shut down tonight. tworience says these last to five days. let's hope it does not go longer than that. there could be this vaccination scenario where let's approve a clean debt ceiling raised. we will live to fight another day. the economicsis editor. i appreciate you coming on to join us today. >> thank you for having me on. it was enjoyable. >> you can check out his work at businessweek.com. that is going to be our show today. we'll show you right back here [captioning performed by national captioning institute] tomorrow[captioning performed by national captioning institute] 7:00 a.m.. now we'lltake you like to be house [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

the speaker pro tempore: -- the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. o lord, we give you thanks for giving us another day. at the beginning of a new workweek we use this moment to be reminded of your presence and to adapt the resources need by the members of this people's house to do their work as well as it can be done. may they be led by your spirit in the decisions they make and be mindful of the millions of americans who rely upon them to consider the welfare of the nation in their negotiations of this day. all this day and through the week may they recall your words spoken through the profits to be mindful of the most vulnerable among us and so to do their best to find solutions to pressing issues facing our nation.

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 there off. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina rise. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule 1, i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. ms. foxx: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on a grounds that a quorum is not present and make a point of order a quorum is not present. the speaker: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. the pledge of allegiance today will be led by the gentleman from colorado, mr. gardner. mr. gardner: 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 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. jones: mr. speaker, -- mr. wilson: every day i appreciate concerned constituents reaching out to me expressing their very real experiences with the health care takeover. jennifer says obamacare will put us out of business and make health insurance unaffordable for our family. charlotte writes i do not feel our economy can afford obamacare. i am retired with a history of lung cancer and my follow-up care will be denied under this plan. terry pleads do whatever you can to stop this. it would be an oppression of the people of this country both in terms of health care and jobs. sara has valid concerns for the

nation's future. our company has already spent time and money to be client with the plan but there are many what ifs, this cannot be a funded plan. melissa is correct, free ticket, no show. putting people in need of risk. i am grateful the house is making every effort to protect the american people from the unsustainable, unaffordable health care takeover law which destroys jobs. in conclusion, god bless our troops, we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition. >> mr. speaker, i rise to ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, 12 hours, in about 12 hours we threaten to shut this government down. now is the time to exhibit leadership, mr. speaker. mr. bera: -- you are the leader of this body and democrats and republicans

so we have to take the best ideas out of both parties. today negotiations can't take place just between conservative republicans and tea party republicans. i stand here ready to work with you, mr. speaker. we have ideas. mr. bera: let's take the best ideas out of both parties, put them together, and put the american people first. this is the united states of america. the first name in our country is united. we've got to stop fighting and we have to start fixing these problems. we have to come together and put we the people first. the american people. take the best ideas as democrats and republicans and let's start working together, mr. speaker. my office is opened and i stand ready to work. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio, the speaker e. seek recognition? the speaker: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the speaker: mr. speaker, my colleagues, as i travel around my district and around the country, the american people are worried about their job, they are worried about their incomes rising, because they

are all under pressure. the economy's not growing. why isn't it growing? one of the issues that is standing in the way is obamacare. the fact that nobody knows what the rules are, employers scared to death to hire new employees, cutting the hours of many of their current employees, and for what reason? this law is not ready for prime time. the house has done its work. we passed a bill on saturday night. sent it to the united states senate that would delay obamacare for one year, and would eliminate permanently the medical device tax that is costing us tens of thousands of jobs that are being chipped overseas. -- shipped overseas. senate decided not to work yesterday. my goodness, if there is such an emergency, where are they? it's time for the senate to listen to the american people just like the house has listened to the american people and pass a one-year delay of obamacare and permanent repeal

of the medical device tax. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. mcnerney: mr. speaker, the climate change panel published a latest report claiming a climate change is happening and it is the result of human activity. the report was produced by 259 scientists from 39 different countries over the last six years. it is the most comprehensive and authoritative assessment of the earth's changing climate. the report shows that climate change is real and shows the urgency to reduce humankind's co-2 emissions. scientists now have a 935% confidence that their findings are correct. mr. speaker, the science is not up for debate. human climate change is happening. the evidence is overwhelming. science shows that if we fail

to curb our carbon emissions we will face catastrophic consequences. we cannot continue to ignore this overwhelming science. let's work together to reduce our co-2 emissions and prevent the most severe weather event. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek riggs in? -- recognition? ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. just hours before critical deadline for this country, the democrat senate is m.i.a., house republicans sent them a second legislative proposal to keep the government opened on saturday evening, and the senate is sitting on it. they have yet to take action or even come in to work. make no mistake, the house is committed to keeping the government opened. we are open to compromise. we know that's required of a congress comprised of a republican house and democrat senate. that's why we have taken steps to come to the middle and find

common ground. most recently proposal to keep the government opened fully funds critical services, protects troop pay, provides fairness for all americans under obamacare, and permanently stops obamacare's medical innovation tax. there is so much potential for bipartisan efforts to advance this legislation in the senate. senator reid needs to bring up the proposal and adopt an attitude that is broader than our way or the highway. there is time left for us to work together. the senate needs to hustle. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition? are you asking for unanimous consent? >> yes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. blumenauer: mr. speaker, as we approach the republican manufactured government shutdown by sending a proposal to the senate they know is unacceptable, it is not workable there's an opportunity for republican colleagues to show that they are serious and

not cynical. they could eliminate from their budget the savings of a half trillion dollars that the obamacare would generate. if they are serious and not cynical, they could bring their own spending bills to the floor . remember, they abruptly stopped working on the spending bills last summer as they figured out that the t-hud bill was so bad their own members wouldn't vote for it. if they are truly serious about working in a cooperative fashion and negotiating our differences, then the republicans should allow a conference committee to be appointed to work out the differences between the house and senate. if you're serious about working together to solve problems, why don't you work together to solve problems? thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute.

revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. today i rise to honor one of my constituents from henderson county, jane calvo, on her retirement after nearly 26 years in a career with the federal service. she spent the early part of her career in the foreign service with the state department for nearly four years she served in the u.s. embassy in costa rica. after some time away, she served an exceptional district case worker for one of my predecessors, the former representative, charles taylor, for the entire eight terms of his service in congress. most recently since 2007 she has worked at the social security administration in western north carolina. she first moved to henderson county 35 years ago, and her record of service to our nation and her various roles merits the highest commendation. i'm proud to have her as a constituent. madam speaker, today i wish her all the best in her retirement

where she will have more time to spend with her husband of 40 years, and her two adult sons on behalf of the 11th district, i thank her for her distinguished career of service to this great country. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> instead of working with democrats to prevent a shutdown, house republicans have passed two bills that have no chance of becoming law and are the 42nd and 43rd votes on undermining the affordable care act. mrs. lowey: while the old saying goes, if at first you don't succeed, try, try again, i say to my colleagues across the aisle, stop trying to shut down the government of the united states of america. democrats have offered a

compromise in which republicans get the spending levels they want. it is time to stop pandering to the tea party and do what is right. pass the senate compromise. avoid a shutdown driven solely by radical republicans. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. gardner: about a week ago one of the chief proponents of the president's health care bill in colorado said this, your health insurance plan is being canceled and that's a good thing. yet, president obama said, if you like your health plan, you will be able to keep your health plan. period. over the past month thousands of people around colorado and this country have started receiving letters that their health insurance plan that they liked, that they were promised to be able to keep, notices they are being canceled.

