2013: Schweikert Voted Against Calling For A "Comprehensive, Clean Continuing Resolution To End The Government Shutdown." In October 2013, Schweikert voted against an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "add[ed] language to the title of the bill indicating support of a 'comprehensive, clean continuing resolution to end the government shutdown.'" The bill itself temporarily funded only the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Indian Education and the Indian Health Service through December 15, 2013. The House rejected the amendment to the bill title by a vote of 161 to 228. [House Vote 549, 10/14/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/14/13; Congress.gov, H. J. Res. 80; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 480; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 80]
Bill Title Has No Direct Legislative Effect And Is Used Only To Identify The Bill. According to House Practice, "All bills are given a title that indicates the subject matter of the bill. A title is used strictly for purposes of identification and is not considered in passing on points of order relating to the provisions of the bill. [...] The title is retained on the bill during the various stages of enactment, including engrossment and is entered on the Journal and printed in the Congressional Record. However, it is not considered to be part of the enacted statute and is generally published only in the Statutes at Large. Indeed, when an enacted statute is codified and included in the United States Code, its title may be excluded or greatly abbreviated. A title cannot be used to negate the obvious meaning of the statute. However, a title may, as part of the legislative history, assist in resolving ambiguities" (internal citations and footnotes omitted). ["House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House," 1/5/11]
Underlying Bill Was Part Of Republican Strategy Of Funding Selected Agencies, Leaving The Majority Of The Federal Government Shut Down. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The new fiscal year began on Oct. 1, and because no funding agreement has been enacted, a partial shutdown of the government has occurred. To address certain high-profile issues, House Republicans have been considering a series of 'mini-CRs' that would provide temporary funding to selected departments, agencies and activities. [...] This measure provides funding for programs and activities of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Indian Education and Indian Health Service through Dec. 15, 2013, at the sequester-reduced funding levels effective at the end of FY 2013." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13]
Supporters Of Piecemeal Funding Bills Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bill Said Federal Government Should Not Be Funded In Small Pieces And Called On House Republicans To Re-Open Entire Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The White House on Oct. 4 expressed its opposition and said the president would veto the measure. In its policy statement, the administration said 'passage of piecemeal fiscal year 2014 appropriations legislation that restores only very limited activities ... is not a serious or responsible way to run the United States Government' and that the House should re-open all of government. The administration called on the House to approved the Senate-passed CR" (ellipsis in original). [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote To Fund The Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013, Without Any Changes To The Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a bill that would have temporarily funded the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Indian Education and the Indian Health Service through December 15, 2013. At the end of the debate, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ) moved to "recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee and report it back immediately with language providing for the House to recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H J Res 59), which would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Nov. 15, 2013." The eventual vote was on a motion to table an appeal of the ruling of the chair that Kirkpatrick's motion to recommit was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on her motion. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 216 to 180, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 547, 10/14/13; Congress.gov, H. J. Res. 80; Congressional Quarterly, 10/14/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 80]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Underlying Bill Was Part Of Republican Strategy Of Funding Selected Agencies, Leaving The Majority Of The Federal Government Shut Down. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The new fiscal year began on Oct. 1, and because no funding agreement has been enacted, a partial shutdown of the government has occurred. To address certain high-profile issues, House Republicans have been considering a series of 'mini-CRs' that would provide temporary funding to selected departments, agencies and activities. [...] This measure provides funding for programs and activities of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Indian Education and Indian Health Service through Dec. 15, 2013, at the sequester-reduced funding levels effective at the end of FY 2013." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13]
Supporters Of Piecemeal Funding Bills Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bill Said Federal Government Should Not Be Funded In Small Pieces And Called On House Republicans To Re-Open Entire Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The White House on Oct. 4 expressed its opposition and said the president would veto the measure. In its policy statement, the administration said 'passage of piecemeal fiscal year 2014 appropriations legislation that restores only very limited activities ... is not a serious or responsible way to run the United States Government' and that the House should re-open all of government. The administration called on the House to approved the Senate-passed CR" (ellipsis in original). [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote On The Senate's "Clean" Continuing Resolution, Which Would Have Re-Opened The Government. In October 2013, Schweikert voted for a motion to, according to Congressional Quarterly, "order the previous question (thus ending debate and the possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 380) that would provide for House floor consideration of a motion to disagree with the Senate amendments and request a conference on the farm bill (HR 2642). The rule also would provide for House floor consideration of resolutions that would express the sense of the House on the repeal of existing sugar tariff rate quotas (H Res 378) and on crop insurance premium limits (H Res 379)." A House special rule could have permitted consideration of the Senate's "clean" continuing resolution in multiple ways; indeed, it could have simply declared that when the House adopted the special rule, it would also adopt the Senate CR. Because the special rule being considered by the House did not include any such provisions, House rules prohibited amendments to the underlying bills that would, in effect, agree to the Senate's CR. The vote was on ordering the previous question, which would end debate on -- and prevent any further amendment of -- the proposed rule. The House ordered the previous question by a vote of 219 to 193, and the rule was then approved, which subsequently prevented the minority from offering a clean continuing resolution as an amendment to any of the underlying bills. [House Vote 543, 10/11/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/11/13; "House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House," 1/5/11; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 380]
House Rules Committee Republican Staff: A Vote To Order The Previous Question On A Rule Is "A Vote About What The House Should Be Debating" Which "Does Have Substantive Policy Implications." According to a 2010 memo written by the then-House Rules Committee's minority staff, "This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote against the Democratic majority agenda and a vote to allow the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be debating. [...] Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only available tools for those who oppose the Democratic majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the opportunity to offer an alternative plan." ["The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10]
If The House Had Refused To Order The Previous Question, The Minority Would Assume Control Of The House Floor For An Hour And Could Offer A Germane Amendment To The Rule. According to a 2010 memo written by the then-House Rules Committee's minority staff, "Because the vote today may look bad for the Democratic majority they will say 'the vote on the previous question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on adopting the resolution ... [and] has no substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.' But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the definition of the previous question used in the Floor Procedures Manual published by the Rules Committee in the 109th Congress, (page 56). Here's how the Rules Committee described the rule using information from Congressional Quarterly's 'American Congressional Dictionary': 'If the previous question is defeated, control of debate shifts to the leading opposition member (usually the minority Floor Manager) who then manages an hour of debate and may offer a germane amendment to the pending business.'" ["The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote To Fund The Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013, Without Any Changes To The Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a bill that would have temporarily funded the National Nuclear Security Administration through December 15, 2013. At the end of the debate, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rep. Robin Kelly (D-IL) moved to "recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee and report it back immediately with language providing for the House to recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H J Res 59), which would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Nov. 15, 2013." The eventual vote was on a motion to table an appeal of the ruling of the chair that Kelly's motion to recommit was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on her motion. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 226 to 195, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 541, 10/11/13; Congress.gov, H. J. Res. 76; Congressional Quarterly, 10/11/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 76]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Underlying Bill Was Part Of Republican Strategy Of Funding Selected Agencies, Leaving The Majority Of The Federal Government Shut Down. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The new fiscal year began on Oct. 1, and because no funding agreement has been enacted, a partial shutdown of the government has occurred. To address certain high-profile issues, House Republicans have been considering a series of 'mini-CRs' that would provide temporary funding to selected departments, agencies and activities. [...] This measure provides funding for programs and activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration through Dec. 15, 2013, at the sequester-reduced funding levels effective at the end of FY 2013. [...] The National Nuclear Security Administration operates the nation's nuclear weapons complex and stockpile." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13]
