is appropriations bill. although i am proud to support this critical legislation, i will say that i am disappointed to be d.o.d. appropriations bill. although i am proud to here yetn support of the d.o.d. appropriations bill, as we again seek its passage in the house. despite chairman frelinghuysen's herculean efforts to complete all 12 bills on time, and passing several packages that included the defense bill, the senate refuses to act. recently saw the effects of this when the government shut down put great stress on the backs of our service members this when and their families. mr. speaker, it's time that we push aside partisanship and do what's right for the country. and for our national security by passing this bill. while it certainly represents the outcome of many hard choices, it prioritizes funding where our troops need it most. it wisely invests in readiness, training, maintenance, and procurement of new equipment and technology to ensure that our troops are prepared for the tasks before them. i'm

the appropriations and transportation committees will get the money. is oversight committee absolutely appropriate and congress needs to do more oversight. if they do not like how the executive branch is spending money, they should authorize more and do more. many have not been authorized, meaning formally set up to continue in business. it gets funded, but technically they are supposed to be authorized. that is the big oversight that congress is not doing. if you do not like the way the army corps of engineers is spending money, fix that whole process. then the army corps can only spend money when congress tells them to. host: sammy is on the democratic line from kinston, north carolina. caller: good morning. the city councilman in north carolina, in the last 15 years we have had two major floods and lost about 700 homes. we had a meeting with the north carolina emergency management team, and everybody in the past was talking about, fema would replace people's lost homes and all that, and i thought about the issue of the army corps of engineers. it is

we're not even going to give you a number to appropriate to on the appropriations bill. we don't fund the government now until we do something that has nothing to do w-l funding the government. maybe that's the logical conclusion of years of bad behavior. maybe that's the logical conclusion of thinking you can hide the work of the congress behind a massive bill that nobody understands, that everybody says i want to be in that massive bill that nobody understands either. and i believe one of the issues that was debated the last few hours was we want to put our bill that would help daca kids on a bill that must pass. we're not, we'll not be happy unless our bill as we guarantee it gets on another bill that would have a better chance of passing than our bill. what we need is a daca bill that can pass on its own. surely you can take a 70% or 80% issue and combine it with another 70% issue of people who believe we ought to do a better job securing the border and managing people who have come into the country in other ways as well. surely you can take those two issues and find

to allow full year appropriations for the remainder of this year'spr appropriations that includes fy 19 and then to be balanced to the needs of the department of defense critical functions that are required to have a full year of appropriations defense or state department with the department of health the national institutes of health fda and the ability of the social security administration and to take care of health care needs. all of that requires we have predictability of a budget. i am pleased during this debate without democrats and republicans we are committed to bringing out a budget by february 8 to have that type ofe predictability. they didn't want to go for a continuing resolution. and we also need to get done by no later than february 8. funding it is in our national interest to understand we have a national crisis. every community is suffering fromin the opioid crisis and we need to make sure to be a strong partner to deal with the crisis. we need to give disaster relief and help to the communities of texas and florida and we know we have to get that done now. we cannot

no appropriation of money. and so as the frustration, does that really, something that, one would characterize as simple change, is that really constitute a misuse of taxpayer dollars? does it threaten transparency? does it really threaten oversight if an earmark, definition of use is not used there? so that's one example where not asking for any money, just asking for change of words on a deed. another example, i come from the state of washington, maybe, i'm not sure where you're from, mr. schatz the state of texas also has water issues. those of us in the west, what's the old saying whiskey is for drink and water is for fighting. it is truly is the, an essential part of life for our economy, for our communities, for industry, for agriculture, for recreation, for wildlife habitat all those type of things so my short time in congress i spent a lot of time fightg for the ability of those of us in the west to get projects approved. so it is really frustrating when we have buy-in, investment of local government, s

