[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 112 (Friday, July 26, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H8574-H8581]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES ON H.R. 3448, SMALL BUSINESS JOB PROTECTION
ACT 1996
Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 3448) to provide tax relief for small
businesses, to protect jobs, to create opportunities, to increase the
take home pay of workers, to amend the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947
relating to the payment of wages to employees who use employer owned
vehicles, and to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to increase
the minimum wage rate and to prevent job loss by providing flexibility
to employers in complying with minimum wage and overtime requirements
under that act, with Senate amendments thereto, disagree to the Senate
amendments, and request a conference with the Senate thereon.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Torkildsen). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
motion to instruct offered by mr. clay
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Clay moves that the managers on the part of the House
at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses
on the Senate amendments to the bill H.R. 3448 be instructed
to report as soon as possible their resolution of the
differences between the Houses, because the minimum wage is
at its lowest real value in 40 years and because working
families deserve a raise.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under rule XXVIII, the gentleman from
Missouri [Mr. Clay] and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling]
each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Clay].
[[Page H8575]]
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer a motion to instruct conferees. We have
spent this morning debating a bill that will jeopardize overtime pay
for working Americans. More and more workers rely on overtime pay just
to make ends meet, yet Republicans insist on passing legislation that
will weaken a worker's right to time and a half pay for overtime.
The House's action today makes it even more necessary that we act
quickly to enact an increase in the minimum wage. An increase to the
minimum wage will provide simple justice for working men and women.
We offer talk about the importance of getting people off welfare. If
we are serious about that, if we really want to get people off welfare
as opposed to just talking about it, there is one simple way to do
that--make work pay.
Almost two-thirds of the minimum wage workers are adults, while 4 in
10 are the sole breadwinner of their family.
Recent studies suggest that 300,000 would be lifted out of poverty if
the minimum wage were raised to $5.15 per hour. This includes 100,000
children now living in poverty.
Mr. Speaker, this is a matter of simple justice. This is a matter of
promoting family values.
It is time to do something positive for the working poor. Polls show
that 75 percent of Americans support raising the minimum wage.
Mr. Speaker, the time to raise the minimum wage is long overdue.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, obviously we want to work with the minority to resolve
the differences as quickly as possible.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan [Mr. Bonior].
Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time, and I am glad to hear my friend from Pennsylvania say that he is
interested in working with the minority to resolve this issue as
quickly as possible.
Back in 1948, Harry Truman gave a speech about a do-nothing Congress,
and in that speech he said that the Republicans had not created jobs,
they had not raised wages, they had not protected pensions, they had
not dealt with the health care issue, they had not done a single thing
to help working families in America. At the end of the speech Truman
looked at the audience and he said, ``How many times do you have to get
hit over the head before you realize what is hitting you over the
head?''
Mr. Speaker, I want to believe my friend from Pennsylvania. He is a
noble, decent, hard-working Member of this body, Mr. Goodling, but let
me tell my colleagues something, I have some difficulty here because we
have seen a strategy of delaying, of burying, of ducking on this issue.
Five separate times Republicans blocked an increase in the minimum
wage. Newt Gingrich said the minimum wage should be based on the wages
of workers from Mexico. Dick Armey said that he would fight it with
every fiber of his being. Tom DeLay said that the minimum wage families
do not really exist. And the chairman of the Republican conference said
he would commit suicide before he would vote for raising the minimum
wage.
So, after all this published pressure in the country forced them to
act, the House raised the minimum wage, but only after our friends on
this side of the aisle tried to repeal the minimum wage for 10 million
workers in this country. So people can understand our trepidation and
our fear that this is not going to get done.
Workers in this country are losing these wages on a daily basis,
costing literally hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars to these
low-income workers in this country today. Twelve million Americans are
working hard, they are working long hours.
These are people who are choosing work over welfare, and they cannot
raise a family on $8,800 a year. When they are in that situation, they
end up working two jobs and three jobs and overtime.