Supporters Of Piecemeal Funding Bills Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bill Said Federal Government Should Not Be Funded In Small Pieces And Called On House Republicans To Re-Open Entire Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The White House on Oct. 4 expressed its opposition and said the president would veto the measure. In its policy statement, the administration said 'passage of piecemeal fiscal year 2014 appropriations legislation that restores only very limited activities ... is not a serious or responsible way to run the United States Government' and that the House should re-open all of government. The administration called on the House to approved the Senate-passed CR" (ellipsis in original). [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote To Fund The Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013, Without Any Changes To The Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a bill that would have temporarily funded several border security-related parts of the Department of Homeland Security. At the end of the debate, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) moved to "recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee and report it back immediately with language providing for the House to recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H J Res 59), which would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Nov. 15, 2013." The eventual vote was on a motion to table an appeal of the ruling of the chair that Shea-Porter's motion to recommit was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on her motion. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 226 to 196, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 539, 10/10/13; Congress.gov, H. J. Res. 79; Congressional Quarterly, 10/10/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 79]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Underlying Bill Funded Several Border Security-Related Parts Of Homeland Security Department Through December 15, 2013. According to Congressional Quarterly, the bill "provide[d] funding for certain components of the Homeland Security Department through Dec. 15, 2013, at the sequester-reduced funding levels effective at the end of FY 2013. Specifically, funding would be provided for security, enforcement and investigation activities of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Coast Guard; for protection, preparedness, response and recovery activities of the National Protection and Programs Directorate's Office of Biometric Identity Management; and research, development, training and services activities of Citizenship and Immigration Services." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13]
Underlying Bill Was Part Of Republican Strategy Of Funding Selected Agencies, Leaving The Majority Of The Federal Government Shut Down. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The new fiscal year began on Oct. 1, and because no funding agreement has been enacted, a partial shutdown of the government has occurred. To address certain high-profile issues, House Republicans have been considering a series of 'mini-CRs' that would provide temporary funding to selected departments, agencies and activities. [...] This measure provides funding for certain components of the Homeland Security Department through Dec. 15, 2013, at the sequester-reduced funding levels effective at the end of FY 2013." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13]
Supporters Of Piecemeal Funding Bills Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bill Said Federal Government Should Not Be Funded In Small Pieces And Called On House Republicans To Re-Open Entire Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The White House on Oct. 4 expressed its opposition and said the president would veto the measure. In its policy statement, the administration said 'passage of piecemeal fiscal year 2014 appropriations legislation that restores only very limited activities ... is not a serious or responsible way to run the United States Government' and that the House should re-open all of government. The administration called on the House to approved the Senate-passed CR" (ellipsis in original). [Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote To Fund The Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013, Without Any Changes To The Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a bill that would have temporarily funded the Federal Aviation Administration through December 15, 2013. At the end of the debate, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rep. Elizabeth Esty (D-CT) moved to "recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee and report it back immediately with language providing for the House to recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H J Res 59), which would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Nov. 15, 2013." The eventual vote was on a motion to table an appeal of the ruling of the chair that Esty's motion to recommit was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on her motion. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 228 to 194, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 536, 10/9/13; Congress.gov, H. J. Res. 90; Congressional Quarterly, 10/9/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 90]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Underlying Bill Was Part Of Republican Strategy Of Funding Selected Agencies, Leaving The Majority Of The Federal Government Shut Down. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The new fiscal year began on Oct. 1, and because no funding agreement has been enacted, a partial shutdown of the government has occurred. To address certain high-profile issues, House Republicans have been considering a series of 'mini-CRs' that would provide temporary funding to selected departments, agencies and activities. [...] This bill provides funding for the Federal Aviation Administration through Dec. 15, 2013, at the sequester-reduced funding levels effective at the end of FY 2013." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/8/13]
Supporters Of Underlying Bill Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bill Said Federal Government Should Not Be Funded In Small Pieces And Called On House Republicans To Re-Open Entire Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Democrats in both the House and Senate have opposed House Republicans' piecemeal approach and have called for action on the Senate-passed continuing resolution (H J Res 59) that would fund the entire federal government. Similar to previous short-term funding bills the House has taken up, the White House on Wednesday said it would veto the measure." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/9/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote To Fund The Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013, Without Any Changes To The Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a bill creating a bicameral working group that would recommend federal spending changes and debt limit increases. At the end of the debate, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rep. Julia Brownley (D-CA) moved to "recommit the joint resolution [sic: bill] to the House Appropriations Committee [sic: House Rules Committee] and report it back immediately with language providing for the House to recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H J Res 59), which would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Nov. 15, 2013." The eventual vote was on a motion to table an appeal of the ruling of the chair that Brownley's motion to recommit was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on her motion. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 227 to 194, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 533, 10/8/13; Congress.gov, H.R. 3273; Congressional Quarterly, 10/8/13; Congressional Record, 10/8/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3273]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Republicans Said That They Would Not Agree To Raise The Federal Debt Ceiling Unless The Administration And Democrats Agreed To Significant Policy Changes That Would Reduce Future Spending. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Congress has been unable to reach agreement on stopgap FY 2014 funding (H J Res 59), with Republicans demanding changes to the 2010 health care reform law (PL 111-148; PL 111-152) in exchange for temporarily funding the government. As a result, a partial government shutdown began Oct. 1. The need to raise the nation's statutory debt limit also looms, with Treasury saying that unless Congress raises the borrowing limit by Oct. 17 it won't be able to fully finance all government obligations, which could lead to a default by the federal government. Republicans have called on Democrats and President Obama to enter into negotiations on the two issues and have said they won't raise the debt limit unless it is accompanied by fundamental changes to mandatory spending programs that will help reduce future spending and the growth of the nation's debt, arguing that government spending remains the primary cause of growing debt." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/8/13]
Rep. Brownley: Underlying Bill Would "Simply Prolong The Government Shutdown," And Adopting Her Amendment Would End It. According to the Congressional Record, Rep. Brownley said, "My amendment is a simple, straightforward improvement that I believe both sides can agree is absolutely necessary, and it is also supported by the majority of the American people. If my amendment passes, it will end this reckless and irresponsible government shutdown. The majority claims that the bill before us right now will force the House and Senate to negotiate; but as written, this bill will do nothing of the sort. It will simply prolong the government shutdown. It will prolong the pain being done to our veterans, to the National Guard and Reserves, and to women, infants, and children; and, most importantly, this bill will prolong the pain being inflicted on our economy. Let's be clear, this bill is a bill to nowhere. In my view, there is no one in this room right now who thinks this bill will reopen the government." [Congressional Record, 10/8/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote On The Senate's "Clean" Continuing Resolution, Which Would Have Re-Opened The Government. In October 2013, Schweikert voted for a motion to, according to Congressional Quarterly, "order the previous question (thus ending debate and the possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 373) that would provide for House floor consideration of joint resolutions that would provide funds to pay for salaries of federal employees working during the government shutdown (H J Res 89); and provide fiscal 2014 continuing appropriations for the Federal Aviation Administration (H J Res 90); and a bill (HR 3273) to establish a 20-member bicameral working group to seek agreement on discretionary spending levels, increases in the debt limit and changes to mandatory spending." A House special rule could have permitted consideration of the Senate's "clean" continuing resolution in multiple ways. For example, it could have simply declared that when the House adopted the rule, it would have also adopted the Senate CR. Because the special rule being considered by the House did not include any such provisions, House rules prohibited consideration of amendments to the underlying bills that would, in effect, agree to the Senate's CR. The vote was on ordering the previous question, which would end debate on -- and prevent any further amendment of -- the proposed rule. The House ordered the previous question by a vote of 226 to 186, and the rule was then approved, which subsequently prevented the minority from offering a clean continuing resolution as an amendment to any of the underlying bills. [House Vote 531, 10/8/13; Congress.gov, H. Res. 373; Congressional Quarterly, 10/8/13; "House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House," 1/5/11; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 373]
House Rules Committee Republican Staff: A Vote To Order The Previous Question On A Rule Is "A Vote About What The House Should Be Debating" Which "Does Have Substantive Policy Implications." According to a 2010 memo written by the then-House Rules Committee's minority staff, "This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote against the Democratic majority agenda and a vote to allow the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be debating. [...] Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only available tools for those who oppose the Democratic majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the opportunity to offer an alternative plan." ["The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10]