i've sat on the appropriations committee since my second term in congress. even that beginning we were known as the most bipartisan committee and unfortunately that has eroded significantly and we need get back to the days where approp reators sat down across the aisle and were able to work through each of the 12 budget bills and make sure we can send them to the house floor that work with the senate and with the white house to send the entire appropriations act to the president. that's the only responsibility we have in the united states kaungs tushz constitution as a congress and -- >> for people that have watched this budget process, why do budgets matter? they don't have the force of law? >> it's funny, john, that you raise that. the budget should matter because the idea behind a budget is that you are creating a spending blue print, now even with that, the appropriations committee in both houses end up making spending decisions that don't wholly align with it way these budgets, even when we pass them which we don't always do, evilen with it way they lin

this is not an appropriations bill. this is a stopgap emergency method in order to save ourselves from collapse. that is the republicans' responsibility. democrats, so many months ago, passed a budget. as a member of the budget committee, a budget that respected the needs of all americans. including the united states department of defense. it provided funding for ordinary men and women who put on the uniform, some of them on food stamps. it provided for veterans' health. it provided for the children's health insurance. it provided for infrastructure. and it provided for ensuring that americans could have good health care. that was a democrats' budget. the republican budget was a $2.4 trillion and counting cut to the needs of the american people. it threatened medicaid and medicare. quite contrary to democrats. now we find ourselves in the midst of those in puerto rico and the virgin islands who barely got lights or power during the holiday season or thereafter. it's dealing with texans who have no power in their homes.

appropriation act. on july 27, the appropriations committee approved the f.y. 2018, commerce-justice-science and related appropriation act. that vote was by a vote of 30-1, overwhelmingly bipartisan. on the same day, july 27, the committee unanimously approved the f.y. 2018 legislative branch appropriations bill. i'll go on and on with two more. on september 7, 2017, the full appropriations committee approved the labor, health and human services and education and related agencies appropriations bill. the vote then was a little closer, 29-2, but still overwhelmingly bipartisan by a pretty evenly divided appropriations committee. and on september 7, well before the end of the fiscal year. senate appropriations committee unanimously approved the 2018 department of state foreign operations and related programs appropriations bill. all of these bills, and then four chairman's marks have been available to this senate for consideration and not a single one of them has been able to be brought to the floor. now

and what is not appropriate. i don't know if there's an answer to that, if it's a rhetorical question. >> desiree smith, planning department staff. i think that's a question for the japantown task force, in terms of their position. i cannot speak to them. but i can say that we've been meeting with them since -- this designation was initiated back in 2013. there was another planner that drafted the document and at that time there were meetings and conversations that took this issue back up again -- tim frye and supervisor breed's office has had several meetings with community members and there were questions about -- remaining concerns about the plaza, but i cannot speak to the change. someone from the japantown task force, if you would like to invite them up? >> yes. maybe a representative frcan co forward. >> could you clarify your question, commissioner? >> commissioner hyland: why the change now? it seemed to me that it was understood that the plaza and pagoda were one. and our position, and the reason we're t

to have full-year appropriations for the remainder of this year'son appropriations and i certainly hope that will include fy 19, that would certainly be the best and that it will be fbalanced between the needs of the department of defense and the non-defense agencies, we have critical functions that require to have a full year of appropriations for, including our national defense, department of defense, state department, department of health and the work that's done in the national institutes of health, the drug administration, social security administration and take care oft our health care needs, all that requires that we have the predictability of a budget so i am pleased that we were able, during this debate, i wasn't pleased we had a shutdown but i was pleased that during this debate we had great discussions among democrats or republicans that weng are committed to bringing out a budget by february the eighth so we can give that predict ability to the people of this country. that was one of the principal frustrations that many of us didn't want to go for another continuing resoluti

