated texas independence day, but for the debt that the republican

texas accumulated, we would have continued as an independent nation. that debt caused the collapse of the republic of texas. house conservatives are deeply concerned that the debt, deficits will ultimately crush the united states of america just as it did the republic of texas. how do we even begin to get our mind around it and understand it? think in these terms, if in our personal lives you always pay your mortgage and taxes first. i deduct my mortgage and taxes out of my paycheck. we all do. you have to pay your mortgage and taxes first. america's mortgage and taxes are social security, medicare, medicaid, interest on the national debt, and veterans benefits. those are things we must pay first. that's our mortgage and taxes. when we pay our mortgage and taxes first as a nation, it consumes all our income. all that's left is about $185 billion. we pay social security, medicare, medicaid, interest on the national debt, veterans benefits, that's it. all you're left with is $185 billion america, to run the

government for the entire year. that will only run the federal government for about 10 days. so we as a nation are living on a credit card that will be paid for by our children and grandchildren. a devastating heritage to leave to our kids, and this is why house conservatives are so determined to balance the budget. but we recognize how essential national security is. we recognize how vital it is that our men and women in uniform vow cuss on their mission. -- focus on their mission. focus on defending america around the world. we don't want them to worry about whether they have enough equipment, gas, am mow, they have the best facility in the world, best health care in the world. that's why chairman rogers, chairman young have put together this bill. i'm proud to be a part of it. for my piece the military construction and veterans' affairs portion to make sure that our men and women in uniform can focus on their mission and not look over their shoulder and worry for one moment that they have the full support of the congress, the full support of the american people, to do what they have to do to put their lives on the line to defend this great

nation. this bill is essential because it funds the military at a level for fiscal year 2013 that is sufficient increase that will allow them to absorb these automatic budget cuts, the sequester terminology is confusing to folks, but it is essentially an automatic spending cut across-the-board that all of us as conservatives would like to see -- we want to see those cuts go into place, but we would like to shift them away from the military and move them into other areas, but we've got the situation where conservatives only control 1/3 of 1/-- basically one half of one third of the federal government. we are outnumbered. we are doing our best to get movement towards a balanced budget in a way that is prudent, that won't raise taxes, that protects our military and the veterans and essential needs of this nation. chairman bill young has done a superb job in putting together a defense bill that at this level of funding for the defense

department we determined yesterday from the military chiefs that the chief of staff of the army said by passing this bill today we will solve at least a third of the problems that the army would face as a result of the automatic spending cuts by funding it fiscal year 2013, when the cuts kick in, it's a far softer blow to the military than it would be if we were stuck at 2012 levels. . the chief of naval operations said the difference was night and tai. by passing this bill, it will cushion the blow on the navy dramatically. i look forward to working with my colleagues from all over the country and continue to work to soften the blow on the military but this is essential to make sure our men and women in uniform have everything they need to do their job. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves, the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: i would like to remind my colleagues that the

defense bill will be subject to the $46 billion as a result of sequestration which general odierno says will hollow out the force. i'm honored to yield two minutes to my colleague, mr. david price, the ranking member of the appropriations committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. price: there's a blizzard of evidence against this continuing resolution, yet the republican majority keeps skidding ahead like an out of control snowplow. instead of avoid seg quest ration with a balanced deficit reduction package this c.r. will lock in these devastating cuts, impairing vital government function, redeucing the paychecks of thousands of american workers and undermining our economic recovery, the c.b.o. says it will cost three quarters of a million jobs. earlier this week, mr. speaker, i heard a panel of economist speculate about what future generations will say about what we're going through now. 20 or 30 years from now.