If The House Refused To Order The Previous Question, The Minority Would Assume Control Of The House Floor For An Hour And Could Offer A Germane Amendment To The Rule. According to a 2010 memo written by the then-House Rules Committee's minority staff, "Because the vote today may look bad for the Democratic majority they will say 'the vote on the previous question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on adopting the resolution ... [and] has no substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.' But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the definition of the previous question used in the Floor Procedures Manual published by the Rules Committee in the 109th Congress, (page 56). Here's how the Rules Committee described the rule using information from Congressional Quarterly's 'American Congressional Dictionary': 'If the previous question is defeated, control of debate shifts to the leading opposition member (usually the minority Floor Manager) who then manages an hour of debate and may offer a germane amendment to the pending business.'" ["The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Supporters Of Underlying Bills Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bills Said Federal Government Should Not Be Funded In Small Parts And Called On House Republicans To Re-Open Entire Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Democrats in both the House and Senate have opposed House Republicans' piecemeal approach and have called for action on the Senate-passed continuing resolution (H J Res 59) that would fund the entire federal government. Similar to previous short-term funding bills the House has taken up, the White House on Wednesday said it would veto the measure." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/9/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote To Fund The Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013, Without Any Changes To The Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a joint resolution to temporarily fund the Head Start program through December 15, 2013. At the end of the debate, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA) moved to "recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee and report it back immediately with language providing for the House to recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H J Res 59), which would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Nov. 15, 2013." The vote was on a motion to table an appeal of the ruling of the chair that Capps' motion to recommit was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on her motion. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 226 to 191, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 529, 10/8/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/8/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 84]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Underlying Bill Was Part Of Republican Strategy Of Funding Selected Agencies, Leaving The Majority Of The Federal Government Shut Down. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The new fiscal year began on Oct. 1, and because no funding agreement has been enacted, a partial shutdown of the government has occurred. To address certain high-profile issues, House Republicans have been considering a series of 'mini-CRs' that would provide temporary funding to selected departments, agencies and activities. [...] This bill provides funding for the Head Start Program through Dec. 15, 2013, at the sequester-reduced funding levels effective at the end of FY 2013." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/3/13]
Supporters Of Underlying Bill Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bill Said House Republicans Should Fund The Entire Government Rather Than Just A Few Pieces. According to a Statement of Administration Policy issued by the Office of Management and Budget, "The Administration strongly opposes House passage of piecemeal fiscal year 2014 appropriations legislation that restores only very limited activities. Consideration of appropriations bills in this fashion is not a serious or responsible way to run the United States Government. Instead of opening up a few Government functions, the House of Representatives should re-open all of the Government. The harmful impacts of a shutdown extend across Government, affecting services that are critical to small businesses, women, children, seniors, and others across the Nation. The Senate acted in a responsible manner on a short-term funding measure to maintain Government functions and avoid a damaging Government shutdown. The House of Representatives should allow a straight up or down vote on the Senate-passed H.J. Res. 59." [Office of Management and Budget, 10/4/13]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Block A Vote To Fund Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013, Without Any Changes To The Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a bill to temporarily fund the Food and Drug Administration through December 15, 2013. At the end of the debate, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA) moved to "recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee and report it back immediately with language providing for the House to recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H J Res 59), which would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Nov. 15, 2013." The vote was on a motion to table an appeal of the ruling of the chair that Farr's motion to recommit was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on his motion. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 217 to 182, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 527, 10/7/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/7/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 77]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Underlying Bills Continued Republican Strategy Of Funding Selected Agencies While Leaving The Majority Of The Federal Government Shut Down. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Instead, House Republicans have chosen to move piecemeal spending bills that they are pressing senators to back, and today will vote on one to fund the FDA (H J Res 77) and one (H J Res 75) to fund a program that provides nutrition support for expecting and nursing mothers and their babies. The bills would provide funds for the programs through Dec. 15 at fiscal 2013 levels." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Supporters Of Underlying Bills Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bills Said They Addressed Those Closures That Had Hurt Shutdown Supporters Politically, And Called On House Republicans To Re-Open The Entire Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Senate Democrats Friday pledged to resist individual spending bills that would restart funding for the Food and Drug Administration and a nutrition program, and warned of the threat to public health if the government shutdown continues. 'For the sake of all Americans' health, the shutdown needs to end now,' said Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich. [. . .] Democrats said they would not accept the individual bills, and accused House Republicans of trying to pick political winners. 'What they decide to send to us tomorrow is where we shame them today,' said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara A. Mikulski of Maryland." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote To Fund Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013, Without Any Changes To The Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a bill to temporarily fund FEMA through December 15, 2013. At the end of that debate, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rep. Timothy Bishop (D-NY) moved to "recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee and report it back immediately with language providing for the House to recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H J Res 59), which would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Nov. 15, 2013." The eventual vote was on a motion to table the appeal of the ruling of the chair that Bishop's motion to recommit was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on his motion. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 224 to 185, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 521, 10/4/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 85]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Underlying Bills Continued Republican Strategy Of Funding Selected Agencies While Leaving The Majority Of The Federal Government Shut Down. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Instead, House Republicans have chosen to move piecemeal spending bills that they are pressing senators to back, and today will vote on one to fund the FDA (H J Res 77) and one (H J Res 75) to fund a program that provides nutrition support for expecting and nursing mothers and their babies. The bills would provide funds for the programs through Dec. 15 at fiscal 2013 levels." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Supporters Of Underlying Bills Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bills Said They Addressed Those Closures That Had Hurt Shutdown Supporters Politically, And Called On House Republicans To Re-Open The Entire Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Senate Democrats Friday pledged to resist individual spending bills that would restart funding for the Food and Drug Administration and a nutrition program, and warned of the threat to public health if the government shutdown continues. 'For the sake of all Americans' health, the shutdown needs to end now,' said Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich. [. . .] Democrats said they would not accept the individual bills, and accused House Republicans of trying to pick political winners. 'What they decide to send to us tomorrow is where we shame them today,' said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara A. Mikulski of Maryland." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote On The Senate's "Clean" Continuing Resolution, Which Would Have Re-Opened The Government. In October 2013, Schweikert voted for a motion to end debate on a proposed House rule that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for House floor consideration of joint resolutions to provide fiscal 2014 continuing appropriations at post-sequester fiscal 2013 funding levels for the following: nutrition (H J Res 75); nuclear programs (H J Res 76); the Food and Drug Administration (H J Res 77); national intelligence (H J Res 78), border security and immigration (H J Res 79); certain Native American programs (H J Res 80); the National Weather Service (H J Res 82); Impact Aid (H J Res 83); Head Start (H J Res 84); the Federal Emergency Management Agency (H J Res 85); and a bill (HR 3233) that would provide retroactive pay for furloughed federal workers." The vote was on ordering the previous question, which would end debate on -- and prevent any further amendment to -- the proposed rule. The House ordered the previous question by a vote of 223 to 184, and the rule was then approved, which subsequently prevented the minority from offering a clean continuing resolution as an amendment to any of the underlying bills. [House Vote 519, 10/4/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13; "The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 371]
House Rules Committee Republican Staff: A Vote To Order The Previous Question On A Rule Is "A Vote About What The House Should Be Debating" Which "Does Have Substantive Policy Implications." According to a 2010 memo written by the then-House Rules Committee's minority staff, "This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote against the Democratic majority agenda and a vote to allow the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be debating. [...] Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only available tools for those who oppose the Democratic majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the opportunity to offer an alternative plan." ["The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10]