we heard promises from the president that they could keep it. yet here we are. cancellation after cancellation. the house has passed legislation to keep the government opened but to make sure that obamacare doesn't continue to be the drain on our economy. let's do the right thing. let's pass a bill. fund the government. keep obamacare from doing harm to the american people. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: address the house for one minute, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman seek unanimous consent? mr. pallone: yes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. i heard the speaker say that -- house has done its work by delaying obamacare. i'd like to remind the speaker and all my colleagues on the g.o.p. side that the work that has to be done is to pass a budget to keep the government opened. the issue of obamacare is over. it was resolved in the last presidential election when the president was re-elected and said he was going to continue

with it. why do we continue to talk about obamacare? i assure my colleagues on the republican side the people in my district are clamoring for obamacare. they want to sign up so they can get health insurance, affordable health insurance. that's not what we should be litigating here today. the fact of the matter is that republicans are saying it's my way or the highway. they are saying if you don't agree to delay obamacare, we are not going to pass a budget and shut the government down. that is not leadership. they are in charge. they are in the majority here. they are supposed to do their business and not try to go to the 45th and 46th vote on obamacare. i could sit here and say, well, i'm not going to vote for a budget unless you agree to pass gun safety legislation. that's not the way this place is supposed to operate. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one minute.

mr. mica: i thank the speaker his morning. my colleagues and fellow members of congress, 10:00, 10:15 in the morning, where's the united states senate? i was here until let's see, 12:30 yesterday morning. as i recall we passed a bill to keep the government opened. we passed a bill that had compromise. most republicans voted over 40 times to repeal obamacare, but we agreed to just a one-year delay in implementation. the president has already agreed to a delay of a year for employers. why not for the american people in a train wreck that's about to happen to try to get our act together because people do need health care. where was the united states senate yesterday? i say they were a.w.o.l., they

were not here. they don't come in until 2:00 today, and then they'll jam a bill through the house and senate and try to make it look good. 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 north carolina seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, we are just a day away from opening of obamacare exchanges, it seems like every day there is more bad news that comes out about the health care law. but the american people won't be singing once obamacare begins is a far cry from what they were promised. american people were promised obamacare would be more affordable. mr. holding: a promise there would be more choices, promised more coverage. for many americans it is already proving to be the opposite. mr. speaker, my home state of north carolina is expected that individual market rates will triple for young people and

quadruple for young men. recently my office received a call from a man whose provider told him that his family's preums were being raised to over $800 a month. the administration is not ready for this. small businesses are not ready for this. doctors and health care professionals are not ready for this. mr. speaker, the american people are not ready for this. and they do not want this. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, where, oh where, has the senate gone? where oh where can they be? with time so short and issues o long, where oh where has the senate gone? the house has offered a compromise. we have passed legislation to fund the government and postpone obamacare for year. but the senate and president

refuse to work together, refuse to negotiate, refuse to compromise, refuse to talk to us. while we were here until nearly 1:00 a.m. sunday morning, the senate was gone. the president, according to "the new york times," played golf over the weekend. so the president will negotiate with the iranians. the president will negotiate with the russians about syria. but the president and senate will not talk to the house. aren't americans as important as syrians, russians, and iranians? i guess the senate and the president have other priorities. but their inaction of talking to us will cause a shutdown. where oh where has the senate gone? where oh where can they be? with time so short and issues so long, where oh where has the senate gone? that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina -- north dakota seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cramer: thank you, mr. speaker.

the democrats who run this town seem to be in denial about the unworkibility of this health care law. the president has said it's working exactly the way it's supposed to. and harry reid has said it's wonderful. if it's so wonderful why does the administration continue to issue delay after delay of key provisions for key constituencies? the truth is this law is not ready for prime time for anyone. what's more, it's not fair. not only is it not fair to those who own a business, it's not fair to those who work for one. frankly it's not fair for anyone at all. house republicans are simply requesting a one-year delay in its implementation for everyone. that seems fair. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. petri: thank you, mr. speaker. american's health care system needs reform. there is no denying that. when the law signed by this

president is not the answer most americans are looking for. we know health insurance is too expensive. the average american family has seen their premiums rise by over $3,000 since 2008. but under obamacare, premiums could increase by as much as 413%. we know that young people in america are especially vulnerable. but under obamacare young americans could end up paying 19% to 30% more for their insurance. we know that far too many of our fellow americans are left with no insurance coverage at all. but the congressional budget office tells us that even after obamacare's implemented 30 million people will be uven insured. it's time to defund this law and replace it with common sense health care reform. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, there's a lot of fighting going on right now

in this chamber, and i can tell you there's nothing better than when i get to leave washington and go back home to see my grandkids. mr. bentivolio: nothing warms my heart more than emily, nathan, and katherine giving me hawing. as a grandfather i find myself giving commonsense advice to my grandchildren. it's funny to tell them obvious things and seems like sage wisdom to them. nathan, if you want to be big and strong you need to eat your vegetables. katherine, always wear your seat belt. finally, don't stick your finger in the light socket. since the passage of obamacare, the economy has stagnated as businesses try to figure out the new rules and regulations. don't stick your finger in the light socket. obamacare is running our nation into a country of part-time workers, as companies try to fall under the 30-hour threshold in order to afford their employees. don't stick your finger in the light socket.

premiums are rising rather than falling. don't stick your finger in the light socket. by the president's own admission, the systems to implement obamacare are not yet ready. don't stick your finger in the light socket. americans are pleading with the senate -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. bentivolio: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from the district of columbia seek recognition? ms. norton: request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman asking unanimous consent? ms. norton: after 41 votes to repeal the affordable -- the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. norton: after 41 votes to repeal the affordable health care act, the republicans want the administration to believe they now want only a delay. why don't they state that forthrightly? why don't they say they are now for the affordable health care

act but they want to delay it because of certain issues and bring them forward? instead their call for delay is still about their opposition all together to the affordable health care act. 100,000 people are already receiving benefits under the affordable health care act. do you really want us to yank them back from benefits that they have never received before? doesn't make a lot of sense. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 , the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed

questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? mr. petri: i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 3174. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3174, a bill to authorize the secretary of transportation to obligate funds for emergency relief projects arising from damage caused by severe weather event in 2013, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. petri, and the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, ms. norton, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill before us. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. petrie: -- mr. petri: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. petri: h.r. 3174 is a bill with a clear and simple goal. this legislation allows the department of transportation to obligate previously authorized and appropriated funds for emergency relief projects without limitation to the amount a state can receive for a particular severe weather event. this bill does not increase spending and only applies to funds that have been previously authorized or appropriated. this bill is consistent with the authorizing language in m.a.p. 21 which we passed in bipartisan support last summer. map-21 does not limit how much a state can receive from an emergency relief program for a particular severe weather event. this bill restores the flexibility provided in map-21 to the department of transportation to determine how funds that have already been authorized and appropriated should be spent. this bill has bipartisan support and i reserve the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin reserves. the the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. norton: i rise in support of h.r. 3174, this legislation would lift the cap on the federal highway administration emergency relief program funds that occur in 2013. earlier this month colorado experienced historic storms that resulted in severe flooding, landslides, and mudslides. as a result of these severe storms, more than 50 bridges have been damaged or destroyed, and over 200 miles of colorado have been affected by the flooding. initial estimates by the colorado department of transportation are the damage to roads and bridges as a result of the storm could cost between $430 million and $475