When a mother is working an extra job, she is not there for her kids
in the evening, she is not there to teach them right from wrong, she is
not there to read them bedtime stories. When the father has to work two
or three jobs or overtime, he is not there for Little League of soccer
games. He is not there for dinner conversations. And the whole fabric
of civil society starts to come unraveled.
This needs to be done now. It needs to be done before Labor Day. It
needs to be done so we can get on with the object of giving America a
raise. So I encourage my colleagues to vote for this resolution so we
can do this, as the resolution says, as the instructions say, as soon
as possible. We do not need to wait another month or two or three
before this issue is resolved.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
Mr. Speaker, I do that to make sure that everybody understands that
nobody was trying to exempt millions of American workers from minimum
wage. What we were trying to do is what the other side of the aisle
thought they had done in 1989 and thought they had done later, which
was to say that there is no difference between interstate and
intrastate, because all those workers were already exempt less than
500,000 of them.
What we were trying to do, as I indicated, is make sure that there is
no difference between interstate and intrastate, exactly what the
minority thought they had done in 1989. According to the Congressional
Research Service, that affected 230,000 people, not 10 million, not 16
million, 230,000, of which I grandfathered all of those so none of them
was affected.
Therefore, we cannot say that somehow or other somebody was trying to
take away an exemption, because the exemption was already there. All we
were trying to do was make sure that we got it the way they wanted it,
but it did not work out that way.
{time} 1200
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr.
Cunningham].
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman that spoke in the aisle a
minute ago said to increase the minimum wage. If my colleagues remember
the last time the minimum wage was raised before this, it was raised by
Ronald Reagan and the Republicans.
Why, when the Democrats had both the House and the Senate and the
White House, if the minimum wage is so important now, did they do
nothing? They had control of all three of the areas in which they could
have raised the minimum wage and they chose to do nothing. The
President even said the minimum wage is not the way to empower people.
But now it is important because it is a political year.
No, Mr. Speaker, they do not raise the minimum wage and they talk
about a do-nothing Congress. Well, Democrats did a lot of things in the
103d Congress. They increased taxes the highest level ever. They
promised a middle-class tax cut and they increased the marginal rate on
the middle class.
Mr. Speaker, we tried to live up to that bargain and give money back
to the middle class with a $500 tax deduction to working families for
every child, and my Democrat colleagues fought that. Why? Because they
want the power and the ability to spend money out of Washington, DC, so
they can rain it down to their liberal interest groups, so they can get
reelected. That is what is cruel.
Mr. Speaker, if my colleagues want to help the American people,
balance the budget and cut out the extra spending.
Let me give another classic example. In education, the liberals have
cut education year after year after year. How? The President's direct
lending program cost over a billion dollars more just to administer.
One year in operation they have lost $100 million and they cannot
account for it. That is cutting education because those dollars are not
going to the classroom.
We took the savings from that and increased Pell grants and increased
students loans 50 percent and Democrats said Republicans are cutting
education. What we did is we cut their power in River City and we
capped the administrative fees on direct lending.
AmeriCorps where it is $29,000 per volunteer, and in Baltimore it was
[[Page H8576]]
$50,000 per volunteer; the wasteful spending that we have in
Washington, DC. If my colleagues want to help American families and get
them a minimum wage, then balance the budget and take off interest
rates. They will have more money for schools and car loans and home
loans and they will have a good life. But no, Democrats want to make it
political rhetoric in an election year, when they absolutely refused to
do it when they had the total House, the total Senate and they had the
White House.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, may I remind all speakers that we are talking about the
minimum wage and not some of these other issues that have been brought
before us.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Hawaii [Mrs.
Mink].
Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Speaker, I thank our ranking member for
yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, this matter of raising minimum wage is a matter of
simple justice. We have heard throughout the last year and a half about
how important it is for people to work. In fact, we have passed a
welfare reform bill, so-called, which will require work because work is
an important ethic that ought to be encouraged.
And while we talk about work, we always say work should be rewarded.