If The House Refused To Order The Previous Question, The Minority Would Assume Control Of The House Floor For An Hour And Could Offer A Germane Amendment To The Rule. According to a 2010 memo written by the then-House Rules Committee's minority staff, "Because the vote today may look bad for the Democratic majority they will say 'the vote on the previous question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on adopting the resolution ... [and] has no substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.' But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the definition of the previous question used in the Floor Procedures Manual published by the Rules Committee in the 109th Congress, (page 56). Here's how the Rules Committee described the rule using information from Congressional Quarterly's 'American Congressional Dictionary': 'If the previous question is defeated, control of debate shifts to the leading opposition member (usually the minority Floor Manager) who then manages an hour of debate and may offer a germane amendment to the pending business.'" ["The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Underlying Bills Continued Republican Strategy Of Funding Selected Agencies While Leaving The Majority Of The Federal Government Shutdown. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Instead, House Republicans have chosen to move piecemeal spending bills that they are pressing senators to back, and today will vote on one to fund the FDA (H J Res 77) and one (H J Res 75) to fund a program that provides nutrition support for expecting and nursing mothers and their babies. The bills would provide funds for the programs through Dec. 15 at fiscal 2013 levels." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Supporters Of Underlying Bills Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bills Said They Addressed Those Closures That Had Hurt Shutdown Supporters Politically, And Called On House Republicans To Re-Open The Entire Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Senate Democrats Friday pledged to resist individual spending bills that would restart funding for the Food and Drug Administration and a nutrition program, and warned of the threat to public health if the government shutdown continues. 'For the sake of all Americans' health, the shutdown needs to end now,' said Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich. [. . .] Democrats said they would not accept the individual bills, and accused House Republicans of trying to pick political winners. 'What they decide to send to us tomorrow is where we shame them today,' said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara A. Mikulski of Maryland." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote To Fund Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013 Without Any Changes To Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Before passing the National Guard measure, the House voted [. . .] to table the appeal of a ruling of the chair that offering a continuing resolution that contains no changes to the 2010 health care overhaul (PL 111-148, PL 111-152) is not germane. Bill Enyart, D-Ill., attempted to offer the Senate-passed stopgap funding measure (H J Res 59) as a motion to recommit. The motion was ruled not germane because it exceeded the bill's jurisdiction to fund National Guard and reserve salaries. Passage of the Senate-passed measure would send the measure, which would fund the entire federal government, to the president who has said he would sign it into law." The vote was on the motion to table the appeal of the ruling of the chair that Enyart's (D-IL) proposed motion to recommit with instructions was not germane; that ruling had had the effect of blocking a vote on the motion to recommit. The House adopted the motion to table by a vote of 228 to 194, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 515, 10/3/13; Congress.gov, H.R. 3230; Congressional Quarterly, 10/3/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3230]
Underlying Bill Was Part Of House Republican Strategy To Fund Selected Parts Of Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "House Republicans have now decided to move a series of 'mini-CRs' that would provide temporary funding to selected departments, agencies and activities." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Rules Committee Had Rejected Motion To Permit Vote On "Clean" Continuing Resolution. According to Congressional Quarterly, "But the committee rejected, along party lines, a motion from Rules ranking member Louise M. Slaughter, D-N.Y., to permit a vote on the Senate version of the full continuing resolution (H J Res 59)." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
Supporters Of Selective Funding Bills Said If Democrats Want Federal Agencies To Be Open, They Should Vote To Fund Them. According to Congressional Quarterly, "'The concept is pretty general: If there's really parts of the government that Democrats want to fund, we're going to give them that chance,' Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., said after a House Republican Conference meeting Tuesday." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
Opponents Of Selective Funding Bills Said Federal Government Should Not Be Funded Piecemeal And House Should Fund All Government Functions. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The Office of Management and Budget issued a new veto threat Wednesday through a Statement of Administration Policy that covered all five GOP proposals. 'Consideration of appropriations bills in a piecemeal fashion is not a serious or responsible way to run the United States Government,' it said. 'Instead of opening up a few Government functions, the House of Representatives should re-open all of the Government.' It urged the House to allow an up-or-down vote on the Senate version of the House continuing resolution." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
2013: During 2013 Government Shutdown, Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote On Funding The Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013 Without Any Changes To Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a joint resolution to fund the National Park Service and National Park System, the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, the Smithsonian Institution, and the National Gallery of Art through December 15, 2013. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Before passing the spending legislation Wednesday, the House affirmed, [...] along party lines, a motion to table the appeal of a ruling that offering a continuing resolution---without health care policy riders---is not germane. Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., who was presiding over floor debate, ruled the motion not germane because it exceeded the jurisdiction of the legislation (H J Res 70) funding national parks and museums. Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, attempted to offer the Senate-passed stopgap spending measure (H J Res 59) funding the entire government as a motion to recommit. Its passage would send the measure to the president who has said he would sign it into law to reopen the government." The vote was on a motion to table an appeal of the ruling of the chair that Van Hollen's (D-MD) proposed motion to recommit with instructions was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on the motion to recommit. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 230 to 194, killing the motion to recommit. The underlying joint resolution then passed the House, but as of October 3, 2013, no further action had occurred on it. [House Vote 512, 10/2/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13; CRS Summary of H.J.Res. 70, 10/2/13; Congressional Record, 10/2/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 70]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote On The Senate's "Clean" Continuing Resolution, Which Would Have Re-Opened The Government. In October 2013, Schweikert voted for a motion to end debate on a proposed House rule that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for House floor consideration of the joint resolutions to provide fiscal 2014 continuing appropriations for national parks and museums ( H J Res 70), District of Columbia (H J Res 71), veterans' programs (H J Res 72), the National Institutes of Health (H J Res 73) and a bill (HR 3230) to provide temporary funds for National Guard and Reserves inactive duty." The vote was on ordering the previous question, which would end debate on -- and prevent any further amendment to -- the proposed rule. The House ordered the previous question by a vote of 227 to 197, and the rule was then approved, which subsequently prevented the minority from offering a clean continuing resolution as an amendment. [House Vote 509, 10/2/13; Congress.gov, H. Res. 370; Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13; "The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 370]
House Rules Committee Republican Staff: A Vote To Order The Previous Question On A Rule Is "A Vote About What The House Should Be Debating" Which "Does Have Substantive Policy Implications." According to a 2010 memo written by the then-House Rules Committee's minority staff, "This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote against the Democratic majority agenda and a vote to allow the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be debating. [...] Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only available tools for those who oppose the Democratic majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the opportunity to offer an alternative plan." ["The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10]
If The House Refused To Order The Previous Question, The Minority Would Assume Control Of The House Floor For An Hour And Could Offer A Germane Amendment To The Rule. According to a 2010 memo written by the then-House Rules Committee's minority staff, "Because the vote today may look bad for the Democratic majority they will say 'the vote on the previous question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on adopting the resolution ... [and] has no substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.' But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the definition of the previous question used in the Floor Procedures Manual published by the Rules Committee in the 109th Congress, (page 56). Here's how the Rules Committee described the rule using information from Congressional Quarterly's 'American Congressional Dictionary': 'If the previous question is defeated, control of debate shifts to the leading opposition member (usually the minority Floor Manager) who then manages an hour of debate and may offer a germane amendment to the pending business.'" ["The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10]
Underlying Bills Funded Selected Agencies While Leaving The Majority Of The Federal Government Shutdown. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The House moved toward debate on five proposals to reopen selected federal agencies and institutions Wednesday in advance of a White House meeting between President Barack Obama and congressional leaders Wednesday evening. The House Rules Committee approved, 9-3, a rule that clears the way for the House to reconsider three limited continuing resolutions (H J Res 70, H J Res 71, H J Res 72) that were defeated Tuesday under suspension of the rules because they did not reach the two-thirds threshold required for passage, although each did receive a majority. Two new proposals are also available for debate that would temporarily extend funding for the National Institutes of Health (H J Res 73) and for members of the National Guard and reserves (HR 3230). [. . .] The three limited stopgap spending plans defeated Tuesday under suspension of the rules in the House would fund the National Park Service and Department of Veterans Affairs and authorize the District of Columbia to spend its municipal funds." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Rules Committee Had Rejected Motion To Permit Vote On "Clean" Continuing Resolution. According to Congressional Quarterly, "But the committee rejected, along party lines, a motion from Rules ranking member Louise M. Slaughter, D-N.Y., to permit a vote on the Senate version of the full continuing resolution (H J Res 59)." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
Supporters Said That If Democrats Wanted Federal Agencies To Be Open, They Should Vote To Fund Them. According to Congressional Quarterly, "'The concept is pretty general: If there's really parts of the government that Democrats want to fund, we're going to give them that chance,' Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., said after a House Republican Conference meeting Tuesday." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
Opponents Said Federal Government Should Not Be Funded Piece-By-Selected-Piece And That The House Should Fund All Government Functions. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The Office of Management and Budget issued a new veto threat Wednesday through a Statement of Administration Policy that covered all five GOP proposals. 'Consideration of appropriations bills in a piecemeal fashion is not a serious or responsible way to run the United States Government,' it said. 'Instead of opening up a few Government functions, the House of Representatives should re-open all of the Government.' It urged the House to allow an up-or-down vote on the Senate version of the House continuing resolution." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block House Democrats The Ability To Force An Up-Or-Down Vote On The Senate-Passed "Clean" Continuing Resolution. In September 2013, Schweikert voted for a motion to, according to Congressional Quarterly, "order the previous question (thus ending debate and the possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 367) that would provide for House floor consideration of the Senate amendment to the joint resolution that would provide fiscal 2014 continuing appropriations." The rule only permitted consideration of a Rules Committee-specified amendment to the Senate-passed continuing resolution. The House adopted the motion to order the previous question by a vote of 229 to 198. The House then approved the proposed rule. [House Vote 501, 9/30/13; Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13; House Report 113-239, 9/30/13; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 367]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