million. to assist states in dealing with unexpected destruction of surface transportation infrastructure because of natural disasters or catastrophic failure caused by an external event, congress created fhwa's emergency relief program. this program provides funding to states to make emergency repairs and restore federal-aid highway facilities to predisaster conditions. while the e.r. program receives $100 million annually from the highway trust fund, demand for funding from this program usually exceeds this amount and requires supplemental appropriations from general revenues to address the backlog of funding requests from states. earlier this year congress ppropriated $2 billion for the e.r. program in the hurricane

sandy relief legislation. this appropriation was intended to address rebuilding highways in the wake of hurricane sandy as well as other natural disasters across the nation. mr. speaker, i would note that the house had a vigorous debate about hurricane sandy during that relief bill's consideration. with many of my friends on the other side of the aisle actually opposing the bill, including the sponsor of the legislation we are debating today, thankfully a majority of the house stood with our colleagues from states that suffered the incredible destruction as a result of hurricane sandy. and i would urge that we stand with our colleagues from colorado today in the hope that prior opponents of such relief will see how important it is

when it affects their own home state to understand that we are all in this together in this country when it comes to natural and catastrophic disasters. over $2 billion provided by that legislation for highway e.r. projects as a result of hurricane sandy and other disasters, approximately $550 million remains available. in addition to providing additional funding for the e.r. program, the legislation also restricted the amount that a state could receive of these funds. no more than $100 million per incident. with a separate cap provided for highway repair funds for states affected by hurricane sandy. to address the concern that colorado could not fully -- could not be fully reimbursed for the cost of restoring its

infrastructure, which could cost more than $400 million in a timely manner. h.r. 3174 eliminates the $100 million cap on e.r. funds made available in the hurricane sandy relief act for all disasters that occur in 2013. this bill is consistent with changes to the e.r. program made in the most recent surface transportation authorization act. the moving ahead for progress in the 21st century act, or map-21, which also eliminated the historical $100 million cap. mr. speaker, no state can plan for the type of destruction colorado is dealing with as a result of the severe storms and flooding. that is why the e.r. program was created. that is why the house passed the hurricane sandy relief act and made additional repair

funds available to all states that had suffered such natural disasters. mr. speaker, i strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting h.r. 3174. let us ensure that colorado has the support and resources that it needs to rebud its surface transportation infrastructure. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: mr. speaker, i yield such time he may consume to the gentleman from colorado, mr. gardner. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. gardner: i thank the gentleman from wisconsin and appreciate your leadership in this important matter as we try to bring relief to the people of colorado who have suffered as a result of the floods that began on september 11. i also thank the lady from the district of columbia for her leadership on this issue as well and her support of the underlying measure. thanks to chairman shuster and the appropriations committee as well, chairman rogers for

supporting and making sure this legislation moves to the floor as expeditiously as it has. the lady from the district of columbia i would note that i voted for the $17 billion hal rogers amendment on sandy making sure we had emergency funding through fema for all victims of that atrocious storm and disaster. but i also tried to make sure that we had funding for another disaster that happened in colorado in the western united states dealing with wildfires and forest fires. in fact tried to amend the legislation with a disaster assistance for colorado that was rejected and not allowed to go into the bill and ultimately made a decision based on the fact we were treating disasters differently. but it's important to know we do come together for disaster assistance to make sure we take care of people who have been harmed around this country. on september 11 of this past couple weeks ago, a flood began that destroyed nearly 2,000

homes. damaged over 17,000 homes. early reports that almost 25% of the buildings at the university of colorado received some kind of damage. i have toured with other members of the colorado congressional delegation, mr. perfect mutter, mr. coffman, mr. polis, our two senators, mark udall, senator bennett, as well as the governor as we have witnessed firsthand, both on the ground and air, the devastation that has taken place. and for people who are rebuilding lives and homes or businesses that were lost, today this body takes great step forward into providing at least one key component of certainty. that certainty comes in to those thorough fairs that allow them to get -- thorough fairs that a -- thoroughfares that allow them to get to and from schools. our transportation system that was impacted by the floods. 200 lined miles of highway were affected as if somebody had taken a sandcastle, built it,

and the wave came and washed it away. a crumbled up piece of paper destroying hundreds of miles of colorado highway. 50 bridges wiped out. the colorado department of transportation initially estimated that between 300 and $500 million worth of damage was done to our highway system and have now settled on a figure closer to $475 million. i commend the federal highway administration who swiftly released $35 million to help with the costs of the most immediate repairs, but there must be more that is done. so, mr. speaker, i thank this body for its support of h.r. 3174, legislation that with a yes vote will automatically -- will not automatically lift the cap for other states that experience severe weather events but allows the secretary of transportation to make that determination. as mr. petri noted, this is not a new appropriation. there is no new spending, but it gives flexibility to the department of transportation to make decision that is will help

the people who have suffered in colorado. as i mentioned, the cap was also raised to $500,000 for responses in other areas and other hurricanes whether it's hurricanes, floods, other events this country has faced. we have an opportunity to help the people of colorado, the people of this country get back on their feet. i appreciate the support that this body has given this resolution today. mr. speaker, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from wisconsin reserves. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from colorado. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for three minutes. mr. perlmutter: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentlewoman from the district of columbia for yielding time to me so that we could -- i could speak about the catastrophe that we had in colorado 2 1/2 weeks ago. some portions of our state received more rain in three days than we get in a year and a half. and that amounted to tremendous

flooding, some people say it's 200-year flood. others say it's a $500-year flood, but it damaged, canyons, homes, businesses, roads up and down the front range of colorado. so our delegation has come together. there's some controversy as to the origins of this funding and whether or not the democrats or republicans from colorado supported this assistance for highways. that's in the past. we are together today because our state needs the assistance. we rise to ask for quick passage of house resolution 3174, which will enable colorado to quickly begin the process of rebuilding our damaged infrastructure. almost 19,000 homes and businesses across colorado were damaged or destroyed. i had friends, neighbors, and

family affected by this storm. i want to thank -- i want to start by thanking our first responders, the police, firefighters, the colorado national guard, the united states army, fema for their heroic effort to save lives. so individuals, volunteers, charities, state, local, and federal government responded as one. to help the people in the state of colorado. i witnessed firsthand with mr. gardner, mr. polis, and our senators and governor, the national guard rescuing a stranded family. and these men and women without a doubt prevented these floods from taking more lives. the damage throughout the state is catastrophic and truly unbelievable. i represent two counties of the nine that were declared major disaster areas. now that the waters have receded, it is time to rebuild, and at least 200 miles of state

and federal roads were damaged and 50 bridges were either damaged or destroyed by the floods. that doesn't include local, county, and city streets and roads and bridges. in total, the colorado department of transportation is estimating the damage to our state and federal roads to be about $475 million. the "denver post" wrote the flooding that swept through colorado is the biggest catastrophe to ever strike the state's infrastructure. current law restricts funds from this account to 100 million per state per incident. we know the damage to roads, bridges, and infrastructure in our state will well exceed that $100 million. i'm proud to be a co-sponsor of h.r. 3174 with my friends in the colorado delegation to make sure colorado has the resources we need to rebuild. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. perlmutter: if i might have 30 more seconds. ms. norton: i yield another

minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional minute. mr. perlmutter: this bill does not cost a dollar. it simply allows the secretary of transportation the flexibility needed for colorado and other communities impacted by severe weather events this year to rebuild our roads and bridges. i'm asking all my colleagues to join in supporting h.r. 3174 and help us in colorado rebuild. i'd ask unanimous consent, mr. speaker, to introduce a couple letters from our governor and from the department of transportation outlining the damage that our roads have suffered. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. perlmutter: with that i yield back to the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: mr. speaker, i yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from colorado, epresentative coffman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. coffman: thank you, mr.

