Hal Rogers: “Mr. Chairman, the passage of this amendment would be an admission by the Members of this body that we cannot do the job…”

“Mr. Chairman, the passage of this amendment would be an admission by the Members of this body that we cannot do the job our people elected us to do. We were elected by our constituents, all of us, to come here and pass on spending and funding the Federal government. Passing this amendment would say, no, we are going to put things on automatic pilot. We do not have the capacity or the ability to pass on individual spending bills. I think that would be a dereliction of our duties. We would take away the automatic period at the end of the sentence, the October 1 deadline, and therefore these appropriations bills are not must-pass pieces of legislation. We would extend the appropriating process, rather than bring it to a successful conclusion. Number two, passage of this amendment would put a premium on people opposing and stonewalling and causing inaction. Those who would want to increase spending or those who want to avoid a funding cut for a program or a bill would be automatically strengthened by the existence of the automatic continuing resolution, saying, if we do nothing, the status quo prevails. Most Members of this body want some change in the status quo, either up or down. Automatic continuing resolution would take away the incentive to make something happen by a deadline. If we remove the deadline of October 1, then I predict nothing will take place. The government will be on automatic pilot.”