The Proposed Rule Only Authorized House To Consider A Rules Committee-Specified Amendment To The Senate's CR. According to the House Rules Committee's report on the rule, it "The resolution provides for the consideration of the Senate amendment to H.J. Res. 59, the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2014. The resolution makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or his designee that the House recede from its amendments and concur in the Senate amendment with the amendment printed in this report. The resolution provides 40 minutes of debate on the motion equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The resolution provides that the Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The resolution waives all points of order against consideration of the motion." [House Report 113-239, 9/30/13]
House Rules Committee Republican Staff: A Vote To Order The Previous Question On A Rule Is "A Vote About What The House Should Be Debating" Which "Does Have Substantive Policy Implications." According to a 2010 memo written by the then-House Rules Committee's minority staff, "This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote against the Democratic majority agenda and a vote to allow the opposition, at least for the moment, to offer an alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be debating. [...] Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only available tools for those who oppose the Democratic majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the opportunity to offer an alternative plan." ["The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10]
If The House Refused To Order The Previous Question, The Minority Would Assume Control Of The House Floor For An Hour And Could Offer A Germane Amendment To The Rule. According to a 2010 memo written by the then-House Rules Committee's minority staff, "Because the vote today may look bad for the Democratic majority they will say 'the vote on the previous question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on adopting the resolution ... [and] has no substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.' But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the definition of the previous question used in the Floor Procedures Manual published by the Rules Committee in the 109th Congress, (page 56). Here's how the Rules Committee described the rule using information from Congressional Quarterly's 'American Congressional Dictionary': 'If the previous question is defeated, control of debate shifts to the leading opposition member (usually the minority Floor Manager) who then manages an hour of debate and may offer a germane amendment to the pending business.'" ["The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means," House Rules Committee Minority Staff Memo, 3/18/10]
Rules Committee-Specified Amendment Delayed ACA's Individual Mandate For One Year And Barred Federal Contributions To Lawmakers' And Staffers' Health Insurance. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The leaders' latest plan would delay for a year a mandate in the Affordable Care Act (PL 111-148, PL 111-152) that individuals buy insurance and include a proposal from Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to roll back federal contributions provided to lawmakers and staff to offset some of the cost of health insurance, a benefit many other employers provide their workers." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Rep. Peter King (R-NY) Opposed Rule, Said Process Of Attaching Conditions To Continuing Resolution Was "Dead End" And A Clean Continuing Resolution Should Be Voted On. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Rep. Peter T. King, R-N.Y., said he would vote against the rule because it is a 'dead end' that the Senate will not accept. He said leaders should put a clean continuing resolution on the House floor for a vote. 'We have to end this process,' King said. 'I don't want to facilitate a process that's doomed.'" (Note: King voted in favor of ordering the previous question.) [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Supporters Said Delaying Individual Mandate Was Fair In Light Of Administration's Year-Long Delay Of Employer Mandate And Law's Alleged Exception For Members Of Congress. According to Congressional Quarterly, "'It's pretty clear that what our Members want is fairness for the American people,' Boehner said in a statement issued after a House Republican Conference meeting. 'The president provided a one-year delay of the employer mandate. He's provided exceptions for unions and others. There's even exceptions for Members of Congress. We believe that everyone should be treated fairly.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Backers Of Barring Federal Contribution To Cost Of Members' And Staff's Health Care Premiums Argued That It Would Put Congress In The Same Position As Ordinary Americans With Regards To The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The House plan also would include language long pursued by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., that would roll back contributions provided to members and staff. He and other Republicans say it would ensure that Congress is subject to the same law as ordinary citizens. 'The entire cabinet and the president and all his political appointees will have to live under Obamacare, the same as members of Congress,' said Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. 'We still continue to believe the individual mandate being delayed is in the best interests of the American people.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Opponents Of Ending Federal Contribution Argued It Meant Members And Their Staffs Would Be Treated Differently Than Ordinary Federal Employees. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., said he's not sure he'd vote for the plan because it puts legislative branch employees in a lower class than other federal employees. 'Making us different than any other federal employee is unfair to everybody. We should be treated like everybody else who works in the federal government,' he said." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Create A New 'Super Committee' Focused On Spending And Debt Limit. In October 2013, Schweikert voted for legislation that would have created a 20 member, bicameral working group focused on government spending and the debt limit. According to Congressional Quarterly, the legislation would have "establish[ed] a 20-member bicameral working group to recommend to the House and the Senate overall levels of discretionary spending, increases in the statutory debt limit and changes to mandatory spending. The group would [have] be[en] required to meet within one day of members being appointed and would meet daily until a majority from both chambers have adopted recommendations, or until the working group co-chairs determine there is good cause not to meet. Recommendations would [have] be[en] reported within three days of their adoption." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 224 to 197. The bill died in the Senate. [House Vote 534, 10/8/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/8/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3273]
2013: Schweikert Voted Against Shutdown-Ending Compromise Agreement That Funded The Federal Government Through January 15, 2014 And Suspended Federal Debt Ceiling Through February 7, 2014. In October 2013, Schweikert voted against a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "require[d] the Health and Human Services Department to verify the income qualifications of people who apply for tax subsidies under the 2010 health care overhaul. [. . .] [and] provide[d] continuing appropriations for government operations through Jan. 15, 2014, reflecting an annual discretionary level of about $986 billion. It would allow federal borrowing to continue through Feb. 7, 2014, after the president certifies that the U.S. Treasury cannot pay its obligations and would set up an expedited process for Congress to consider resolutions of disapproval for the debt limit increase authorized by the bill. It also would provide for retroactive pay for federal employees who worked through the government shutdown that began on Oct. 1, 2013 and for workers furloughed during that time." The vote was on a motion to concur with the Senate's version of the bill, which the House agreed to by a vote of 285 to 144. Afterwards, the bill was sent to the president, who signed it into law. [House Vote 550, 10/16/13; Congress.gov, H.R. 2775; Congressional Quarterly, 10/16/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2775]
Both Furloughed And Essential Federal Workers Received Back Pay For The 16 Day Government Shutdown. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Federal workers, including about 800,000 who were furloughed due to the shutdown and those deemed essential, will receive back pay for the past 16 days. States that used their own funds to implement operations normally paid by the federal government will be reimbursed." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/16/13]
HHS Was Required To Verify Income Of Health Insurance Subsidy Applicants, But Bill Made No Other Changes To The Affordable Care Act. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Despite some Republicans' efforts to dismantle or defund Obama's signature health care overhaul (PL 111-148, PL 111-152), the only provision related to the 2010 law requires the Department of Health and Human Services to verify the income qualifications of people who apply for tax subsidies to help buy health insurance." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/16/13]
Conference Committee Convened To Negotiate House-Senate Fiscal 2014 Budget Agreement By December 13, 2013. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Under the Senate deal, a conference would be created to negotiate a fiscal 2014 budget agreement, with directions to report a deal by Dec. 13 to give Congress time to adopt a concurrent budget resolution setting out binding totals for broad categories of spending and revenues before the stopgap spending plan expires in mid-January." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/16/13]
Bill Increased Authorized Federal Funding For Olmstead Lock Project By Over $2 Billion, A Priority Of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). According to Congressional Quarterly, "One of those provisions was language to increase the authorization for the Olmsted Lock project on the Ohio River between Illinois and Kentucky to almost $3 billion from $775 million. That provision effectively locks in language from the Senate-passed water resources bill (S 601) that would shift the entire cost of the project from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund to taxpayers. A bill (HR 3080) the House is expected to take up next week would shift a smaller share of the costs to taxpayers. Currently, the costs of the project are split evenly by the trust fund and the federal government, and the growing price tag has been eating up the lion's share of the trust fund, limiting money for repairs elsewhere in the inland waterways system. The estimated cost of the project has soared to about $3 billion from the $775 million estimate when it was first authorized a quarter century ago. Shifting the costs has long been a priority of barge operators, who support the Inland Waterways Trust Fund with a tax on the diesel they burn. It also has been a priority of McConnell, whose GOP critics wasted no time attacking what they called an improper earmark." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/16/13]
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) Said He Asked That The Olmstead Lock Provision Be Included In The Deal. According to the Lexington Herald-Leader, "The deal contained a $2.8 billion authorization for the Olmstead lock and dam project in Western Kentucky that at first glance appeared to many as McConnell sneaking pork into the last-minute bill. While McConnell was the target, Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander said he asked for its inclusion. [...] McConnell has long been a supporter of the Olmstead project, but his Senate office said that the Senate Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development has 'stated publicly that this was their request.' Questions about McConnell's involvement were referred to U.S. Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Alexander, R-Tenn., the chairwoman and ranking member of the subcommittee." [Lexington Herald-Leader, 10/16/13]