speaker. i thank the gentleman from wisconsin for his leadership as well as our own congressman gardner from the state of colorado whose district was very significantly impacted. by this. i had the opportunity last monday to go up with the vice, governor of the state of colorado, congressman jerry polis, and congressman corey gardner whose districts were both severely impacted by the flooding to see that damage. it was extraordinary hoach -- -- how much -- certainly houses were lost and we mourn for the people that were lost, but the road damage was extraordinary. miles and miles of roads that we would see with whole sections missing. so this legislation, h.r. 3174, is vital to the state of colorado to get that -- get

those roads back where they are usable. and in fact our residents in those affected areas can get to and from their homes and their businesses. mr. chairman, i would ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from colorado, ms. degette. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized for three minutes. ms. degette: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentlelady for yielding. as you can tell, not just from what everybody from our congressional delegation has said, but also from the many, many news reports that we have seen in the last week. this flood really was one of the worst floods in colorado's history. i'm a fourth generation coloradoan and i remember some of the previous ones.

the flood in 1965 when i was a little girl, the terrible platte river flood that flooded cherry creek. . my home was right by there and we had flood damage. and the tragic big thompson flood where many, many people were killed. this is what happens to us in the west sometimes, but it really was a 500-year flood or worse. and i guess we feel terrible for the eight coloradoans who have died, many are still unaccounted for and we pay for all of them that they may be safe and that they may be -- that their homes may be preserved by the time the snow flies, which is any minute now. on september 15, president obama issued a major disaster declaration for colorado ordering federal aid to supplement state and local recovery efforts. you just cannot overstate the

scope of this damage. as you heard from mr. perlmutter, mr. gardner, and mr. polis' congressional districts were severely impacted by this, but all the rest of us had severe impact in our districts, too. boulder had over 16 inches of rain in the course of five days. communities in el paso, fremont, jefferson, logan, morgan, pueblo, washington, adams, larimer, arapaho, bloomfield, and denver were all impacted by this. it really was a state issue. and residents have lost their homes. businesses have been devastated. communities have been destroyed. our friends and relatives and neighbors still are without power. many of them can't drink their water. as you have heard from all of my colleagues, the devastation goes everywhere from mountain

highways to agricultural properties on the plain. over 50 bridges have been damaged or destroyed, and over 200 miles of colorado roads have been impacted by the flooding. in the mountain areas, what happens is the roads go along the creek, so when the creeks turn into raging rivers from this terrible rainfall, the roads are completely wiped out and the mountain communities are isolated. as you have heard from my colleagues, the funds from the emergency relief program under the disaster relief appropriations act of 2013 are restricted to $100 million per state per incident unless the funds are being used to repair damage caused by hurricane sandy. so if we remove the cap -- i'd ask for an additional minute. ms. norton: pleased to yield additional minute. ms. degette: if we remove the cap on the federal highway administration emergency relief funds, colorado can get the

assistance relief we need to rebuild. since this does not authorize new appropriations as not an earmark, the budget score is zero. i really respectfully request we all come together and vote for this legislation. it's much needed. and by the way, this is a good example, mr. speaker, of how if congress really wants to put its mind together to work on something, we can do it in a civil and efficient and speedy way. this is the thought we should keep in mind as the week progresses in front of us. i yield whack. -- yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: i yield such time as he may consume to representative lamborn from colorado. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. lamborn: thank you. i appreciate the recognition. mr. speaker, rise today in support of a bill introduced by my colorado colleague, corey gardner, to help colorado rebuild from the floods that have ravaged our states in recent weeks.

the flooding damage that leaves 17,000 homes and other structures, several thousand of which were destroyed outright. millions of dollars of public infrastructure have been washed away. specifically over 200 miles of colorado roads and at least 50 bridges have been damaged or destroyed. the floods consumed an area of colorado that is twice the size of rhode island. currently the law caps emergency funding for highway and bridges at $100 million per state. according to a preliminary estimate from the colorado department of transportation, the cost to rebuild our state's roads and bridges is several times that amount. we are not asking congress to appropriate any additional funds, we are simply asking that we be able to access money that congress has already appropriated for reconstruction after a natural disaster. this legislation has a congressional budget office score of zero, meaning it does not add a time to our national debt. the flooding was worse in the northern part of the state, but

there were heavy rains and flooding even in the southern part of the state where i represent, and two people, unfortunately, were swept away and lost their lives. i do thank my colleagues for their consideration of this bill to help the great state of colorado to rebuild. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: mr. speaker, this house is proud to stand, should be proud to stand with colorado. anyone who saw the state seeming to be washed away and floods and likes of which i have never seen in my life would have their heart go out to the residents of the state. mr. speaker, i note that last week there was a united nations report that found that when they surveyed scientists from throughout the world there was

95% certainty that climate change is having its effects right now. that is a very high percentage for scientists to give to anything. we know that a combination of ctors produced these thousand-year floods, whatever you want to attach to them in colorado, but they certainly were aided and abetted by climate changes. this house needs to take climate change seriously as difficult as it is, we are going to see more and more catastrophes like this. as usual they will be in places we never expected them, in places where there are not tornadoes, we'll see tornadoes. in places where there have not been floods, that is the way we have -- that is what we have

seen in just the last few years. i certainly am pleased and i'm sure every member of this house will be pleased to stand with the residents of colorado as they try to recover from this flood which has devastated so many of their citizens. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. petri: mr. speaker, i encourage all members to support this bill and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 3174. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill s. 1348. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 1348, an act to re-authorize the congressional award act.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx, and the gentleman from california, mr. miller, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the the gentlewoman from north carolina. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and on s. heir remarks 1348. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of s. 1348, the congressional award program re-authorization act of 2013, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. foxx: in 1979 congress enacted the congressional award act to promote initiative achievement and excellence among young americans between the ages of 14 and 23 years old. to earn an award, participants must complete a self-designed program of challenging goals in four program areas, service, personal development, physical

fitness, and expedition/exploration. they can work toward a congressional award certificate or medal. in either category there are three achievement levels. gold, silver, and bronze. minimum requirements must be met regarding the number of hours devoted to each of the four program areas. total hours worked toward the award and the duration of the participants' efforts. senators and representatives present the awards at local city or state ceremonies. it has been my great pleasure to make such presentations many times, the latest was a presentation of the silver medal earlier this summer to ne of my constituents from louisville, north carolina, miss shelby buerkle. she worked more than 200 hours of community service and 100 hours of physical activity to earn her very well deserved honor, and we are very proud of her achievement. as my colleagues on both sides of the aisle would surely agree, it is of great

importance to provide support and encouragement to america's young people, particularly when they are learning about the value of giving back to their communities and become being productive upstanding citizens. the legislation before us today provides an opportunity simply to extend this worthwhile program through the fiscal year 2018, and i urge my colleagues to lend their support. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i rise in support of this legislation. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. miller: mr. speaker, i want to thank the majority, the gentlewoman, ms. foxx, for bringing this legislation to the floor. this is bipartisan legislation which promotes initiative achievement and excellence among young people. the congressional award act empowers young people to take greater responsibility for their own lives, to discover new talents, advocate on behalf of others, and take positive action in the community. the congressional award program

has helped thousands of young people, including some of the most disadvantaged youth find ways to get involved in public service. it shows young americans how to set goals and to achieve them. through this program, these young people gain self-confidence, problem solving skills, and the ability to work as part of a team. traits are evaluated by employers and institute of higher education. since 1979 this program has grown substantially. total participation in the congressional award program exceeds 35,000 participants. in my home state of california, 6,491 participants have enrolled since 1979. completing over 450,000 hours of community service. as a nonprofit organization that operates almost exclusively through private donations, the congressional award act is an excellent example of successful public-private partnersships and i urge my colleagues to support this legislation. again i thank the committee for bringing it to the floor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from north carolina. miss forks: thank you, mr. speaker.

-- ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to ask the gentleman from california if he has further speakers. mr. miller: i have no further questions and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. foxx: i'd like to thank my senate colleagues and senator tom carper of delaware in particular who worked diligently to ensure this important program is renewed in a timely manner. providing these awards to young people in my district has been a great honor and privilege for me throughout my tenure representing north carolina's fifth congressional district. the paragraph tiss pants of this -- participants of this program continually inspire me and i look forward to many more ceremonies in the years to come. once again i urge my colleagues to vote yes on s. 1348. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass senate 1348.

so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, -- ms. foxx: i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and make a point of order a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this otion will be postponed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the house will stand in recess subject to the call of the chair.

they have said they will block any resolution to keep the government running that is tied to the health care law. it will be at 2:00 p.m. eastern. you can see the senate life on our companion network c-span22. you can see it right here live when members return. joined by thomas mann and norman orenstein to continue this discussion on the possible government shut down. you have written two books on why the american government is so dysfunctional. does this surprise you? guest: i wish it did. it is entirely predict the bull. in the firstit

edition of our book last april. our politics has become intensely policy and -- partisan, even tribal. parties hasolitical just veered sharply to the right not just on ideological grounds but on procedural grounds. willingness to use any means to achieve what they have only properthe objectives for america. host: we can get more into the differences. is the current situation more serious than past moments of gridlock? guest: it is. i was a little bit surprised that we would be at this impasse now.

after the 2002 election, son of the difficulties were part of the permanent campaign that they are always focused on bringing down there opponent to bring traction. mitch mcconnell made a statement that his number one goal was to make president obama a one term president. after all he achieved his goal of making obama a two-term president. that tribalism took hold right away. it has led us to close the abyss. to the a shutdown is one thing, it is looming ahead with the debt ceiling where he has seen these games played before. there are always the votes to make sure that we will not play

with america's fullface -- with america's fullface in credit you closer to a disaster than i have ever seen before. host: any thoughts of whether a compromise can be reached in the hours ahead? guest: it could be. bit ot wpm won't.t it the way for a compromise is for speaker boehner, contrary to wishes of the pottery conference of these party conferences, is to put the senate bill that will go to the house this afternoon, the clean continuing resolution, before the half full house. i think that will carry all of the democrats and enough republicans to prevent the shutdown. but speaker boehner has judged that he would be very unpopular and it would be very unpopular within his own caucus. he knows he has another battle coming up in two weeks.

he made a calculation. now is the time to let his party members feel that some of the public reaction to the shutdown to give him a little leg up and avoiding a public default. host: you wrote a piece in "the washington post" ahead of this shutdown fight -- looking ahead to this fight down the road, do you think congress can still get done -- if stuff done, still? guest: it is looking grimmer and grimmer. our fantasy should be be close to reality. what we are talking about, which would move our economy back on track in a dramatic rate, it does not involve substantial

movement away from principles. the reason we are not getting there, which will include infrastructure, is because we are not dealing with liberals and conservatives, we're dealing with some radicals that he want to bring enormous turmoil to the system so they can achieve ultimate ends. that is not conservative, it is radical. host: that issue brought up earlier, it is possibly exemplified in the most quoted piece from your book, "it is even worse than it looks, how the american constitutional system collided with the new politics of extremism." one of the major parties has become an insurgent outlier.

host: you have taken some heat on this. guest: it is not a balanced -- two parties.the we have been studying and working with republicans and democrats on congressional reform for almost four decades. we have never reached a point where our objective analytic understanding of congress allowed us to speak to something that was not politically correct. we saw a party that had veered far out of the mainstream. if it were just a matter of substantive ideological differences, that would be fine.

we see a party and it is illustrated -- what we see is a continuing resolution to keep government open, tied down by dominions of nullified -- a law that was passed two years ago. and for which millions of billions of dollars have been invested by insurance companies to get this started. it was tough. we have taken some heat from republicans. norman and i have received scores of e-mails from self identified republicans who said to us, "thank you, our party has been taken hostage by an extreme group. we need to return to problem solving. pragmatic policymaking. god speed with your efforts."

host: we are speaking with thomas mann. he is a government senior fellow at the brookings institution. they are taking your calls and comments as we talked through this potential government shutdown that would happen at midnight tonight. karin is up first for maryland on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. can you hear me well? i moved to the area from georgia about six weeks ago. my husband is a federal employee working in i.t. support. he is still going to have to do his job with interest. my question to you -- internet access has become sparse. i am in the home buying process. i am trying to follow as much as i can to keep up with the

story because it directly impacts my family. are they shutting down because --have we reached some kind of debt ceiling? are we shutting down because they cannot reach an agreement? you can jump in. sets ofe have two issues right now. david rogers of politico wrote a very good piece about how this is really about a host republican budget that cuts spending so far below what it own 10-year budget plan was, that they cannot get appropriations done.

there is a real gulf on the house and senate of this food normally you keep the government funded. normally you keep the government funded until you can work out your differences. they're having difficulty with that. the biggest problem is what tom suggested a little while ago. it is putting onto a continuing resolution that demands that go far beyond what we normally see, that have nothing to do with the current budget. it is an attempt not only to nullify the law but to nullify an election. a clean, continuing resolution that would lead to a shutdown and lead to a lot of people like your husband not working. unless the house resolution would take some soft slice of the federal employees and pay them. host: some members of the house of representatives went to the senate yesterday and talked about the blame games that we have seen in the headlines of many of the papers. i want to show a clip of a

republican from arkansas at that meeting outside the senate chamber. [video clip] >> the fact that the senators are not here, harry reid is off somewhere, is all the evidence you need to know that they want to shut down the government. i have been told that by high- level democrats, that this has been a plan for a while. i personally believe that senator reid and the president, for political purposes, want to shut down the government. that is a scorched-earth policy. it is like what they used with sequestration, they blamed every bad thing on sequestration. they made decisions within the agencies to make the political pain as bad as it could be. i believe that is the plan here. the only evidence you need is the fact that they are not here. this is the old football

strategy. when you get to where you want to be in a football game, you run out the clock. you run out the clock because you think you like where you are. that is exactly what is going on here. host: do democrats like where they are? are they trying to run out the clock? guest: no. they believe in government. they understand that this shutdown, if it comes to pass, will cost billions of dollars. it is not money-saving. many people, as well as the economy, will be hurt. they have no interest in shutting down the government. they have been willing to accept a cr that really goes against their views about how much to spend and where to spend it. but for short-term efforts to postpone those negotiations,

they have been willing to accept it. what they will not accept is this unrelated matter of revisiting the affordable care act, which was passed almost three years ago. parts of which have already been implemented. guest: to show how far off the rails we have gotten -- if we talked about a continuing resolution that would keep the funding at these levels, the sequester numbers slash discretionary spending. the portion of the budget other than programs like social security. dramatically below what they have been before. it has brought levels down dramatically. way below what democrats want. it would be a huge victory for them given their priorities. they have decided instead to use the affordable care act as a hostage.