i have encouraged the committee members and their appropriately cleared staff to do just that. look at the memo senator grant and i sent to the deputy attorney general and fbi director. members can then make up their ownat minds. i've also encouraged them to review the committee's transcripts and other unclassified materials that have been available to them and t thr staff for a long periodme of ti. we mad may agree certain informn should be released at the appropriate time of care to preserve classified information and the integrity of any investigation. i've already been pushing the department to review the classified referral memorandum. three of the unclassified paragraphs each contain the same or single classified fact. now that really surprised me. of the nongovernment sources do not claim to repeat or confirm any information for any government document. evenid after the portions that reference the alleged classified fact it is hard to understand why that should be classified. in the unsecured space and on and on secure phone line. the fbi never notified the entities can'

the congress deems appropriate. if you make these transparent, then it will be the congress and the american public who will consider this, not just an individual. and this will have to, therefore, be approved not just by the individual that asks for such directed spending but by the congress itself, by the representatives of the american people, and they will judge the merits of these programs, which i think is ultimately the protection the public needs and wants. public needs and wants. our reforms are the rules of the house. talking about transparency, put it on your website and the committee's website when they give approval to an earmark so that the public at each stage of the process and other members will have the opportunity to know what is being asked for and what is being approved. i thank the chairman and ranking member for this opportunity to testify today. i look forward to answering the subcommittee's questions. let me end with what i have told a number of people on both sides of the aisle. if a propos

and to pass the full-year defense appropriations budget we showed the fall the other programs? what about funding education? or infrastructure? president trump has made a big show about investing in infrastructure.as spare me the violins to make sure we do the entire budget at the same time and on time and that is before we spend it on time and sitting down at n the table sitting on the appropriations committees since my second term in congress and even at the beginning we were known as the most bipartisan committee and that has eroded significantly and we need to get back to those days to work through each of those budget bills to work with the senate and the white house. that is the only responsibility wee have and republicans have consistently advocated that in favor of their wealthy contributors and corporations. >> watchinge the budget process why do they matter? the budget should matter becausein the idea is a spending blueprint. and then to make those spending decisions the way these online. and then to establish pending caps and a blueprint. >> that means we should adop

we're not even going to give you a number to appropriate to on the appropriations bill. we don't fund the government now until we do something that has nothing to do w-l funding the government. maybe that's the logical conclusion of years of bad behavior. maybe that's the logical conclusion of thinking you can hide the work of the congress behind a massive bill that nobody understands, that everybody says i want to be in that massive bill that nobody understands either. and i believe one of the issues that was debated the last few hours was we want to put our bill that would help daca kids on a bill that must pass. we're not, we'll not be happy unless our bill as we guarantee it gets on another bill that would have a better chance of passing than our bill. what we need is a daca bill that can pass on its own. surely you can take a 70% or 80% issue and combine it with another 70% issue of people who believe we ought to do a better job securing the border and managing people who have come into the country in other ways as well. surely you can take those two issues and find

it's not appropriate. the way it was done in the past is just not appropriate. it just wasn't right. i don't think -- no matter how much lipstick you slap on a pig, it's still just a pig. we need to aim for something better. we need to aim for something that's more reflective of what our founding fathers envisioned where congress does the horrible hard task of looking dollar for dollar at how federal agencies are spending. you're not going to do that tomorrow. you mentioned, you know, the days of lincoln, for goodness sakes. this is not a new problem. it's going to take a while to get out of the problem. gallup says that your last historic high in job approval was the 1970s at i think 31%. so this has been a long, festering problem and one that you're not going to solve with this hearing, this rule change, this year. but i think you're right. i think by slowly moving, maybe 1% that you're addressing today, but it's going to set the stage for the american people having greater trust in you tomorrow and the next day. all of us should look forward to setting in tho