Bill Set Up A Presidentially Triggered Suspension Of The Debt Ceiling Until February 7, 2014; Congress Would Then Have Opportunity To End Suspension Early. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The bill provides for the suspension through Feb. 7, 2014, of the current statutory limit on federal borrowing, which would allow the government to borrow whatever it needs through that time to fully finance government operations --- unless Congress enacts a resolution of disapproval. [...] Under the measure, the current $16.7 trillion statutory limit would be suspended once the president submits to Congress a written certification that the Treasury Department would otherwise be unable to issue debt to meet existing federal obligations. This certification must be made within three days of enactment. [...] The [Senate] amendment allows Congress to cancel this suspension of the debt limit and prevent any further borrowing by the Treasury by enacting a resolution of disapproval. (Such a disapproval is considered unlikely, however, since the president would almost certainly veto a disapproval resolution and Congress would be unlikely to muster the two-thirds vote needed to override the president's veto.) [...] If enacted into law within 22 days of when the president submits his certification, that suspension authority would be terminated and the debt limit would be set at the increased level of borrowing that had occurred through that time." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/16/13]
Republican Supporters Said Bill Restored A Measure Of Sanity By Ending Shutdown And Threat Of Federal Default. According to Congressional Quarterly, "During floor debate, several House Republicans urged passage of the measure to end the standoff. 'After two long weeks, it's time to end the government shutdown,' said House Appropriations Chairman Harold Rogers, R-Ky. 'It's time to take the threat of default off the table. It's time to restore some sanity to this place.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/16/13]
Democrats Said Shutdown Had Been Unnecessary, As House Republicans Should Have Allowed A Vote On A Clean Continuing Resolution Earlier. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Democrats, who had been calling for a vote on a 'clean' stopgap spending bill, said that the shutdown had been unnecessary. 'Thank you, Speaker Boehner, for finally allowing a majority of House members to vote on reopening the government and avoid default,' said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. 'We can bring this sadness to an end.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/16/13]
Republicans Who Opposed Bill Said Lack Of Delay Or Repeal Of ACA Meant Millions Of Americans Suffering From It Would Receive No Help. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who staged a 21-hour talk-a-thon in late September to urge Congress to defund the law, voted against the measure but did not obstruct its swift passage. He maintained that the GOP would continue to fight against implementation of the health care law. 'Unfortunately, once again here the Washington establishment isn't going to listen to the American people,' Cruz said in an impromptu news conference as the deal was officially announced midday Wednesday. 'The deal that has been cut provides no relief to the millions of Americans who are hurting because of Obamacare.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/16/13]
October, 2013: Schweikert Voted To Block A Vote To Fund Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013, Without Any Changes To The Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a bill to temporarily fund the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children through December 15, 2013. At the end of that debate, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ) moved to "recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee and report it back immediately with language providing for the House to recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H J Res 59), which would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Nov. 15, 2013." The eventual vote was on a motion to table an appeal of the ruling of the chair that Kirkpatrick's proposed motion to recommit was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on her motion. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 223 to 185, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 523, 10/4/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 75]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Supporters Of Underlying Bills Said Congress Should Re-Open Agencies Where Parties Agreed On Funding. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Earlier this week, the House passed a handful of piecemeal funding bills, and the chamber is expected to vote on others this weekend and early next week. 'Here is a place where we all have agreement,' said Georgia Republican Rob Woodall. 'Whatever else we have, we can continue that conversation later. Let's do what we all agree on.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
Opponents Of Underlying Bills Said They Addressed Those Closures That Had Hurt Shutdown Supporters Politically, And Called On House Republicans To Re-Open The Entire Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Senate Democrats Friday pledged to resist individual spending bills that would restart funding for the Food and Drug Administration and a nutrition program, and warned of the threat to public health if the government shutdown continues. 'For the sake of all Americans' health, the shutdown needs to end now,' said Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich. [. . .] Democrats said they would not accept the individual bills, and accused House Republicans of trying to pick political winners. 'What they decide to send to us tomorrow is where we shame them today,' said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara A. Mikulski of Maryland." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/4/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Block A Vote To Fund Entire U.S. Government Through November 15, 2013, Without Any Changes To Affordable Care Act. In October 2013, Schweikert effectively voted to block a vote to fund the entire federal government through November 15, 2013. The House was considering a bill to temporarily fund veterans' programs, including the Veterans' Benefits Administration, through December 15, 2013. At the end of that debate, according to Congressional Quarterly, Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), moved to "recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee with instructions that it be immediately reported back with language providing for the House to recede from its amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the fiscal 2014 continuing resolution (H J Res 59), which would provide continuing appropriations for government operations through Nov. 15, 2013." The eventual vote was on a motion to table the appeal of the ruling of the chair that Duckworth's motion to recommit was not germane; that ruling had the effect of blocking a vote on her motion. The House tabled the appeal by a vote of 228 to 194, killing the motion to recommit. [House Vote 517, 10/3/13; Congress.gov, H. J. Res. 72; Congressional Quarterly, 10/3/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 72]
Underlying Bill Was Part Of House Republican Strategy To Fund Selected Parts Of Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "House Republicans have now decided to move a series of 'mini-CRs' that would provide temporary funding to selected departments, agencies and activities." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Rules Committee Had Rejected Motion To Permit Vote On "Clean" Continuing Resolution. According to Congressional Quarterly, "But the committee rejected, along party lines, a motion from Rules ranking member Louise M. Slaughter, D-N.Y., to permit a vote on the Senate version of the full continuing resolution (H J Res 59)." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
Supporters Of Selective Funding Bills Said If Democrats Want Federal Agencies To Be Open, They Should Vote To Fund Them. According to Congressional Quarterly, "'The concept is pretty general: If there's really parts of the government that Democrats want to fund, we're going to give them that chance,' Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., said after a House Republican Conference meeting Tuesday." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
Opponents Of Selective Funding Bills Said Federal Government Should Not Be Funded Piecemeal And House Should Fund All Government Functions. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The Office of Management and Budget issued a new veto threat Wednesday through a Statement of Administration Policy that covered all five GOP proposals. 'Consideration of appropriations bills in a piecemeal fashion is not a serious or responsible way to run the United States Government,' it said. 'Instead of opening up a few Government functions, the House of Representatives should re-open all of the Government.' It urged the House to allow an up-or-down vote on the Senate version of the House continuing resolution." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Request A Conference With The Senate To Negotiate A Compromise Continuing Resolution Funding The Government. In October 2013, Schweikert voted for a rule that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] that the House insist on its amendment to the Senate amendment to the joint resolution that would provide fiscal 2014 continuing appropriations and request a conference with the Senate." The vote was on adoption of the rule. The House approved the rule by a vote of 228 to 199, but the Senate took no action on the request for a conference. [House Vote 505, 10/1/13; Congress.gov, H. Res. 368; Congressional Quarterly, 10/1/13; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 368]
Decision To Request Conference Showed That House Would Not Drop Its Demand For ACA Changes Before Government Shut Down. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Congress early Tuesday set in motion the first government shutdown in 17 years after volleying multiple proposals across the Capitol on Monday. The House agreed 228-199 to a motion to enter conference negotiations with the Senate over funding the government beyond Sept. 30, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Monday he would reject the proposal even before it reached the chamber. The move effectively sends the stopgap spending measure (H J Res 59) and the House's most recent amendment to gut the 2010 health care overhaul (PL 111-148, PL 111-152) to the Senate to be reconciled with its version which would continue post-sequester spending levels. Less than 15 minutes before the midnight deadline, the Office of Management and Budget officially sent a memo to agencies instructing them to execute plans for a shutdown. About an hour before the House voted on going to conference, Reid said he would reject the proposal. He called for the House to avert a shutdown by passing a six-week continuing resolution before starting any conference negotiations. 'We will not go to conference with a gun to our head,' Reid said." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/1/13]
Going To Conference Would Have Enabled House Democrats To Force A Straight Up-Or-Down Vote On The Senate's Continuing Resolution, But Rule Altered House Rules To Block That. According to Talking Points Memo, "With less than two hours to midnight and shutdown, Speaker John Boehner's latest plan emerged. House Republicans would 'insist' on their latest spending bill, including the anti-Obamacare provision, and request a conference with the Senate to resolve the two chambers' differences. Under normal House rules, according to House Democrats, once that bill had been rejected again by the Senate, then any member of the House could have made a motion to vote on the Senate's bill. Such a motion would have been what is called 'privileged' and entitled to a vote of the full House. At that point, Democrats say, they could have joined with moderate Republicans in approving the motion and then in passing the clean Senate bill, averting a shutdown. But previously, House Republicans had made a small but hugely consequential move to block them from doing it. [. . .] But the House Rules Committee voted the night of Sept. 30 to change that rule for this specific bill. They added language dictating that any motion 'may be offered only by the majority Leader or his designee.' So unless House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) wanted the Senate spending bill to come to the floor, it wasn't going to happen. And it didn't." [Talking Points Memo, 10/10/13]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