So we have come now to this legislation which is an attempt to pay fair
wages, to make it profitable for people to work at the lowest income in
our country.
People who work at minimum wage, $4.25 now, all they are going to
receive after a year is $5.15 an hour; not much more than what they
get, but a substantial amount for those people who are in the lowest
income in our society. And I have met many tens of thousands of workers
who are earning minimum wage in my district.
Mr. Speaker, I was appalled when once the Labor Department issued the
unemployment statistics, everywhere we had been told that the economy
was down and that the tax collections were down. And yet at the same
time our unemployment figures remained stable. They remained stable
because in my community, people have to work three or two jobs just to
keep their families together. So when they lose the third job and
retain two, they are not unemployed, so it was not reflected in the
unemployment statistics, but it certainly was reflected in the amount
of money that they had to sustain their families.
Mr. Speaker, if we are going to consider the family and the
importance of the family, the importance of rewarding work and making
people self-sufficient and encouraging this idea of family
responsibility, we have to have an increase in the minimum wage.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from West
Virginia [Mr. Wise].
Mr. WISE. Mr. Speaker, the minimum wage is finally going to be a
bipartisan bill, but with Republicans and Democrats alike, to my
friends on the other side of the aisle who want to troop down here and
talk about how Democrats did not do anything the first 2 years of the
Clinton administration, I would hasten to remind them of the earned
income tax credit which was part of the deficit reduction bill.
Democrats passed that and it gave every American earning under
$26,000 a year a tax cut. It gave 100,000 working West Virginians a tax
cut. That was in lieu of the minimum wage and I might add not one
Republican Member voted for it. Not one Republican Member voted for
that middle-income and lower middle-income working person's tax cut,
which, in effect, was a minimum wage increase.
But let us talk about this minimum wage, because it is time for it to
go up. The minimum wage has not been raised since 1991, effectively. In
West Virginia, what it has meant, failure to raise the minimum wage
during the year that it has been talked about has meant $41 million of
lost wages to working West Virginians. It has meant, since July 4, the
loss of about $2 million a week to working West Virginians. That is
money not only in their pockets but money that could be circulating in
the economy.
Mr. Speaker, it also means that for working West Virginians it means
that there are 112,000 payroll jobs that will see an increase because
of this minimum wage increase over the next 2 years going from $4.25 to
$5.15 over a 2-year period.
We talk about welfare reform; this is welfare reform, because what it
says is there is value to work. I think that if workers have not had a
pay increase since 1991, if they are at minimum wage, their buying
power is at an all-time buying low for the last 40 years. If they are
now making one-third the average nonsupervisory wage, and the minimum
wage used to be one-half of that, yes, it is time for a raise.
So, Mr. Speaker, let us get this to the floor quickly. I am delighted
to see there seems to be agreement among Republicans and Democrats. It
is time for West Virginians to stop losing $2 million a week and get
that pay raise.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, do we have the right to close on this side?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Torkildsen). Yes, the gentleman is
correct.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the gentleman if he intends
to call additional speakers.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, whenever the
gentleman from Missouri tells me he is down to his last speaker, I will
get up and endorse his motion and then yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr.
Becerra].
Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 2
minutes. That is all it should take Members of this House to pass this
bill. Two minutes. Not 2 months and certainly not 40 years. But for 40
years we have seen the minimum wage constantly have the value eroded
down to the point now where we are now talking to folks who are working
for minimum wage who cannot afford to exist.
Mr. Speaker, this is not a liveable wage. And it has been more than a
month since this House, by a vast majority of its Members, decided to
tell the American people, America you deserve a raise. But for more
than a month this bill has been held in limbo because of politics. The
Senate passed a raise on the wage more than a month ago and we cannot
get this out so Americans can finally get their raise.
Mr. Speaker, there is not a need to wait any longer. We need not have
an instruction to tell Members of Congress to finally do their work.