this shows that perspective is out the window. host: the term political hostagetaking comes up in your book. this? when did we first start seeing guest: we have had some efforts over the years to use the debt ceiling to embarrass the president's party and to maybe even extract a related advantage on something. but never before, as norm said, before 2011, have we had our major political parties willing to threaten a default and go right up to it. and presumably cross over to it. the big change came after the 2010 elections, the arrival of a class of tea party members. at the very beginning of that congress, john boehner said that we are going to get a lot done

but my one piece of advice to you is do not play around with the debt ceiling. the full faith and credit of the united states, this is something we cannot do. because of its damage potentially to the country. but also, the damage to the republican party. but within months, he was running to get out in front of his new party conference. host: back to the phones. pete, new york, republican line. you are on with thomas mann and norm ornstein. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. i am a first-time caller. i would like to know what they think about the repeal of the 17th amendment. i believe that gridlock is caused because the senators are directly elected by the people. i think it would help the situation and make it less political in nature if the state

legislatures appointed their senators. nothing more than a mouthpiece for how state legislators vote. which comes from the people. i think that the senators ought to be there to discuss and debate their legislature's opinion on it. each of them get two votes, end of story. and then the senators would not be so prone to vote differently because they are directly elected by the people. host: mr. ornstein? guest: this has become an interesting popular discussion, repeal of the 17th amendment. it is not going to happen. in part because of the whole history of the u.s. is that we move more and more towards elections expanding the electorate. that popular movement is not

going away. we have to think a little bit about what the consequences would be if state legislatures selected senators. what the consequences would be for state legislative elections. it would change the nature of the states. billions of dollars would go into state elections to influence the course of those. that would change the nature of the state legislatures and the states themselves. there is a lot of stuff there that would be deleterious. guest: it is interesting to note that prior to the adoption of a 17th amendment, for decades, we were already seeing a transition in senate elections with individual state legislative races becoming a means for electing senators. you were already beginning to get popular involvement in the election of senators.

the other point i would make, our problems today having to do with gridlock, shut down, and a possible public default, are not arising in the senate. republican senators are more pragmatic. at least half of them are. the problem is entirely in the house of representatives. host: we are talking with thomas mann of the brookings institution and norman ornstein of the american enterprise institution. authors of "the broken branch" from 2006. most recently, "it's even worse than it looks." that was published in may of this year. mr. ornstein, a question from twitter. does anyone seriously think that this will not end and america is not going to pay its bills?

guest: we are closer to the point where we could see a default. i hope that does not happen. i am among those who believe that if we have the shutdown and it lasts for a week or 10 days, maybe that will move us further away from the default position. if you look at what the house republican position is now on the debt limit, compared to what it is on simply continuing funding the government, it goes beyond what is now delaying obamacare for a year and repealing the medical device tax. to a whole wish list of things that have nothing to do with the debt. some observers have said it is mitt romney's agenda from 2012 that they have put out there in return for extending the debt limit for one year. which is basically saying that

we lost the election but here is how we can win it, by using the debt as hostage. if that continues, i think president obama is going to stick to his determination to say no concessions on the debt limit per se, and we have got at least a 50-50 chance that we could default. guest: what we need is the mcconnell rule. he proposed that the president be given authority to raise the ceiling. congress would then have the right to pass a law overriding that. the president could veto it and it would take a two thirds vote to override him. this is unlikely except under extraordinary circumstances. if we could get that adopted, we could remove the temptation? that is now being used in a

highly irregular and illegitimate way. the second piece of this is that if we actually come to the brink, the president, who has the authority that -- to see that laws be faithfully executed, cannot fulfill his constitutional responsibility. they are mutually exclusive. he cannot pay the bills and honor the debt limit at the same time. he may decide on his own that he is going to ignore the debt ceiling in order to pay the bills. it would be highly controversial, its constitutionality disputed. it might lead republicans to call for his impeachment. but it would keep us from default and financial chaos. host: your book has some tough words for house republicans. here is a question from e-mail. guest: i wish we had seen

appropriations bills passed in the regular order. host: for folks that don't know, regular order. guest: the way congress has set up its process -- debate on the floor. a lot of amendments allowed. when laws are passed in different forms, you go to a conference committee and bring them back. in the case of appropriations in the annual budget, there are 12 appropriations bills which are normally start in the house, passed the house, moved to the senate and each of them is reconciled individually. it is also done under the rubric

of a budget. what we need to keep in mind is that this year, the house and the senate did pass budgets. the house have been urging the senate to pass a budget so they could go to a conference and do the regular order and set the priorities. when the senate passed the budget, the house said we will not go to conference with you. we have only three appropriations bills that have passed the house. the rest were withdrawn and did not get anywhere. in this case, you can look at both houses and say there is some blame here. but it was the initiation by the house and the refusal to go to conference that set us down this path. as i said earlier, it was passing appropriations bills that went even below whatthe original 10 year budget plan of paul ryan was that have led us to a gulf. the paperback is an expanded version brought up to date from the book, "it's even worse than

it looks," that we published a year ago. host: where does this current book bring us up to? guest: it was just published a couple weeks ago. we take it up -- it really takes us through the first part of this year up till the summer. host: the book is "it's even worse than it looks," the authors are thomas mann and norman ornstein. stephen is waiting to talk with you. minnesota on our line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a question and a statement. my question is, with the supreme court passing of the citizens united, i feel that by passing that that has put the corporations and lobbyists in control of our government. could you explain this to me? welcome to the united states of

corporations, have a good day. guest: this is one of the most controversial decisions the court has made, overturning decades of precedent in law and in prior court decisions. basically, it said corporations and that is for-profit, nonprofit, and labor unions as well -- have the freedom out of their treasuries to spend presumably independently on behalf of of or in opposition to any candidate. treating corporations as individuals in that respect. if it had stopped there, it would be one thing. but what happened is, it was combined with a lower court

decision that created a legal basis for the formation of a new kind of political organization, the super pac. this is an entity that could receive any amount of money from anyone and spend any amount on behalf of or against any candidate. interestingly, for the most part, it is not corporations that are funding it, but wealthy individuals with strong ideological views. they have also figured out a way to use nonprofit tax data, 501(c)(4), to keep the donors' identification anonymous. we do not have transparency, we have unlimited funds in our politics, it has been a very sad chapter. guest: i should add here.

on october 8, the supreme court will be hearing a case that aims to remove all the limits that individuals can give in a two - year cycle to parties and and to candidates. that would move us further to removing all limits and restrictions on campaign spending. turning us into a wild west. that has had a lot to do with the dysfunction we are talking about, the nature of that e campaign money system. host: a question for mr. ornstein. guest: our system and the laws make it very difficult for a third party to take hold.

there are so many impediments in the way. if you think about a system where you have an electoral college, a first past the post, single member district system. the candidate who gets the most votes can win the seat. there is no proportional representation. a third party would have to win significant numbers of seats in congress, not just do well in a presidential election. doing well in a presidential election becomes very difficult. and then we have got to turn to another reality, the number of pure independents in american politics is probably less than 10%. most americans identify with one of those two parties. the dissatisfaction that they may feel towards the parties does not easily translate into abandoning that identification and going somewhere else. but we are seeing in the republican party this deep, internal split between

traditional conservatives and the more radical ones. how that plays out may determine whether a lot of those who had a party identification stick with it. it is not clear where they would go if they don't. guest: it has happened before. in the middle of the 19th century, the then-strong alternative party, the whig party, went out of business and was replaced by abraham lincoln's republican party. since then, we have just had the two major parties. independent parties and candidates have come forward and had influence but have never been in a competitive position to win a presidential election or elect substantial members to congress. for the reasons norm stated, that is unlikely to happen. host: if you want to talk to

thomas mann or norman ornstein, longtime congressional scholars. john, new york, democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. it does not take much to remove the veil of secrecy on this whole thing. the most relative facts that are missing from the conversation are that president obama is acting in the national interest, the human interest. they are harping on his fiscal responsibility. he has a moral responsibility. this whole incident was caused back -- the mortgage shenanigans. back with fannie mae, when the whole economy melted down. people got hurt. he implemented the affordable care act to protect people who were destroyed by the republicans who started the shenanigans.