our agencies to have full-year appropriations or i should say the remainder of this year's appropriations and i certainly hope that will include fy19. that would certainly be the past and then it will be balanced, balanced between the needs of the department of defense and the non-defense agencies. we have critical functions that require to have a full year of appropriations including our national defense, the department of defense, our statert departmt and the department of health and the work thats is done in food safety and the federal drug administration and the social security administration to deliver checks to our seniors and to take care of our health care needs. all of that requires that we have the flexibility of a budget. .. ons between democrats and republicans that we are committed to bringing out a budget by february 8 so that we can give that type of predictability to the people of this country. that was one of the principle frustrations that many of us didn't want to go for a continuing resolution without knowing how we were going to deal with the budget. there are some sp

give us our appropriations. not 18 days, not 30 days. for the rest of the fiscal year. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> request to address the house for one minute, to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. for one minute. the house will come to order. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, it's simple. until you make it complicated. there's a poster in my office that says just that. it kind of describes where we're at. we're having a lot of debate in this house about the current government funding situation. our military, the children's health insurance program. mr. rothfus: which by the way house republicans actually voted to extend more than two months ago and again did this past week. here's the simple part. the children's health insurance program can be re-authorized. the government can be reopened and paychecks sent to our troops without delay if senators schumer and casey and othe

give us our appropriations. not 18 days, not 30 days. for the rest of the fiscal year. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> request to address the house for one minute, to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. for one minute. the house will come to order. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, it's simple. until you make it complicated. there's a poster in my office that says just that. it kind of describes where we're at. we're having a lot of debate in this house about the current government funding situation. our military, the children's health insurance program. mr. rothfus: which by the way house republicans actually voted to extend more than two months ago and again did this past week. here's the simple part. the children's health insurance program can be re-authorized. the government can be reopened and paychecks sent to our troops without delay if senators schumer and casey and othe

i'm a member of the defense appropriations subcommittee on the appropriations committee. and the way as the senator from north carolina knows, that we do defense appropriations is with great care. we have markups. we find out what each service branch needs in terms of personnel, in terms of bases and installation, in terms of new acquisitions. and that process takes a fair amount of time. and that markup is not done. and so i would love to move on dense appropriation -- defense appropriations, but from the standpoint of responsibly spending hundreds of billions of dollars, we're not there yet. so, therefore, i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call: mr. hatch: mr. president, america's kids have access to quality medical care is among my top priorities in the senate. that's why long ago i reached across the aisle to create the revolutionary children's health insurance program, or chip. i'm proud to call chip my own. ted kennedy -- teddy kennedy, to get this bill passed, and faced

we have now gotten into almost 10 years of no debate on the appropriations bill. one big hill at the end to the point in that culture apparently even bills that have nothing to do with the spending bill become a reason to shut the government down. i think democrats and republicans would like to see a chance to have a say beyond just a few people deciding what the ultimate bill looks like. to have a say on how we spend our money. i've talked to a number of democrats yesterday to want who want to rethink where their side has been on this issue and there's no better time to start the next appropriations bill did not have this as their goal for the next year not to have a big bill at the end and to have two come to the door face and a amendment and a member wants to make an wind up on the president's desk one or two at a time rather than all at one time time. >> is the leader mentioned one of the policy items that had gotten overshadowed based on government funding was the chip reauthorization a six-year full reauthorization of c.h.i.p.. as long as term the program is

allow our agencies to have full appropriations since they remainder of this year appropriations and i certainly hope that will conclude fy 19 and that will certainly be the best. and then it will be balanced, balanced between thehe needs of the department of defense and the non-defense agencies and we have a critical motions that required to have a full year of appropriations for an including our national defense department and their state department and the department of health and the national institutes of health and food safety and the ability to deliver checks for seniors all that requires that we have the perfect ability so we have i am pleased that we have during this debate and i wasn't pleased by the shutdown plan please that during this debate we had great discussions upon democrats and republicans that we are committed to bringing out a budget by february 8 so that we can give that type of predictability to the people of this country and that was one of the principal frustrations that many of us without knowing how to deal with the budget and we need to get done by no lat