Let us get to the business of this Congress. Let us increase the wage
of American workers who earn the least amount in this country and do
some of the hardest work. They have waited a long time. They have had
to suffer through this. And quite honestly, it is time for us to tell
them we appreciate what they do. And rather than the politics day after
day, denying them the opportunity to have a 50 cent increase in their
hourly pay, let us get past this political bickering and say it is time
to increase the wage of America.
I urge Members to vote for this instruction and let us tell the
leadership of the Congress: Fight if you wish, but do not do it on
American workers' time. Let us pass this and get it over with and give
America what it deserves.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, as soon as we cut the rhetoric, we will get this minimum
wage conference over.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from
Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro].
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of raising the minimum
wage and I call on the Republican leadership to quit the stalling
tactics on this much-needed legislation.
Mr. Speaker, 80 percent of the American public wants to see an
increase in the minimum wage. Americans need a raise and the Gingrich
Congress has gone to unbelievable lengths to stiff working people,
including this morning voting to cut overtime pay for working people.
The Republican leadership has employed every parliamentary trick in the
book to deny the minimum wage to, deny workers a 90-cent increase. We
are talking, friends, about 90 cents.
[[Page H8577]]
Under Federal law, Speaker Gingrich takes home $171,500 a year in
taxpayers' money for his salary. In contrast, the minimum wage worker
who puts in 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a year makes a grand total of
$8,840.
On April 17, Speaker Gingrich promised to, ``look at raising the
minimum wage.'' It has been exactly 100 days since Speaker Gingrich
made that promise and the American taxpayers have paid him $46,989 in
that time. And in Connecticut, minimum wage workers lost a total of
$4.8 million in this time in terms of their wages.
Speaker Gingrich and the Republican revolutionaries passed their
Contract With America in the first 100 days of this Congress, but when
it comes to working people, the Republican leadership cannot get its
act together enough to enact a paltry 90-cent raise. America needs a
raise now. Let us do it.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, I rise just to indicate that I voted for the bill when
it left the House. I got some provisions in to protect the most
vulnerable who normally are affected. Therefore, as soon as we stop the
rhetoric, we will go on to conference and get the job done.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia
[Mr. Lewis].
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my Republican
colleagues to stop blocking action on the minimum wage. I have said it
before and I will say it again here today: Raising the minimum wage is
not just an economic issue, it is a moral issue. It is the right thing
to do. The time is always right to do right.
The Republicans in Congress will do anything to deny hard-working
people a small raise. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Majority Leader, I know you
vowed to fight an increase in the minimum wage with every fiber in your
being but you cannot fight the will of the American people forever. Now
is the time to act. Now is the time, not tomorrow, not next week, but
today. One thing is for sure. Come November, working people will
remember.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York [Mr. Owens].
(Mr. OWENS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, America needs a raise; most of America needs
a raise. Really, the CEO's are doing very well in America. The
stockholders are doing very well. This is a time of prosperity and a
great deal of growth. it is time to share the wealth, however.
American workers are stagnated and some are faced with decline in
incomes. Here is a small step that we can take. I wish that we could
have both Republicans and Democrats resolve between now and the end of
this session, at least we will do no more harm to workers than has been
done already this year.
{time} 1215
The tiny steps that we can take is to move from $4.25 an hour to the
first step in this two-step raise which will be 45 cents a year over a
2-year period, just 90 cents, to move from $4.25 to $5.15. What all the
economist say, if you factor in inflation and you look at the way that
the cost of living has been raised over the last 20 years, we are way
behind.
To really stay level with the cost of living, this minimum wage
increase should go to something like $6.30 an hour. So even after we
give the two-step increase over a 2-year period, 90 cents to bring it
up to $5.15 an hour, we will still be way behind what we really had 20
years ago with the minimum wage.