right? what is motivating all of this is, do the research. you have the heritage foundation that has been fueling this thing with ted cruz, who is . who is behind that, the koch brothers? the previous caller mentioned corporations. host: we will take your point. we talked about congress and this current situation. talk about the role of the white house. guest: the white house, the president after the elections really thought that there was an opportunity here and continues to have discussions with some senate republicans to reach, not a grand bargain, but at least a mini grand bargain. those talks have not gotten very far. in the absence of some kind of

larger deal, what is the president going to do? is he going to give in to demands on shutting down the government or on the debt limit in return for giving up his signature a congressman legislation of his first term? no president would do that. if you make any kind of gestures in that direction, we end up heading down a road where ever year or every few months you are going to get a new set of demands made. i can understand the position that the president is taking in this. the fact is, as many articles have pointed out, this is much less a fight between congress and the white house. not even a fight between republicans in congress and the white house. it is a fight within the republican party, often the house versus the senate, over how you interact with the president who is going to be there for another three years. the president has been more of a bystander in this process than

anything else. host: chris in alabama says to you, mr. ornstein, i do not think john boehner would allow a default. he would break the hastert rule. explain the hastert rule. guest: it is a practice applied when george bush was president. hastert was speaker of the house. the idea was we are going to pass bills that get a majority of the majority. the idea was that we need close to unanimity in our republican conference congress because we do not want to make concessions to democrats. we are going to try and channel it through. if it were simply a rule that said the majority of the majority, it would be easier for boehner because he could bring a

bill and lose a strong majority of his own party and replace them with democrats. john boehner has defined the rule, he needs unanimity or close to it. he has himself been held hostage to a couple dozen or more of his most ardent, most radical members. it is true that if boehner brought a clean debt resolution bill and a clean continuing resolution to the floor, those would get all of democratic votes and he would only need a couple dozen republicans. he could do that. it would probably cost him his speakership. guest: that is really the point. chris is right. speaker boehner can bring a bill to the floor. he controls the rules committee. democrats would support a role -- a rule allowing for a vote on a clean debt ceiling increase or a clean cr.

he would be going against the energy within the republican party. i think it was john earlier who mentioned the mobilization in recent years has been on the political right. they are the ones who are hovering over republican primary elections and driving the dynamic in the house. speaker boehner could go down in history as a hero if he took this step, even if it meant his loss of the speakership. host: our republican line, tom, florida. good morning. you are on with thomas mann and norman ornstein. caller: thank you for taking my call. i really take offense to the characterization of the radical

reference to members of the republican party. they are just trying to stop this nation from its march to the ocean. here is the bottom line -- let's start at the beginning. i am willing to bet neither one of you can tell me what yo line, most percent of the american economy should be occupied by the government. i am willing to bet you we do not get a number from either one of you. host: mr. mann, do you want to jump in? i am happy to respond. for many years, decades, the u.s. has -- the federal government has occupied roughly 20% of the economy. this is perhaps the lowest level of any democracy in the advanced world. because of the aging of society, i think we are going to have to

increase tax revenues to 3 percentage points. at the same time, we make adjustments in social security and medicare and slow the growth of health care costs, that is the only way i believe we can have a stable financial situation and a growing economy. >> we will leave the last few moments of this discussion. there is a briefing on capitol hill. just getting underway. youhe women of america and and the man who care about women know that the latest republican shutdown plan continues the war on women. shutting down the government is a dangerous game and the republicans are playing it. there are no

winners and only losers. republicans are obsessed in stopping the affordable care act. does notent shutdown stop the affordable care act. millions oforrow, americans will sign up for affordable health insurance and there is nothing the republicans can do to stop it. all of this futile brinksmanship brings only chaos and pain with hundreds of thousands of workers not providing the services that people need, which will hurt every single american. latestook at the republican shutdown and what it entails. repeal the medical device tax, which raises $30 billion over 10 years.

whether you are for or against that tax, they do not replace the revenues. resolutioncontinuing causes a $30 billion increase in the deficit over 10 years. the republican shutdown plan is a budget buster. but now they have added a new target, a group they frequently punish, a group called women. benefits ofl other obamacare that have gone into effect already and we have gone through them. youou are a young person, can stay on your mom and dad's insurance. only onedo single out existing benefit to stop and

that benefit is known as the women's health amendment. i am going to show you this and we have it afterwards. theyis the section that delay. the only existing benefit that they have and here is what it says. withfirst four word -- " respect to women," and we have that for you to look at. it talks about the event of care that will no longer be available if they have their way. i want to tell you what those benefits are that they are stopping. guaranteed affordable birth control. screenings for cervical cancer. screenings for sexually transmitted diseases, or std's. screenings for pregnancy related diabetes. screenings for domestic violence.

breast-feeding counseling. you who have ever lost a love one knows the critical importance of these event of services. republicansservices want to stop in the shutdown proposal. anyone who has postponed a life- saving cancer screening because they could not afford it knows how dangerous the plan is. and here is the thing. republicans already lost a vote on this very provision in the united states senate and they lost an election in part because voters rejected their war on women. but still their war on women continues. they cannot seem to stop themselves. so we. them. -- so we will stop them.

stop this war on women in america. take up and pass a clean cr. pass a clean debt ceiling. these are a most basic responsibilities. it is my pleasure to turn the podium over to senator step in stabbenow. >> thank you, senator boxer. a pleasure to stand with senator boxer. just as they try to shut down the government in 2011 by saying they wanted to stop preventive health care for women, they are doing it again and we will not let it happen this time as well. it is appalling to me. the majority of americans are women. women have already been

benefiting by preventative health care being available without out-of-pocket costs. no longer the insurance companies able to discriminate against women just because we are women and calling that a pre-existing condition. womenare over 8 million who for the first time are going to know that if they are pregnant, they are going to be able to have maternity care, prenatal care, to be able to give them the very best chance to have a healthy baby and be able to take care of them. without the affordable care act, maternity care will be unavailable for the majority of women trying to find health insurance on their own in the private market. that is just a fact. some young moms who had gone through that situation. but to add insult to injury, not

only are they stopping or delaying the ability for women to get the comprehensive health care they need including maternity care, they have to go a step forward and say, for the health-care coverage, not preventive services for men, just preventative services for women will be eliminated through this provision. this is stunning, absolutely stunning. we are committed on behalf of the women of this country to make sure that this does not happen. it will not happen. it is time to continue funding the government. we are talking about a debate over a continuing resolution for six weeks. six weeks.

rather than coming together, republicans and democrats to be services,port in paychecks for military, support for veterans and seniors, support for children and families for six weeks. they are choosing to delay health care for women in this country and stop the most basic care that is already in place for women in this country. not going to happen. the great senator from hawaii. >> thank you. mym glad to join colleagues and the rest of you this morning. this it tax on the affordable care act defies logic. here we are on the eve of a government shutdown. rather than keeping the

government running, the republicans have used every opportunity to put in various provisions that would defund the affordable care act. this is not the first time they have tried to repeal the affordable care act. dozens of times. 43. dozens. somebody said if you keep doing , you are to get the same results. it is time to take a different tack. here we are in the dead of night, those of us continuing to watch what the house is doing. at midnight, they snuck in a provision one more time that specifically targets women of this country. we already have laws in this country that prohibit

discrimination on the basis of sex, religion. they put in this provision that just targets the women in this country. it truly defies logic. my colleagues have talked about what they are doing as preventive care. the women do not have to pay a copay. it especially hates women. it is unjustified and unfair. aboutto anyone who cares the fair treatment of everyone, stop doing this. let's move forward. let us pass legislation that will raise the debt ceiling. then we can have a reasoned we have a lot of differences on these other issues. stop targeting women for these kinds of specific attacks. thank you.