they're likely to be baffled, they said. how could a great nation do such damage to itself. how could political brinksmanship and rinled ideology go so far? in fact that's exactly what my constituents are already asking as they begin to pay the price for this house's failure to do what we were elected to do. just yesterday, the members of the military construction and veterans subcommittee heard testimony from senior officers of each service about the impact of sequestration on their opingses. their message was, don't be fooled. we may be giving them marginally greater flexibility by including the full year 2013 bills for defense and veterans in this continuing resolution but we are not sparing them from the sledgehammer of sequestration. this approach also begs the question, why not pass full-year bills for all departments? the homeland security

subcommittee produced a compromise full-year bill that could have easily been included in this bill. stopgap funding measures only perpetuate economic uncertainty and only prevent us getting to the heart of our fiscal challenge. mr. speaker, we owe this body a better appropriations process and we owe our people a budget that accelerates the recovery and protect ours economic future instead of simply serving a rigid political ideology. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: i yield now to the vice chairman of the house armed services committee, the gentleman from texas, mr. thornberry, three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. thornberry: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the chairman yielding. mr. speaker, i've got to observe that i wish that all of the members on both sides of the aisle who decry sequestration today had voted

with those of us who wanted to target cuts rather than having this across the board approach. this bill, like sequestration, is not what any of us would like if it were up to -- would like. if it were up to me, i would replace the money it takes out of defense and rea the domestic spending as well. imperfect as this measure is, i believe it is absolutely essential that we pass it today and i want to focus for just a second on defense. even if you spend the money on a continuing resolution, it make an enormous difference what vehicle one uses. in a regular appropriations bill you can have the flexibility to meet the current needs with a c.r. you are locked into last year's levels and that brings in

inefficiencies and waste. so just to get the same amount of equipment, for example, it takes more money under a c.r. than it does under a regular appropriation bill. you just had to question -- had the question posed, why do this just for defense? why treat defense differently and have a full appropriations bill for defense and mil cobb and veterans and -- and milcon and veterans and not the rest of it. number one, because we can. both the house and senate appropriators have negotiated a defense appropriation bill. it is there for us to take so chairman rogers has picked it up and included in this -- it in this c.r. a second reason is, the house and senate passed and the president signed into law, the defense authorization bill there is no other area of government that has done that. if you look at what already is the law, passing an appropriation bill to implement it makes sense.

a third reason is that defense took a disproportionate share of the cuts under sequestration. defense is 18 noveget federal budget. it had to absorb 50 noveget cuts. it took a disproportionate share and therefore some relief from the constraints put on by the continuing resolution makes sense, especially for defense. i'd say a fourth reason to treat defense differently is because defense is he first job of the federal government. we send our soldiers and intelligence community personnel to all parts of the world to risk their lives to defend us. and it seems to me that the least we could do is give them the flexibility and support they need to do their job. therefore i think it is absolutely essential for the country's testifies that we pass this appropriation bill and i urge all members on both sides of the aisle to support it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlelady from new york.

mrs. lowey: may i ask how much time remains? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york has 17 minutes. and the gentleman from kentucky has 12 1/2 minutes. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the distinguished ranking member, mr. serrano from new york. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. serrano: as the ranking member of the financial services and general government appropriations subcommittee, i want to outline several areas of concern in this section of the bill. several agencies under the jurisdiction of the subcommittee requested vital changes to the fair fiscal year 2013 budget to help them address pressing needs and blunt the impact of the sequester. unfortunately, all of these changes were rejected by the other side. for instance, no other a-- no asigs -- no additional money is

provided for the securities and exchange commission to continue the inchation of the dodd-frank legislation. we need a strong cop on the beat to prevent financial misbehavior this bill does not help in this regard. under this bill, no additional money is provided to the i.r.s. to help them catch tax cheats or help americans with questions on their tax forms. moreover no additional money is provided to help the i.r.s. administer new tax credits under the affordable care act, something that will only lead to more confusion. once again, republicans are attempting to extend the federal employee pay freeze for the rest of the year. have we -- had we had a full omnibus bill, and i think with a little work we could have had such a bill, we could have addressed many of these concerns. unfortunately this c.r. is inadequate to the needs of our federal government and to the american people and does mot provide all agencies with the needed flexibility to best deal with the sequester. for that and other reasons, i

urge opposition to this bill and i thank the gentlewoman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: i yield one minute to the gentleman from pennsylvania who chairs the transportation and infrastructure committee, mr. shuster,, for the purposes of a -- mr. shuster, for the purposes of a colloquy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shuster: ipt to engage in a colloquy on the medium air defense strategy, maiad. it prohibits funds from being obligated on the mias program. there's been some confusion on the word of the program before us. i would like to intervi it is your intent that the prohibition created in the ndaa is law and not changed or overridden by anything in this bill. i yield to the chairman. mr. rogers: i thank the gentleman for yielding.