This is the least we can do. The war that has been declared on
workers this year, starting with the November victory in 1994 of the
Republican majority, is an unprecedented war. At least we can call a
halt between now and November, try to stake some small steps to
communicate to the American people that we do care about working
families, that when we talk about moving from welfare to work, we want
to make work rewarding. We have taken the rewards out of work by having
people who earn the minimum wage earning less than you get if you are
on welfare, and in many cases you are better off if you are on welfare
and have Medicaid because at least you have a health care plan. Let us
end the war on workers and raise the minimum wage without further ado.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, if we wanted to delay the process, we would not have
come to the floor to ask to appoint conferees. I might remind my
colleagues that it was the senior Senator from Massachusetts that held
all of this up over on the Senate side, the appointing of the
conferees, not because it had anything to do with the minimum wage but
because he did not like something in relationship to health care. That
is where the delay has been. We are trying to expedite it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, just to correct the record, I yield myself
such time as I may consume.
Why do they keep adding these nongermane issues to important issues
like the minimum wage? It should not have been there in the first
place. That is the problem with what is happening in this 104th
Congress under the leadership of the Republicans.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri [Mr.
Volkmer].
(Mr. VOLKMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Pennsylvania says that
they are not the cause of the delay. I can remember back early on in
this year, way back, when we on this side attempted many times to bring
up a minimum wage bill and to be thwarted by the votes of the majority,
because why? Speaker Gingrich did not want us to have a minimum wage
bill.
Finally, because of some of their Members and some of the Members
from people from the media and the public said we have to have a
minimum wage, everybody knows that the minimum wage has the lowest
buying power that it has had in the last 40 years, so that got to them.
So then they finally came up with they want an amendment, though that
would have obfuscated most of it, even denied any minimum wage to over
10 million workers. We defeated that. They tried the same thing in the
Senate.
This has been a long arduous process, and all because Speaker
Gingrich and Dick Armey, they do not want us to have the public, the
people out there that work, they do not want them to have a little
increase in the minimum wage, 90 cents over a period of 2 years, a 90-
cent increase.
Most of my colleagues on the majority side, that would be a hill of
beans, does not amount to anything. They would throw that away in 15
minutes without any problem. To people in my district who work for a
minimum wage, that 90 cents means a heck of a lot, folks. That means
more bread on the table. That means maybe an extra pair of socks for
the kids, maybe even a pair of shoes in due time. That is what it
means. It does not mean that to the majority, to the wealthy, but it
does to those who work for it.
As for me, I worked for a minimum wage at one time. I know what it is
like. I do not like it. I do not think anybody on the minimum wage
really likes working for the minimum wage. But to have to work for
$4.25 when you should be working for $5 or $5.15 makes a big
difference.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
North Carolina [Mr. Coble].
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I had not planned to speak today. I have no
prepared text. But I get tired of bashing. It is easy for Democrats to
bash Republicans, easy for Republicans to bash Democrats. We seem to be
in the bashing game.
I was back on the rail, listening to the bashing exercise. I may be
wrong, Mr. Speaker, but I think if memory serves correctly, and it
does, during the 103d Congress, when my Democrat friends controlled the
House, controlled the Senate, controlled the White House at the other
end of Pennsylvania Avenue, not one word was mentioned about minimum
wage. They were in the wheelhouse of that ship. My colleagues had
control of the ship. But minimum wage was not on their radar screen, my
friends. Now all of a sudden it is a hot item and it is the
Republicans' fault.
[[Page H8578]]
I tire of it, Mr. Speaker, and I believe the American public tires of
it and can see through it.
I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for yielding me the time.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana [Mr. Souder].
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I am a little confused as to what we are
debating because we mostly seem to be having a bash Republican session
here as opposed to debating the substance. In other words, the House
appointed conferees. I think the chairman in the House and the majority
in the House are willing to move ahead.
I have differences with what the House did. I actually agree with
much of what the Senate is trying to do because I believe, and I get
tired of having my motives attacked, I believe that in actuality that
the increase in the minimum wage will hurt those who least can afford
to be hurt.
I know in inner-city Fort Wayne we have been trying to get a grocery
store to relocate back there. We lost all the major downtown grocery
stores. This will increase their wage rates basically 20 percent. They
already made a market decision that they could not put it there and we
are making the market decision more difficult.