House's Last Amendment To Senate CR Delayed ACA's Individual Mandate For One Year And Barred Federal Contributions To Lawmakers' And Staffers' Health Insurance Premiums. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The leaders' latest plan would delay for a year a mandate in the Affordable Care Act (PL 111-148, PL 111-152) that individuals buy insurance and include a proposal from Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to roll back federal contributions provided to lawmakers and staff to offset some of the cost of health insurance, a benefit many other employers provide their workers." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Add A One Year Delay Of The Affordable Care Act's Individual Mandate To The Senate's "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Would Have Prevented A Government Shutdown. In September 2013, Schweikert voted for an amendment that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] fiscal 2014 continuing appropriations. The House amendment would fund the government until Dec. 15, 2013, and delay for one year a requirement in the 2010 health care overhaul that all individuals purchase health insurance or pay a tax penalty. It also would require the president, vice president, members of Congress, congressional staff and political appointees to purchase health insurance through the health care law's state insurance exchanges and would limit the subsidies they may receive for purchasing insurance." The vote was on a motion to recede from prior House amendments and concur, with the specified amendment, to the Senate amendment to the continuing resolution. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 228 to 201. The Senate subsequently rejected the House's amendment. [House Vote 504, 9/30/13; Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 59]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
House's Amendment To Senate CR Delayed ACA's Individual Mandate For One Year And Barred Federal Contributions To Lawmakers' And Staffers' Health Insurance Premiums. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The leaders' latest plan would delay for a year a mandate in the Affordable Care Act (PL 111-148, PL 111-152) that individuals buy insurance and include a proposal from Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to roll back federal contributions provided to lawmakers and staff to offset some of the cost of health insurance, a benefit many other employers provide their workers." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Supporters Said Individual Mandate Delay Was Fair In Light Of Administration's Year-Long Delay Of Employer Mandate And Alleged Exception For Members Of Congress. According to Congressional Quarterly, "'It's pretty clear that what our Members want is fairness for the American people,' Boehner said in a statement issued after a House Republican Conference meeting. 'The president provided a one-year delay of the employer mandate. He's provided exceptions for unions and others. There's even exceptions for Members of Congress. We believe that everyone should be treated fairly.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Backers Of Barring Federal Contribution To Cost Of Members' And Staff's Health Care Premiums Argued That It Would Put Congress In The Same Position As Ordinary Americans With Regards To The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The House plan also would include language long pursued by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., that would roll back contributions provided to members and staff. He and other Republicans say it would ensure that Congress is subject to the same law as ordinary citizens. 'The entire cabinet and the president and all his political appointees will have to live under Obamacare, the same as members of Congress,' said Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. 'We still continue to believe the individual mandate being delayed is in the best interests of the American people.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Opponents Of Ending Federal Contribution Said It Meant Members And Their Staffs Would Be Treated Differently Than Ordinary Federal Employees. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., said he's not sure he'd vote for the plan because it puts legislative branch employees in a lower class than other federal employees. 'Making us different than any other federal employee is unfair to everybody. We should be treated like everybody else who works in the federal government,' he said." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Add A One Year Delay Of The Affordable Care Act's Individual Mandate To The Senate's "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Would Have Prevented A Government Shutdown. In September 2013, Schweikert voted for the proposed rule that, according to the House Rules Committee's report, "provides for the consideration of the Senate amendment to H.J. Res. 59, the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2014. The resolution makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or his designee that the House recede from its amendments and concur in the Senate amendment with the amendment printed in [the Rules Committee's report on the rule]. The resolution provides 40 minutes of debate on the motion equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The resolution provides that the Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The resolution waives all points of order against consideration of the motion." The House adopted the rule by a vote of 225 to 204. [House Vote 502, 9/30/13; House Report 113-239, 9/30/13; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 367]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
Rules Committee-Specified Amendment Delayed ACA's Individual Mandate For One Year And Barred Federal Contributions To Lawmakers' And Staffers' Health Insurance. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The leaders' latest plan would delay for a year a mandate in the Affordable Care Act (PL 111-148, PL 111-152) that individuals buy insurance and include a proposal from Sen. David Vitter, R-La., to roll back federal contributions provided to lawmakers and staff to offset some of the cost of health insurance, a benefit many other employers provide their workers." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Rep. Peter King (R-NY) Opposed Rule, Said Process Of Attaching Conditions To Continuing Resolution Was "Dead End" And A Clean Continuing Resolution Should Be Voted On. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Rep. Peter T. King, R-N.Y., said he would vote against the rule because it is a 'dead end' that the Senate will not accept. He said leaders should put a clean continuing resolution on the House floor for a vote. 'We have to end this process,' King said. 'I don't want to facilitate a process that's doomed.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Supporters Said Individual Mandate Delay Was Fair In Light Of Administration's Year-Long Delay Of Employer Mandate And Alleged Exception For Members Of Congress. According to Congressional Quarterly, "'It's pretty clear that what our Members want is fairness for the American people,' Boehner said in a statement issued after a House Republican Conference meeting. 'The president provided a one-year delay of the employer mandate. He's provided exceptions for unions and others. There's even exceptions for Members of Congress. We believe that everyone should be treated fairly.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Backers Of Barring Federal Contribution To Cost Of Members' And Staff's Health Care Premiums Argued That It Would Put Congress In The Same Position As Ordinary Americans With Regards To The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The House plan also would include language long pursued by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., that would roll back contributions provided to members and staff. He and other Republicans say it would ensure that Congress is subject to the same law as ordinary citizens. 'The entire cabinet and the president and all his political appointees will have to live under Obamacare, the same as members of Congress,' said Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. 'We still continue to believe the individual mandate being delayed is in the best interests of the American people.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
Opponents Of Ending Federal Contribution Argued It Meant Members And Their Staffs Would Be Treated Differently Than Ordinary Federal Employees. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., said he's not sure he'd vote for the plan because it puts legislative branch employees in a lower class than other federal employees. 'Making us different than any other federal employee is unfair to everybody. We should be treated like everybody else who works in the federal government,' he said." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/30/13]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Attach A One-Year Delay Of The Affordable Care Act To A Continuing Resolution That Would Have Prevented A Government Shutdown. In September 2013, Schweikert voted to amend a proposed continuing appropriations resolution that would have funded the federal government through November 15, 2013, by adding provisions that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "would delay for one year implementation of any provision of the 2010 health care overhaul that would take effect between Oct. 1, 2013, and Dec. 31, 2014, including the individual mandate and the imposition or increase of specified taxes and fees. It also would allow companies and insurance providers until 2015 to opt out of mandated birth control coverage for religious or moral reasons, and bar appropriations and transfers from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Fund. It also would set the expiration date for the continuing appropriations to Dec. 15, 2013." The vote was on a motion to concur, with a further amendment, to the Senate's amendment to the continuing resolution that the House had passed 10 days earlier. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 231 to 192. The Senate later rejected the House's amendment. [House Vote 498, 9/29/13; Congressional Actions, H.J.Res. 59; Congressional Quarterly, 9/29/13; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 59]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution, Which Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Which Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
House Considered Two Amendments To Senate's CR: One Would Delay Implementation Of The Affordable Care Act By One Year And Extend The Funding From The CR By One Month; The Other Would Repeal The ACA's Tax On Medical Devices. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The House early Sunday backed a stopgap spending measure that would delay implementation of the health care law and repeal a tax on medical devices, increasing the likelihood of a government shutdown Tuesday. The House sent back the continuing resolution (H J Res 59) to the Senate, adopting amendments by: Erik Paulsen, R-Minn. [...] that would repeal a tax on medical devices that funds the health care law (PL 111-148, PL 111-152) [. . .] Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., [...] that would delay for one year any provision of the 2010 health care overhaul that is otherwise scheduled to take effect between Oct. 1, 2013, and Dec. 31, 2014. [...] The House counterproposal would run until Dec. 15, reversing a Senate change that would shorten it to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/29/13]
Amendment With ACA Delay Provisions Also Permitted Companies And Insurance Providers To Opt Out Of ACA-Mandated Birth Control Coverage. According to Congressional Quarterly, the ACA delay amendment "also would allow companies and insurance providers until 2015 to opt out of mandated birth control coverage for religious or moral reasons." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/29/13]
Supporters Said Year-Long ACA Delay Was A Fair Compromise And Democrats Should Accept It To Avoid Shutting Down Government. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Republicans said Democrats should accept the yearlong delay of the health care overhaul as a compromise over a House-passed version of the measure last week that would defund the law. 'If this government shuts down, it is because you have rejected the compromise that Republicans have reached out to offer,' said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/29/13]