>> we are happy to answer any questions. >> if a shutdown cannot be avoided, members of congress will continue to collect a paycheck. is that appropriate? >> no. i have a bill that would stop us from getting paid. if we do not pay our bills and we defaulted, i asked everyone to become a cosponsor of that bill. we passed it once before. we sent it over to the house. the house killed it. it is absolutely inappropriate. and i think i speak for my colleagues. >> you mentioned the medical device tax. can you give me an idea of what the caucus might consider as an appropriate to pay for if they were to repeal that? >> we are having a caucus

meeting. i do not want to confuse things with you. senator reid said that we are going to handle this message from the house the same way we handled their first bill. anythinging to strip extraneous from ed and send it back a clean cr. that means they have two clean cr's over there. getting into the details on some other playing field was suggested. there are lots of issues we could take up. i want to speak personally about this. a republican party that is haranguing the democrats about the deficit better wake up and smell the roses. 50%deficit has gone down by under this president.

shows howis just and not they can be replacing the revenues. s $30 billion add to the deficit over 10 years. they should be ashamed of themselves. they add $30 billion to the deficit. we could argue the medical device tax. do with thisg to particular situation that we are in now. we do not want to add to the deficit. we just want to keep the government running. >> i would agree with senator boxer. this is the sixth week cr. somebody who has been involved in the effort around medical devices and we have cut in half

the final bill the original tax for medical devices. other opportunities for us to move forward and be able to continue to conclude on health reform. that is not what this is about. this is about six weeks of supporting our troops, our veterans, our seniors, our children, the economy. six weeks. we need to come together and make that commitment to come together. people losing paychecks and being harmed. we will have a number of opportunities that we can talk about ways to work together. >>ou aress what this means for people in michigan? there are many ways in which this affects people in michigan, whether we are talking not someone who turned 65 and wants

to sign up for medicare, where they will have the ability to go in and sign up. insee potential threats veterans payments and disability payments. we potentially in michigan -- a contractor for a lot of defense work. we do not know how it will affect payments to our small businesses. the payments going out around farm programs or around food programs. it is very unclear. the structure will be closed. somethings will continue like social security payments. if you are newly retired and want to be signing up, you will have the opportunity to do that. if you are going on travel with your family, the ability to get

a passport will not be available. from payments to small businesses and to the regular function of government to signing up for health care, veterans benefits, everyone will be impacted in some way. >> every state has federal programs and federal employees. all of these programs and employees will be affected. there are people spending hours and hours figuring out what they are going to do to keep the essential services going in preparation for a shutdown. every single state has federal employees. we have a large military presence and they will be affected. say coming from a border state, we have special problems there.

we have some magnificent parks that people plan for years and years to bring their families only to find if we have a shutdown they. cannot enjoy those places wastee all kinds of toxic sites that need to be cleaned up from former defense installations. people and children live near those sites. there is no end of hurt. having served in the house, i was therefore 10 years. i was there when tip o'neill was a speaker. tip o'neill had a certain magic. the magic was the number 218. he knew he was not going to get every democrat or maybe a block of democrats in everything he did. you meetsay, "could

with me on this particular vote ?" dry. your powder we have to move this bill." "i do know that." "we are ok. you need to vote your district." that is what a speaker is supposed to do. they are speaker of the house. if john boehner we take our bill clean and just put it on the floor, like you find it with the violence against women act, we would not be here now. we would be fine. i have that nice is to john boehner. act like a speaker of the house, not just the speakers of the republican and passed my bill. you'd be surprised how fast they

would come to the table. we will go to you next. >> from the logistics of how this day is going to run -- at some point the senate is going to reject what the house sent over. would you keep voting throughout the night? >> let me just speak. the other questions, you'll have to direct to senator reid. he will be on the floor around 2:00. we are not just going to reject. we are going to strip out the mm it's that are extraneous that attack within, that bust the budget, that has a futile delay in obamacare. we will send back a cr. do not just say -- we are taking the numbers. we are not happy about that.

we are willing to take their numbers. that is what we will do. as far as what boehner does, he will have two cr's in front of him. he has to decide. i am not at liberty to say what senator reid is going to do. we will strip those amendments from the message. and send it back. that will give them two vehicles they can now put on the floor. back iswe will send already a compromise. it continues cuts to small businesses in the defense industry and the sequester and defense at the lower levels. it continues cuts in education, national institute of health, cuts in every part of the budget that we will want to fix and

replace to restore critical investment. we are willing to copper mines for a six-week period and give the house the funding number that they want, so that is a copper mines. stope not willing to hundreds of millions of americans from being able -- i should say tens of millions of americans to get health care, maybe for the first time. >> we have time for two more questions. >> the house is considering sending back a bill which would eliminate subsidies for health care on the exchanges. >> i am glad you raised that. >> they think this is going to split the democrats. >> let me make something really clear. no united states senator is forced in any way from taking a large employer contribution to

their health care. todayr that are -- vitter and several years ago could have this "i do not want employer benefit." he can also call in staff and say, "i do not think you deserve to have a contribution for your health care. therefore and will be reduced to the glove the size of your contribution and i am sending it back to the treasury." this is something that could be done right now. give it my colleagues, back and if you do not think your employees deserve it, cut their salary and send it back. last question. >> will you all forgo your pay if there is a government shutdown? >> nobody gets paid in a

shutdown except members of congress. i am pushing my bill to make sure that we do not get paid and that we are treated just like our staff. thank you very much. i want to pass my bill. i will probably give it away to a lot of good and deserving people. but that is not the way it should be. the people forcing the shutdown should go on by bill. john boehner should not crush my bill why key did two years ago billhould not crush my like he did two years ago. what ought to happen is he ought to say if he is going to force pain on everybody else, he should take the pain, he and his members. >> democratic women senators

rethink about a potential attack on health care. senator boxer even a hint about what the potential strategy would be. she said senator reid has said they will treat this cr the same way they did with the other. they will strip it of provisions and send it back to the house as a clean cr. if you missed any of what was said, is available on the c-span video library at www.c-span.org. john boehner took to the floor to call on senate democrats to pass the house amendment to the temporary spending bill dealing the affordable care act for one year. here's a portion of his remarks. people areican worried about their jobs. they are worried about their incomes rising. they are all under pressure.

one of the issues standing in the way is obamacare. nobody knows what the rules are. employers are scared to hire new and for what reason? the house has done its work. we passed a bill on saturday night that would delay obamacare for one year and will eliminate permanently the medical device tax that is costing us tens of thousands of jobs that are being shipped overseas. the senate so decided not to work yesterday. if there are such an emergency, where are they? it is time for the senate to listen to the american people, just like the house has, and pass a one-year delay of