In the small town that I grew up and other small towns, the increases
in the minimum wage are helping to take very marginal businesses under.
We are seeing the Wal-Martization of America because suburbs can
afford, through economic growth, to afford a lot of this. We need to
look at creative ways, particularly for small businesses to deal with
it.
Basically I believe that what we are debating here is not the
substance of the minimum wage. We voted and I lost. What we are
debating is how to resolve this procedure, how to move the conferees
through, how to do it. We are not really resisting the point of trying
to get the conference done. The Senators have been holding up the
conference.
We want to see it move. As a freshman who has voted on this issue,
who is willing to argue this issue, who unlike others have stood up and
talked and tried to explain why I voted my vote, I do not retreat from
my vote. I realize we have had this argument before.
I just wish that some of rhetoric would be toned down, that the
motives attacks would be toned down, and we could move ahead with this
process rather than continue what I believe has become malicious
bashing of our side.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Missouri [Mr. Volkmer].
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Speaker, one of my many small businessmen in my
rural district, he has been in business for 30 years, he has
approximately 25 employees. Does the gentleman know what he said? He
said, the minimum wage should be increased.
He does not pay the minimum wage. He starts people out at the minimum
wage, but he says, people even starting out now at $4.25 cannot make
it.
If the gentleman wants his name, I will be glad to give it to him.
His name is Pete Leukenhaus. He has a small business in Wentzville, MO.
He believes that it should be increased had, not decreased, not held
the same but increased.
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. VOLKMER. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I believe every business that can pay more
should absolutely pay more. There are many small businesses that are
closed that used to pay less, and they cannot make it. That is really
what I am talking about.
I would have liked to have seen some sort of adjustments to code to
help low-income people who are just starting out, particularly young
mothers who are often divorced or single and trying to make it. I would
like to look at it. This is not the way.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, since the first week of this month, when the
Senate passed the minimum wage bill, Republican delay has cost the
gentleman from Indiana's workers, workers in his State, $5 million a
week. I wish he would consider that when he talks about how dangerous
the minimum wage is.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado [Mrs.
Schroeder].
Mrs. SCHROEDER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Missouri for
yielding me the time.
I have been interested in this debate because Members come in and
say, I do not like the bashing, and then they proceed to bash the
President, the Democrats or whatever.
Let us stop the bashing. Let us reach that challenge. Let us talk
about what is at the core of this debate.
When I went to college, I went to an out of State public university,
which meant I was paying out-of-State tuition. I had a job with the
minimum wage and, with that job, I made enough money to pay that
tuition. Show me where you can do that today.
Let me tell my colleagues, what the real issue is is the minimum wage
is lower in value than it has ever been. You are talking about a 40-
year low. The minimum wage was supposed to be the floor.
Everybody wants to do welfare reform. Everybody wants to do these
kinds of things. But if we cannot have a job where people can sustain
themselves, we are really showing how totally coldhearted we are.
I think it is difficult for people who make $130,000 a year to stand
up here and scream about, we do not want to raise the minimum wage. Yet
the leadership on the other side of the aisle has said they were going
to fight it with every fiber in their body. They were not going to let
it go through.
Nevertheless, when we point that out, they say, there you go,
bashing. It is not bashing. This is reciting what they have said
publicly.
I think it is time we lift the minimum wage. It is way overdue. That
will be the biggest incentive to welfare reform.
I think we need to get on with dealing with the real people who keep
this country moving. It is particularly necessary for women. A very
high percentage of people on the minimum wage are young moms trying to
make it for their kids. They are trying to make it for their kids
because we have not given them the tough child support enforcement help
that they need. Now we are trying to cut off any other kind of support.
Raise the minimum wage. Let us do this together.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds, just to remind
everyone that the core of this debate, as a matter of fact, is do we
expedite or do we not expedite the conference. That is the only core of
this debate. If we stop talking, we will expedite it.
I would just mention that, to the best of my knowledge, to my friend
from Missouri, the senior Senator from Massachusetts, I think, is still
a Democrat.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr.
Riggs].
Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I want to point out to my Democratic
colleagues, as the person who actually offered the minimum wage
amendment on this floor, that I was joined by 92 other Republicans in
voting for that legislation on final passage. The difference is that us
93 Republicans also support meaningful welfare reform. So while on the
one hand we do believe that the Federal minimum wage ought to be
increased, if not to keep pace with inflation to at least restore some
of the purchasing power to the minimum wage that has been lost or
eroded due to inflation and to try to reverse this sort of perverse
incentive in American society where welfare benefits in the aggregate
pay more than the minimum wage job, that is to say, trying to make work
more attractive than welfare, trying to make work pay more than
welfare, the difference again is that we support raising the minimum
wage and reforming welfare.
{time} 1230
And I do not believe a single Democratic speaker who has come down to
the floor and has been talking on this particular subject, this
relatively innocuous motion to instruct conferees, supported welfare
reform when they had the opportunity in this Chamber.
Now, the history is quite clear, colleagues. In 1992, candidate
Clinton promised to end welfare as we know it. In 1995 and again in
1996 President Clinton vetoed welfare reform. Empty rhetoric spoken
with the greatest of sincerity, followed by another broken promise.
This cycle repeats itself all too often with President Clinton.
[[Page H8579]]
So even though his party, the Democratic Party, controlled the White
House and the Congress for the first 2 years of his Presidency,
President Clinton did nothing about welfare. He even admitted that when
he finally got around to introducing welfare reform legislation, or
suggesting welfare reform legislation to this body, it was quite
watered down, and as previous speakers have already pointed out, when
one controls the House and the Senate, they fail to offer legislation
to increase the minimum wage, which seems to sort of undermine their
credibility on this particular issue, it has taken a Republican-led
Congress to pass legislation to reform welfare as President Clinton
promised to do and to increase the minimum wage.
Now, last Thursday we made it possible for President Clinton to again
sign on to a serious commonsense welfare reform package. He can either
keep his word to end welfare as we know it, and my colleagues can help
him do that, or he can do as usual break his word and prove yet again
he means little or nothing of what he says. In order, though, for him
to keep his word, he is going to have to stand up against the
opposition of his party in the House of Representatives and most of the
people who have spoken here on this floor today in the last few minutes
to the idea of genuine welfare reform. The choice is his.
I ask all of my colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle to
join us in raising the minimum wage and reforming welfare.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The diversion is becoming an art in this House. The subject today is
minimum wage; it is not welfare reform, or capital gains, or a host of
other nongermane issues. The gentleman from California who just spoke,
workers in his district have lost $25 million a week since the
beginning of this month because of the delay in this bill becoming law.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr.
Engel].
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding this time to
me. As my colleagues know, this is not Republican bashing or any other
kind of bashing. This is simply setting the record straight.
The American people are not fools. They understand that the Democrats
in Congress all Congress long have been pushing for an increase in the
minimum wage. We could not even get a procedural vote to bring the
minimum wage to the floor for months upon months upon months.
The Republican leadership did not want this bill. They finally are
here kicking and screaming every inch of the way because they know that
80 percent of the American people support the minimum wage increase and
they were on the wrong side of the issue. So they are cutting their
losses, and they are reluctantly coming to the table.
But the American people, again, are not fools. They know that the
Democratic Party has been pushing it in this Congress.
I do not need history about what happened in previous Congresses. Let
us talk about this Congress. This is the Congress that the Republicans
have the majority, and this has been to do-nothing Republican Congress
because it took us so long to finally get the minimum wage to the
floor, and we are finally about to pass the minimum wage, but again
with 90 Republicans or 92 Republicans, still a majority of Republicans
in this Chamber, voted against raising the minimum wage, and a majority
of Democrats overwhelmingly supported and voted for the minimum wage.
So the American people should understand that. That is what has
happened.