Opponents Said Amending Senate's Continuing Resolution Moved Nation Closer To Government Shutdown Because The Amended CR Had No Chance Of Becoming Law. According to Congressional Quarterly, "House Democrats said the GOP moved the nation closer to a government shutdown for the first time in nearly 17 years. 'Instead of working with Democrats to prevent a shutdown, the majority has gotten even more extreme by writing a bill that has no chance of becoming law,' said Rep. Nita M. Lowey of New York, ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee. 'Anyone who votes to amend the Senate bill is voting for a shutdown.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 9/29/13]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Attach A Repeal Of The ACA's Medical Device Tax To A Continuing Resolution That Would Have Prevented A Government Shutdown. In September 2013, Schweikert voted to amend a proposed continuing appropriations resolution that would have funded the federal government through November 15, 2013, by adding provisions that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "would repeal the 2.3 percent medical device tax included in the 2010 health care overhaul. It also would set the expiration date for the continuing appropriations to Dec. 15, 2013; bar authority for capital construction for the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial Commission through Dec. 15, 2013; and extend and increase available visas for the special immigrant visa program for Iraqis who supported U.S. efforts in Iraq after March 2003." The vote was on a motion to concur, with a further amendment, to the Senate's amendment to the continuing resolution that the House had passed 10 days earlier. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 248 to 174. The Senate later rejected the House's amendment. [House Vote 497, 9/29/13; Congressional Quarterly, 9/29/13; Congressional Actions, H.J.Res. 59]
Senate Had Sent The House A "Clean" Continuing Resolution That Funded The Government Through November 15, 2013, And Did Not Include Provisions Defunding The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "At the insistence of conservative Republicans and outside conservative groups, the CR as originally passed by the House would have permanently defunded the 2010 health care law. Senate Democrats over the course of the past week, working through the Senate's often lengthy parliamentary procedures, passed the bill after amending it to drop the Obamacare defunding provisions, as well as House language giving Treasury certain limited borrowing authority (Treasury now estimates that it will be unable to fully finance government operations unless the statutory debt limit is raised by Oct. 17). The Senate also made several other changes to the measure, including by shortening the CR's duration from Dec. 15 to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/28/13]
House Considered Two Amendments To Senate's CR: One Would Delay Implementation Of The Affordable Care Act By One Year And Extend The Funding From The CR By One Month; The Other Would Repeal The ACA's Tax On Medical Devices. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The House early Sunday backed a stopgap spending measure that would delay implementation of the health care law and repeal a tax on medical devices, increasing the likelihood of a government shutdown Tuesday. The House sent back the continuing resolution (H J Res 59) to the Senate, adopting amendments by: Erik Paulsen, R-Minn. [...] that would repeal a tax on medical devices that funds the health care law (PL 111-148, PL 111-152) [. . .] Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., [...] that would delay for one year any provision of the 2010 health care overhaul that is otherwise scheduled to take effect between Oct. 1, 2013, and Dec. 31, 2014. [...] The House counterproposal would run until Dec. 15, reversing a Senate change that would shorten it to Nov. 15." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/29/13]
Supporters Said Year-Long Delay Of ACA Was A Fair Compromise And Adding Medical Device Tax Repeal Might Induce Enough Democratic Senators To Support CR With Delay, Preventing A Government Shutdown. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Republicans said Democrats should accept the yearlong delay of the health care overhaul as a compromise over a House-passed version of the measure last week that would defund the law. 'If this government shuts down, it is because you have rejected the compromise that Republicans have reached out to offer,' said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif. [...] 'I think there are a number of Democratic senators who secretly want a one-year delay,' Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., told reporters after a GOP conference meeting. 'We've just got to find the right mix that enables them to justify that vote. Maybe the medical-device tax is enough.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 9/29/13]
Opponents Said Amending Senate's Continuing Resolution Moved Nation Closer To Government Shutdown Because The Amended CR Had No Chance Of Becoming Law. According to Congressional Quarterly, "House Democrats said the GOP moved the nation closer to a government shutdown for the first time in nearly 17 years. 'Instead of working with Democrats to prevent a shutdown, the majority has gotten even more extreme by writing a bill that has no chance of becoming law,' said Rep. Nita M. Lowey of New York, ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee. 'Anyone who votes to amend the Senate bill is voting for a shutdown.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 9/29/13]
ACA's Medical Device Tax Broadly Covers All Medical Devices Intended For Humans, Such As Tongue Depressors, Infusion Pumps, Latex Gloves And Artificial Hearts. According to the Congressional Research Service, "The medical device excise tax created by the ACA is imposed on the sale of 'taxable medical device[s].' The statute defines that term by incorporating the definition of 'medical device' from the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as that term pertains to a device 'intended for humans.' Courts have recognized that Congress defined the term 'medical device' in the FFDCA 'very broadly,' as the FDA regulates a range of devices from tongue depressors to artificial hearts. As such, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (HCERA) casts a wide net with the term 'taxable medical device.' [...] Treasury resisted efforts by commenters to narrow the scope of the general term 'taxable medical device.' [...] As a result, devices like infusion pumps, which can be used on both humans and animals, and latex gloves, which can be used for both medical and non-medical purposes, fall within the broad definition of a 'taxable medical device'" (footnotes omitted). [CRS Report #R42971, 2/26/13]
Eyeglasses, Contact Lenses And Hearing Aids Specifically Exempted From Tax. According to the Congressional Research Service, "In an effort to limit the ambit of the excise tax imposed on medical device manufacturers, Congress explicitly excluded three types of devices from the term 'taxable medical device' in IRC §4191(a). Specifically, Congress exempted eyeglasses, contact lenses, and hearing aids from the excise tax" (footnotes omitted). [CRS Report #R42971, 2/26/13]
Under "Retail Exemption," Congress Exempted From Excise Tax Any Medical Device That The Treasury Department Determines Is Generally Sold To Public At Retail. According to the Congressional Research Service, "Moreover, the statute empowers the Secretary of the Treasury under the 'retail exemption' to exempt 'any other medical device' which is determined to be of a 'type which is generally purchased by the general public at retail for individual use' from the 2.3% excise tax" (footnotes omitted). [CRS Report #R42971, 2/26/13]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Fund The Federal Government At Current Levels Through Mid-December 2013 And To Permanently Defund The Affordable Care Act. In September 2013, Schweikert voted for funding the federal government through December 15th while permanently defunding the Affordable Care Act. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The resolution continues funding for most government operations through Dec. 15 at current, post-sequester FY 2013 levels in order to continue government operations once FY 2014 begins on Oct. 1. It also permanently defunds the 2010 health care overhaul and allows the U.S. Treasury, once the statutory debt limit is reached, to continue borrowing over the debt limit until Dec. 15, 2014 --- but only to pay the principal and interest on both government debt held by the public and on obligations to the Social Security trust fund." The House passed the resolution by a vote of 230 to 189. The Senate subsequently replaced the text of the House-passed continuing resolution with a "clean" one that funded the federal government through November 15, 2013, and sent that back to the House for further action. A separate bill, which ended the shutdown, later became law. [House Vote 478, 9/20/13; Congressional Quarterly, 9/19/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2775; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 59]
Partial Federal Government Shutdown Began On October 1, 2013 After Senate Rejected This And Several Other House Continuing Resolutions That Temporarily Funded The Government But Also Delayed Or Defunded The ACA. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Republicans remain opposed to the 2010 health care overhaul (PL 111-148; PL 111-152), and with central elements of the health care law set to go into effect --- including operation of state health care exchanges on Oct. 1 and the requirement, starting January 2014, that all individuals buy health insurance coverage --- GOP efforts to block or roll back elements of the law have become the focus of the debate over the need to enact a continuing appropriations resolution for FY 2014. The House has three times passed a CR that included health-care-related language, but Senate Democrats each time rejected those House provisions. [...] On early Tuesday morning, the House voted to request a formal conference with the Senate on the measure, but the Senate also rejected that effort, calling on the House to simply approve the Senate-passed 'clean' CR. [...] The new fiscal year began at midnight Monday night, and because no funding agreement has been enacted, a partial shutdown of the government has begun." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/2/13]
Resolution Would Allow Exceeding Debt Limit Until December 2014 To Pay Interest On Public Debt And To Make Required Payments To The Social Security Trust Fund. According to Congressional Quarterly, "It also permanently defunds the 2010 health care overhaul, and it allows the U.S. Treasury, once the statutory debt limit is reached, to continue borrowing over the debt limit until Dec. 15, 2014 --- but only to pay the principal and interest on both government debt held by the public and on obligations to the Social Security trust fund." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/19/13]
Resolution Would Prohibit Exceeding Debt Limit To Pay Salaries Or Benefits For Members Of Congress. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Under the measure, Treasury could not borrow above the debt limit for any other purpose. All other activities of the U.S. government would have to be funded by general revenues and other revenue streams as they are received. None of the obligations issued could be used to pay the salaries or benefits of members of Congress." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/19/13]
Resolution Required Federal Departments And Agencies To Allocate Funding For Federal Employees In A Way That Prevents Furloughs. According to Congressional Quarterly, "It effectively continues most policy-related provisions enacted as part of previous appropriations laws that were in effect for FY 2013, including pay-related provisions --- thereby extending until Dec. 15 the general pay freeze for federal employees and members of Congress. However, it also specifically provides that compensation and benefits for civilian federal personnel be apportioned by federal departments and agencies at the rate necessary to avoid furloughs." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/19/13]
Resolution Would Provide An Additional $636 Million For Fighting Wildfires. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The resolution provides an additional $636 million for fighting wildfires if existing funding becomes exhausted, with those new funds to remain available until spent. The total includes $600 million for U.S. Forest Service firefighting activities and $36 million for Interior Department activities (of which $15 million is earmarked for burned-area rehabilitation). The funds provided could also be transferred to other appropriations accounts to repay amounts previously transferred for wildfire suppression." [Congressional Quarterly, 9/19/13]