general fund and $3 million grant appropriation. cast powerhouse comes in, provide $1 million, cast forms what's known as a qualified active low income community business for tax credit financing purpose, and in short, the financing deal generates $3.85 million, both of historic reservation and new market tax credits in net of financing costs. and third, the board of supervisors also approved a cast powerhouse llc supervises agreement. they pay for the city's construction costs and expenses for the powerhouse renovation, so the supplemental allows us to get reimbursed for those expenses. happy to have, answer any questions you might have. >> supervisor yee: no questions to this complicated formula. i assure you that both of us understand it. >> i could tell you, i want to thank severin campbell, theresa kau, nelson magrabang, i'm missing people, but we had a lot of help along the way to do this. >> supervisor yee: miss campbell. a report? >> page 41 outlines how the funds would work. the board of supervisors has previously proved th

i'm appropriators mrs. lowey is an appropriator. mrs. lowey is our ranking member with such distinction, and mr. frelinghuysen on your side. appropriators know how to get it done. they know the numbers. left to their own devices. it's when other factors weigh in that it becomes more challenging. let's just say, let's see if we can get that done because that dispositive of shortening the time between where we're now and if we get a solution. value to us, re a dispositive f and we told the president right from the start, it's not an issue. it's not a bill. it's a value of who we're as america. and i think that we can come to terms on that subject as well. and we but make no mistake, if there never were one dreamer in our country, we still would have this challenge on the money side of the debate. so let's not try to assign responsibility to the dreerms for the fact that we don't have the increase in defense. we're willing to go to that a place as we go honoring parity. honoring parity. that's what we agreed to in the budget agreement. what

or i should say the remainder of this year's appropriations. and i certainly hope that will include f.y. 2019. that would certainly be the best. and that it will be balanced, balanced between the needs of the department of defense and the nondefense agencies. we have critical functions that require to have a full year of appropriations for, including our national defense, department of defense, our state department, the department of health and the work that's done in national institutes of health, food safety and the federal drug administration, the ability of the social security administration to deliver checks to our seniors and to take care of our health care needs. all that requires that we have the predictability of a budge. so i'm -- predictability of a budget. i'm pleased that during this debate, not pleased we had a shutdown, we had great discussions between democrats and republicans that we are committed to bringing out a budget by february 8 so that we can give that type of predictability to the people of this country. that was one o

the government has also tried to severely limit the number of appropriately cleared staff who can review documents and even take notes. we have reviewed some information related to whether the fib used the so-called trump dossier and the extend of its relationships with its author christopher steele. as we know now, mr. steele was hired by fusion g.p.s. to research mr. trump's alleged ties to russia. his work was funded by the democratic national committee and the clinton campaign. now, remember, it took a subpoena and a court battle with the house intelligence committee to force that fact out into the open. lawyers for the democratic national committee and the bill clinton campaign officials denied it to the press for months. in other words, they lied. the founder of fusion g.p.s. denied that his firm was, quote-unquote, democratically linked. that, too, was untrue. when the news finally broke, "new york times" reporters actually complained that people who knew better had flat-out lied to them about who funded mr. steele's dossier. but back before the 2016 election, it is unclear who kn

which we will ask the appropriations committee to write the bills. then, there is reason to have a cr, otherwise, we could have innumerable cr's. they could go on forever. this one happened to expire last night. in the first minute after midnight was the first anniversary of president trump's first year in office. heat promised infrastructure -- he promised infrastructure. you gave us -- he gave us a train wreck. he always pushes back from it. so he said what this country needs is a good shutdown. we do not agree. what he set of president obama when we do not control the congress, and he controlled the white house, senate, and the house, and obama who did not control the congress, it starts at the top, that is what he said. the problems started at the top and it has to get solved at the top. the president has to get everyone in the room, and he has delete. and now, at the one-year failureary, a big, fat for that first year. so it is know use having another cr must be have the terms of engagement on how to go forward on the pay -- on the parity, on on

