[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 38 (Tuesday, March 19, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H2462-H2463]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      UNEMPLOYMENT SHOULD BE LOWER

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Duncan] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, during the last 3 years, more than 1\1/2\ 
million people have lost their jobs due to major corporate downsizing, 
1\1/2\ million. This was before AT&T announced a reduction of 40,000 
jobs, and Ford Motor Co., 6,000 jobs, and on and on. Nor does it count 
many thousands of employees who have lost their jobs in very small 
businesses which have closed due to

[[Page H2463]]

NAFTA, GATT, and other weak trade policies.
  We had a trade deficit of $153 billion last year, Mr. Speaker. Most 
economists say that we lose at least 20,000 jobs for each $1 billion. 
That means we lost over 3 million jobs last year due to imports, 3 
million jobs lost to other countries. We simply cannot keep letting 
this happen every year. We do not want a trade war, Mr. Speaker, but we 
seem to be in one now and we seem to be losing.
  We have thousands and thousands of college graduates who cannot find 
jobs in the fields for which they trained, so they are taking jobs as 
waiters and waitresses. And certainly this is honorable employment but 
not what they had hoped and dreamed and worked for. Or they are going 
to law school or medical school, fields in which there are already huge 
surpluses.
  Our unemployment rate is relatively low. We wish it was lower. But 
while unemployment is fairly low, our underemployment rate is terrible.

                              {time}  2245

  If we are ever going to do anything about this horrendous under 
employment, we have to turn this Nation around. We have to show more 
concern for our own people. We should not be against anybody, but at 
the same time we need to put our own people and our own Nation first, 
even if we get called names by the liberal elitists and others who 
worry about being politically correct more than they worry about 
anything else.
  Over riding all of these other problems, Mr. Speaker, is our national 
debt over $5 trillion. I think, Mr. Speaker, that the reason we are not 
more concerned about this national debt is that many people do not 
fully realize how harmful it is to them. Almost every economist tells 
us that this national debt is really holding this country back 
economically and that it puts our economy on a very shaky footing.
  Times are good now for some people, Mr. Speaker, but they could and 
should be good for everyone. People making $5 or $6 an hour could be 
making $15 or $20 an hour, or more, if our Federal Government was under 
control from a spending, taxing, and particularly from a regulatory 
standpoint.
  President Clinton, when he was campaigning in 1992, said he could 
balance the budget in 5 years. Now, in 1996, he reluctantly says 7 
years from now is the best we can do. And the truth is that almost no 
one believes we will really do it even then.
  The American people should be upset by this. They should be angry. 
But far too many think everything is all right because the stock market 
is booming. But could this be the lull before the storm? It will be 
unless we start doing what is right.
  The right thing to do, Mr. Speaker, is to balance our budget this 
year, not 7 years from now. The right thing to do is to lower taxes on 
working families. The average person pays half of his or her income in 
taxes now, counting taxes of all types: Federal, State and local, 
sales, property, income, gas, excise, Social Security, and on and on.
  The right thing to do is to drastically downsize our Government and 
decrease its costs. Right now only Government bureaucrats and fat cat 
Government contractors are benefiting. The few are benefiting at the 
expense of the many.
  The right thing to do is to let our own people keep more of their own 
money so more families could stay together. The kindest, most 
compassionate thing we could do for our children is to create another 
high-sounding Government program, but the kindest, most compassionate 
thing to do would be to let parents keep more of their own money so 
they can do more good things for their own children. The question is, 
do we want to spend the money on the bureaucrats and their unbelievable 
administrative costs, or do we want to spend the money on our children? 
Even our crime rate, Mr. Speaker, would go down if we could downsize 
our Government and decrease its cost.
  I spent 7\1/2\ years as a criminal court judge before coming to 
Congress. Every study, every single one, shows that almost all felony 
crimes are committed by men who come from father-absent households. 
Most marriages; one recent study said 59 percent of all marriages break 
up over finances.
  In 1950 the Federal Government took 2 percent in taxes from the 
average family. State and local governments took a similar amount. 
Today the Federal Government takes almost 25 percent, and State and 
local governments a similar amount. Is it any wonder then, Mr. Speaker, 
that families do not have what they need to stay together and that our 
crime rate and many other problems grow worse?
  We can do much better, Mr. Speaker, much better, and almost all our 
problems would be much less serious if we get our Government under 
control and let the people take control of this Nation once again.

                          ____________________