i would confirm that the gentleman is correct. prohibition in the ndaa is law and nothing in this bill or report overrides that fact. the language in our report was conferenced last year when the outcome of program in the ndaa was not known. chairman young works closely with the armed variouses committee and it's not our intention to change or override any provision of that bill. the prohibition in their bill is the law. i yield back. mr. shuster: i thank the gentleman for making this clear and yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back, the gentleman from kentucky reserves, the gentlelady from new york. mrs. lowey: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to ms. kaptur, the distinguished ranking member of the energy and water subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. kaptur: i rise to express my appreciation that we are

considering this continuing resolution today and not on the precipice of another government shutdown. chairman rogers and ranking member lowey have been tireless in their efforts to bring a semblance of regular order to the appropriations process and in turn this house. however, i must express my disappointment we are not advancing a government-wide, fully inclusive bill with adjustments to address the pressing needs of the american people across all departments and agencies. despite my appreciation for consideration of this bill by being unable and unwilling to pass all our individually negotiated appropriation bill the congress is doing a great disservice to the american people in not providing the firm guidance necessary for several programs to operate effectively. as ranking member of the energy and water subcommittee, i would like to express my disappointment further that necessary adjustments to 2/3 of our jurisdiction are not included. for example important areas of

cybersecurity as well as reducing the local cost share for the army corps projects related to the revitalization after hurricane sandy. further, the weatherization assistant program ♪ included this vital program is facing significant funding challenges and many states are either out of federal funds entirely or will be out of all federal funds. in order for the program to continue to provide service as blizzards blanket the country and for low income americans to continue to receive savings for heating their home, it would be a real job creator across this country. further the bill does not include the administration's request to increase funding for the advanced manufacturing program for our nation to meet the fierce global competition for manufacturing jobs. the united states must regain its position in global manufacturing. we cannot prosper as a nation of service providers only. i would like to highlight the national nuclear security

administration as an example of where a c.r. does not provide the necessary oversight for government. might i ask for an additional 15 seconds? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for 15 seconds. ms. kaptur: i thank the gentlelady. the agency is plagued by crost increases on nearly every task under its juste diction. fwiven the nature of a continuing resolution, congress is unable to meaningfully weigh in on issues such as these. i appreciate inclusion for the united states corporation and i hope that congress can improve on this bill and i commend our chairman, mr. rogers, and ranking member nita lowey of new york who has been such a phenomenal lead . i yield pack. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: i yield myself one minute and i yield to the gentleman from california, mr.

issa, for the purpose of a colloquy. the speaker: the gentleman is recognized. mr. issa: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, it is my understanding that the office of management and budget submitted a list of proposed anomalies for the pending continuing resolution. is it correct that -- and can you tell me the date that the office of management and budget submitted or transmitted that list? mr. rogers: if the gentleman will yield, you're correct, o.m.b. did submit a list of proposed anomalies on february 18. . mr. issa: can you also tell me if that proposed list included any changes in the provisions in current law regarding what is commonly called six-day delivery and requires a level of service by the post office at the 1983 level? mr. rogers: if the gentleman would yield. o.m.b. did not propose any change to the provisions in current law regarding six-day

mail deliverry. mr. issa: i thank the gentleman. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky yield back. mr. rogers: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york, mrs. lowey, has 13 1/4 minutes. and the gentleman from kentucky has 10 1/2 minutes. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: mr. speaker, i'm delighted to give two minutes to my friend, the distinguished chair of the labor, health, human services, education subcommittee -- chair, ranking member. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. >> i rise in strong opposition to this continuing resolution. ms. delauro: it makes permanent, deep, and harmful across-the-board cuts. cuts that will cross our country hundreds of thousands of jobs, will hamstring our economic recovery. 750,000 jobs according to the congressional budget office, and federal reserve chairman ben bernanke. if you vote yes, you vote for