barbara lee, from the appropriations committee, wants to address a few of the items that are being appropriated and not appropriated, and the importance of it, and then we will close out with one more member. >> i want to thank our chairman and the congressional black caucus for their moral stand and responsible stand to not support the c.r. as a member of the appropriations committee, and the subcommittee that funds are -- our veterans, our workforce, department of labor, health, human services, all of our domestic programs, i can tell you with certainty that these c.r.'s that keep coming to us reflect a spending level that is devastating for our communities. devastating to community health centers, to our children's health program, to our disaster relief, to the opioid crisis, to all the issues this congressional black caucus stands for. so we have to get back to a budget that really signifies and realizes and says to the public that we care about the black community and communities of color by prioritizing spending on schools,, on housing on health care, on addressing disaster relief and all

we made clear this is about of andcreate --appropriations stability. support, in a bipartisan manner, getting government as an and funding -- funding a full year of appropriations. the president created the doctor crisis and if he did not want to if he did not and want to talk about it, he should not have to candidate -- have disbanded it in september. >> yesterday and here on the house, 100% of the democrats voted for the continuing resolution. but it time to get it dione c.r.,s goes on, one another c.r. i thank my colleagues for their leadership on this. on a personal note, i want to aay tribute to someone, he congressman. a real champion for the american people. pay tribute to the two of them for being great american patriots and sends my condolences to them. he was a sweet man. very patriotic. announcer: federal government shutdown friday at midnight. we are in day number two. our coverage continues on c-span. the senate in session on the into --on c-span two. this afternoon, no word on any white house briefing. we are hearing from the white house.

in the past three years every defense appropriations bill that has passed out of the appropriations committee has been filibustered by the democratic side. let me say that again. every time we brought a bill, usually a very bipartisan bill out of the appropriations committee for the funding for our troops, every single time it gets filibustered by the democratic side. that's not supporting our military. a number of us have come down. we talked about this. we encouraged our colleagues, don't support the filibuster. and then we've asked, why are you doing this? why are you doing this? we all know that our forces have been cut too dramatically, that national security challenges have increased, and yet every single time we bring a bill out of the appropriations committee to fund our troops, the other side filibusters that bill. now, most people back -- if most people back home knew that, whether they are democrat or republican, doesn't matter what state you live in, if you knew that was going on the senate floor, you probably wouldn't be happy. but that is happening and it still happens every tim

-- fiscal appropriation bills. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on the final passage. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york continues to reserve. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: mr. chairman, i'm pleased to yield a minute to the representive from north dakota, mr. cramer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north dakota is recognized for one minute. mr. cramer: i thank the gentleman for yielding and i thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the children's health insurance program provides health coverage to low-income, low-income children and pregnant women, to have annual income above the medicaid eligibility levels but have no health insurance. it provides care, in other words, mr. speaker, for some of the most vulnerable families in our nation. it covers nearly 5,000 children in my home state. in fact, in fiscal year 2016, north dakota received thsdz 19 million in chip funding. i encourage all of my colleagues to now support this impo

a budget and appropriation.tem has been broken many years in congress. >> thises n is not a normal wor. >> sadly, this is normal in congress but we want to change it. >> maybe we're going to change it. democratic congressman jackie speier of the state of california joins us. before we get into sexual harassment rules on the hill, and hopefully changes that you are trying to make, walk us through the government shutdown. you have said you would vote no on any continuing resolution unless it is clean. why? >> at this point, there is no negotiations going on, as compared to the sexual harassment bill that will be introduced today, where we've worked very closely together. there is a continuing resolution right now with a dump sum of positive things in for the democrats and cut off the affordable care act at its knees. so if you really want a cr in which you're going to have democratic support, you negotiate with the democrats. republicans are not negotiating with us. so they have control of the house of representat