$400 million in cuts to head start. 70,000 children will lose access. you vote to slash $282 million from job training programs. you vote to cut $730 million from title 1 grants. 2,500 schools will be forced to stop providing this crucial aid to one million children. you are voting to cut over $580 million from special education grants. that shifts the cost of 300,000 students with special needs to state and local education agencies. you vote to cut $150 million from childcare at a time when only one in six of the children eligible for childcare assistance are receiving it. 30,000 more kids will lose this aid. you vote to start implementation of the affordable care act at a time when the health reforms we passed are being implemented.

you vote to cut funding for vaccinations and cancer screenings. these cuts only add to the deep cuts that have already been made. $12 billion since two have been made to labor, education, and health programs. in addition to which the budget control act added another $9 billion and this resolution will add a $7 billion more in cuts to what are critical priorities for this nation. we cannot shortchange all of these fundamental priorities. it is time for this institution to exercise its moral responsibility, use our budget as a vehicle for job creation and economic growth. i urge my colleagues to oppose this dangerous resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentlewoman from connecticut's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: i yield one minute to the chairman of the house

oversight and government reform committee, mr. issa of california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. issa: i thank you, mr. speaker. on february 6 the postal service announced a plan to move to a modified six-day delivery schedule beginning in august. under this plan the post office will continue high quality delivery six days a week using its express and priority mail system. this will include packages and mail under that system and will include vital medicine for our seniors. this change will enable the postal service to save $2 billion a year or more. as the chairman of the authorizing committee, i want to clarify that the authorizing language is consistent with six-day delivery provision in the c.r. under this system announced by the postmaster on february 6. specifically this provision would not prohibit the postal service from implementing this plan of modified six-day delivery service.

i want to confirm further that the president himself had previously called for five-day deliverry. the postmaster is maintaining six-day delivery but using priority and express mail to do so. this is fiscally responsible and consistent with the administration not putting an anomaly into the c.r. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlelady from new york. mrs. lowey: i'm very pleased to yield one minute to the distinguished ranking member, mr. farr, of the agriculture subcommittee of appropriations. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. farr: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, madam chair, for yielding. i have been in congress 20 years and on the appropriations committee not quite that long and never in my life have i seen us in such disarray. this institution has failed to lead the nation. it's failed to get its own act together. we can't do this in a transparent and normal process

by adopting bills. we are operating on these emergency issues like continuing resolutions, sequestration. we've got the nation totally confused. the entire administration of government in the united states confused as to what tomorrow's going to bring. we don't know whether we are going to have enough money or give you back some money, are you going to lay off people, cut their salaries? we are in mass confusion and our states and local governments are depending on us getting our act together. i'm surprised that we are failing to address the needs of this nation. yes we have a huge debt. everybody in this congress has a huge debt in their own life. it's called a mortgage. we figure out a 30-year plan or 15-year plan to pay it off. doing this by c.r. is totally irresponsible. i ask for a no vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: mr. speaker, i reserve.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: mr. speaker, i'm very pleased to yield two minutes to mr. bishop, the distinguished chair -- ranking member of the milcon subcommittee of appropriations. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. mr. bishop: i thank the gentlelady for yielding. mr. speaker, today this body is voting on two updated bills that reflect the needs of f.y. 2013 and 10 outdated plans with outdated spending levels that were enacted over a year ago. we need to complete the process on all the bills not just two. governing by continuing resolution is not governing. furthermore, the legislation before us today does nothing to address sequestration. the failure to address sequestration will be devastating on military construction. for example, the modernization efforts will be delayed. the navy sequestration will

affect 10,000 navy owned and three thousands leasted homes by delaying housing construction and improvements. the air force has made it a goal to delay inadequate housing and sequestration will devil ray that call and cause airmen to continue to live in substandard housing. the most troubling aspect of sequestration to me is the impact it will have on the department of defense's school recapitalization efforts. a comprehensive assessment of d.o.d. dependent schools and construction requirements indicated that 149 out of 189 schools had overall condition rating of poor or failing that required significant recapitalization. sequestration will only exacerbate this problem. these reductions in military construction will only result in substandard facilities by service members and job losses in the construction industry and slow economic growth. i remain hopeful that a balanced solution will win over rigid ideological discussions in the coming weeks so we can restore the irresponsible cuts.