back to the appropriations committee. one of the earlier guests said that a debate will be taking place in this next week. again we are under a temporary government funding. how do you see things playing out? >> i am very concerned that there hasn't been movement towarda movementtowards resolvic spending bill that was supposed to have been in place in september for the fiscal year starting october 1, but my republican colleagues were first obsessed with trying to pass a bill that would repel tear away from americans and then they spent all their time on a tax bill, not tax reform, but the bill to give up for the national treasury to the very richest americans over $2 trillion while collecting all of the fundamentals of governing. having the basic spending bill ready to go so we haven't addressed the opioid epidemic and that is why i'm wearing this ribbon tonight it is symbolic killing more people in america a van automobile accidents. they say they want to do something about it and then they do nothing to do. then it'to.

or was it real money and appropriation? >> wasn't in the meeting i don't know exactly, but from talking to leader schumer my impression is reluckantly offered full funding of military and full funding to build to wall or system never going to build a 2000 file concrete wall. >> you are saying authorization was appropriation willing to give you real money to build a wall. >> i think he had to explain that difference to the president about full appropriation year one versus authorization and commitment to appropriation the reality was, the president campaigned, on full funding for the military and border wall said -- remember two weeks ago preside brought in bipartisan deal want a dhaka deal i think called it a bill of love said we need a bipartisan solution i will take heat you all come back on thursday, present me with a solution six senators republican and democrat came back thursday presenting a bipartisan solution he fairly famously blew it up in plea of laden exchange with senators at the end of the day part of our chal

in the past three years every defense appropriations bill that has passed out of the appropriations committee has been filibustered by the democratic side. let me say that again. every time we brought a bill, usually a very bipartisan bill out of the appropriations committee for the funding for our troops, every single time it gets filibustered by the democratic side. that's not supporting our military. a number of us have come down. we talked about this. we encouraged our colleagues, don't support the filibuster. and then we've asked, why are you doing this? why are you doing this? we all know that our forces have been cut too dramatically, that national security challenges have increased, and yet every single time we bring a bill out of the appropriations committee to fund our troops, the other side filibusters that bill. now, most people back -- if most people back home knew that, whether they are democrat or republican, doesn't matter what state you live in, if you knew that was going on the senate floor, you probably wouldn't be happy. but that is happening and it still happens every tim

schumer's office if they offer to appropriate $20 billion.he next thing on your list, full funding for defense. not true. it was something that was in the budget request from fiscal year 18, i happen to write that budget. what the request is right now and the discussion is about the mda levels, which is slightly higher and that mr. schumer not only voted for, but is taking credit for back home for fully funding the military. he gives them a lower figure. >> chris: i don't play the role as the negotiator, but let me do it just for a moment. if senator schumer comes back and says i'm not talking about authorization, i'm talking about appropriation, 18 to $20 billion right now that you can build your wall and there are more democrats saying that including congressman gutierrez, with the president except that i would you make a deal? >> director mulvaney: i will not negotiate you with either. happy to talk about daca. want to resolve daca. what just part of his daca deal look like for the administration's perspective? number one, the southern bor

we don't appropriate money, usually. or we can't appropriate money. and we have another committee, which senator murray is the ranking member of and senator blunt is the chairman of, that's the money committee. so, for us to appropriate, say, $50 billion in new funding for national institutes of health is a wonderful aspiration, but that's not what we do. we decide, for example, whether dr. gottlieb should have a new breakthrough path for medical devices. if the appropriations committee were to decide that dr. gottlieb should have a breakthrough device pathway medical devices we would would be upset. we would say that's our probable and try to appropriate another $50 billion for you, the appropriations committee would be upset they'd say that's our job. let me ask you this, we have discretionary funding, that's the appropriations committee. we have mandatory funding, which this committee could do. what's the size of the nih budget this year? what's your total funding? >> $34 billion. >> how much of that is biomedical research? >> virtually all of it.