sequestration is bad. this c.r. does not address it. and the none defense related cuts. this is bad for head start, job training. title one. childcare. and loss of w.i.c., and i could go on and on. this c.r. is not the way to govern. however we need to come together across partisan lines and need to find middle ground so we can do what is needed for the american people. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: may i inquire of the time? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky has 9 1/2 minutes. the gentlelady from new york has 8 1/4 minutes. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: mr. speaker, i yield four minutes to the distinguished vice chairman of the defense subcommittee on appropriations. the gentleman from new jersey it

is recognized for four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for four minutes. mr. frelinghuysen: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in support of the resolution. urge its adoption. i would like to commend the chairman of the full appropriation committee, mr. rogers, and the chairman of the defense subcommittee, mr. young, for their determination and perseverance in bringing the completed defense and military construction v.a. bills to the floor for our consideration. this afternoon and this morning. since before the end of last it fiscal year, they have been committed to completing the fiscal year 2013 bills in committee and to bring it to the floor and on to the president's desk for his signature. why? because they understand the damage that would be done to our national security if the department of defense was forced to operate under the funding levels and restrictions placed on them by the fiscal year 2012

bill. by passing this package today, we'll be giving our military leadership additional flexibility to protect their mission and capabilities in this constrained fiscal environment. i would also add that the passage of these matters -- measures today reinforces congress' authority to set policy for the department of defense in important areas such as the air force realignment, retirement of navy ships, etc. and also to make sure we don't cede these sort of decisions only to the executive branch. i'm also pleased that the package also allows additional funds for nuclear weapons modernization to ensure the safety, security, reliability of our nation's nuclear stockpile. this is important aspect of our energy and water appropriations bill. finally i would remind our colleagues that this legislative package does nothing to alter the sequestration that took

effect last friday. simply put, that is a problem, a major problem. five members of the joint chiefs of staff presented their chilling testimony before our subcommittee last week. the chairman referred to earlier. describing how national security would be put at risk if they were forced to make deep reductions in spending for personnel and equipment modernization programs. maintenance will sumplet training for nondeploying soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen, and guardsmen will virtually stop. hardworking civilians will face unnecessary furloughs. the army chiefs of staff testified before our full committee, the general told us of his worry, and i quote, if we do not have the resources to train and equip the force, our young men and women will pay the price potentially with their lives, end of quotation marks. the marine commandant reminded

us that america's allies and enemies are watching to determine whether our country remains able to meet its commitments overseas. he said, and i quote, sequestration used solely as a budget issue would be a grave mistake. so while this measure before us helps our men and women in uniform, the meat ax of across-the-board sequestration hangs in the air over the defense and domestic programs alike. it is now -- it has now been over 300 days since this house passed its first sequestration replacement bill. that was last year. still the president and the senate democrats haven't budged and their only solution appears is to raise taxes for the second time in eight weeks. it's time for real balance. more tax increases won't help working families, create jobs, and protect our troops. while allowing sequestration to continue, it will hurt many working families, terminate hundreds of thousands of jobs,

both public and private, and put our men in uniform at risk. this resolution takes us forward . i support it. it's important for national security. and i urge its adoption. mr. rogers: would the gentleman yield -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. rogers: i yield an additional one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. rogers: would the gentleman yield? mr. frelinghuysen: i yield to the chairman. mr. rogers: while we are waiting for the senate to send us a bill , while we are waiting for the president to send us something to relieve us of sequestration, we have no choice but to pass a continuing resolution to keep the government operating. sequestration, i hope we can deal with in the future, but now we are dealing with whether or not to shut the government down. is that not correct? mr. frelinghuysen: that is correct, mr. chairman. let's keep the government open for business. mr. rogers: i thank the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey yields back. the gentlefr