but we're going through the ordinary rhythm of a lapse in appropriations, the technical name for a shutdown managed by the office of management and budget through the various secretaries and i'll be talking to various cabinet secretaries as we work through how to manage the shutdown. each cabinet secretary do everything possible to keep as much of the government open as possible. it will be a different shutdown than 2013. that's a plan we are putting in place this morning. >> susan collins thinks they're this close. are they? >> that's great. i think you would have to reach out first to those sort of self-described centrist democrats. the folks who go back home. montana and wants to work with republicans and tries to run on that platform when he comes to washington and does something different. those are the folks you need to talk to. we've already seen four or five democrats already vote for keeping the government open. working in a bipartisan fashion. we need more of those. this government cannot open again until at least nine democrats support the measure. so it's entirely in their hands

those are routed to the proettesiate city again -- appropriate city agency. what she is asking not 24 hour, seven day an week availability for that dispatch. >> president turman: we could work with the homeless and city agencies to talk about building this protocol so it is an ongoing concern, we can do that, right? >> correct. >> we want community education on costs and limits on policing homelessness. we hear positive a lot from the community meetings that we can't ticket our way out of homelessness, but we hear the opposite message as well which, you know, which isn't helpful. >> president turman: the opposite message? >> encouraging residents to call the police when homeless people are present and they will remove them. >> president turman: who is doing that? >> i mean there is. >> president turman: not from the department? >> yes, from the department. >> president turman: our community engagement people within form the community when they do the community meetings about the appropriate channel to address these issues, is that correct? >> yes and also to

ok. >> ordinance appropriates $300,000 in cigarette litter abatement fees. appropriated 4.7 million in the current year, most to public works for street cleaning, some amount to treasury tax for administrative fees. our understanding that the $300,000 represents a surplus in fee revenues from 16-17 and 17-18. it would fund approximately 8900 hours in additional services and we recommend approval. >> supervisor tang: i just wanted to clarify, i just got confirmation that the supplemental was not formally introduced, just discussed during introduction and it was in the news, but anyway, i still would like for us to work together on figuring that piece out, if it is introduced formally. >> supervisor yee: ok. any public comments on this item? seeing none, public comments closed. >> supervisor tang: motion to send item 5 to the full board with positive recommendation. >> supervisor yee: motion passes. >> clerk: 6, resolution accepting the mental health services act assignment and assumption, related loan documents between the california housing finance agency an

i think it's appropriate at this time to recognize this. sam jordan ran for mayor in 1963, first african-american to do so on a progressive platform of social justice and racial equality. although he came in third place, jordan was widely referred to as the mayor. today i am honored to recognize the legacy of sam jordan. i'm introducing a resolution to rename part of galvez avenue to same jordan way to celebrate the contribution to bayview and entire city and county at large. [applause] i'm not done yet. i have more goodies for you. hope s.f. are you familiar with hope s.f.? i'm introducing a resolution for at least in hunters view to support a wellness center. the department of public health has committed to opening a wellness center in collaboration with hope s.f. and this in an effort to revitalize public housing. this will help us meet that goal and i look forward to further discussions on the benefits and, of course, the needs, the unfounded, profound needs for a wellness center in the community up on the hill. the third thing that i w

barbara lee from the appropriations committee wants to address a few of the items that are being appropriated and not being appropriated and it importance of them. then we will close out with a new damage. chairman to thank the and the caucus for the the moral stand to not support the cr. as a member of the , all ofations committee the domestic programs, i can tell you with certainty that these crs that keep coming to us reflect a spending level that is devastating for our communities. devastating to our disaster relief and you are a crisis and other issues. back to a budget that really signifies and realizes what it says to the public that we care about the prioritizingty by and spending on schools and on houses and health care. and addressing disaster relief. much chairman richman and cdc for standing firm. >> variant with this. and theere today tragedy that is occurring this is a trump tragedy. this was created by the person in the oval office who was inactive. showdown lies at the feet of the republicans and the top of the ticket, trump. let us be crystal clear. they have a large number o