We talk about welfare reform. Well, no one is going to get off the
minimum wage, get off a minimum wage job or get into a minimum wage job
and get off welfare if the minimum wage is not worthwhile, if there is
no child care, if there is inadequate health care, and that is the
problem with the welfare bill. But we are discussing minimum wage, and
it is very clear, very simple. The American people know the Democrats
in this Congress have been for increasing the minimum wage time and
time again, and Republicans have dragged their feet every step of the
way, and again it is consistent with the Republicans attacking working
people in this country, being against the minimum wage, being for
gutting OSHA and gutting all kinds of rights for workers.
So let us get on and let us pass the minimum wage. This is a victory
for the American people.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds just to remind
the gentleman from New York again he had 2 years, complete majority in
the House, complete majority in the Senate, had the White House, never
even mentioned in my committee for 2 years when they had total majority
anything about the minimum wage.
But again I say, the senior Senator from Massachusetts delayed
appointing in conferees over there, we delayed now about 45 minutes
appointing them here. We could get on with the job. All we have to do
is name the conferees.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Montana [Mr. Williams].
Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding this
time to me.
Perhaps the most interesting element in this debate is how one-sided
it is. As my colleagues here and I, similar viewers, know, the reason
our good friend from Pennsylvania has to stand up and keep granting
himself 15 seconds and half a minute is because he cannot get any
Republicans to come over here and support him on this, or very, very
few, and some who have come over and supported him on it are actually
against the minimum wage and have said so.
Look, the American people understand this. This is a very partisan
issue. It has been for almost 60 years. Republicans have been against
the minimum wage since it was first created in the late 1930's, and
they have been against it each time it has come up since. Oh, if we
bring the bill publicly out on the floor, as we have done this
afternoon, the Republicans are back in the cloakroom, and if they
finally have to vote on it, usually enough of them will join Democrats
that we can get it passed.
But Americans are not fooled on this issue. They know that
Republicans are against the minimum wage and Democrats are for it.
There is another way to put that:
My colleagues remember the economics of the 1980's called trickle-
down economics, the new Republican-designed economics called trickle-
down. Of course what that was, it is if we can deny income to lower-
middle-income and middle-income folks and we can increase the income to
the rich and the well-to-do, eventually it will trickle down and help
the low-income workers. Democrats are not for that. We are for an
economics which we like to call percolate-up. This bill is part of
percolate-up: increase the minimum wage so that at the end of the month
the workers in this country have a little jingle in their pocket, they
go out and spend it, and that is what helps the American economy. It is
called percolate-up. It is far different than trickle-down, and there
is an enormous difference between Republicans and Democrats on this
issue.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Connecticut [Mr. Shays].
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, this has been an amazing experience because
this is a time in the history of Congress where two-thirds of Congress
believes we should move forward in a certain direction where two-thirds
of the majority party for very valid reasons disagrees, and this was a
test of this Republican Party on whether a minority within the party
could have some opportunity to pursue with the minority party on the
other side.
I am absolutely convinced that we have been dealing in good faith on
this issue. There were other issues in the Senate, like some Member
holding up the health care bill, and it seemed logical that that was a
bill we wanted because we wanted to deal with the issue of
transportability and preexisting condition and the health care fraud
positions there and the medical savings accounts and so on, and that
bill was being held up by the minority party there, and there were some
on our side who said, ``Well, if that's the case, then the minimum
wage, we're just going to wait on the conference report.'' But both
have been resolved, and we are having a debate now that is somewhat
academic because I understand as soon
[[Page H8580]]
as the debate is over we will have individuals appointed to the
conference committee.
But I just want to, one, thank my leadership for their willingness in
my conference and particularly the Members who strongly disagreed
because they thought it would and still believe that jobs would be at
risk and that profits will be at risk and that prices would be at risk.
We disagree, those of us who support raising the minimum wage.
We have a very good debate on the floor of the House. I believe
people on both sides of the aisle were dealing in good faith. Two-
thirds of this conference wants to move forward on the minimum wage. I
think that will happen, and to the credit of this majority party we
just did not vote out a minimum-wage package, we voted out a package of
economic stimulus tax credits for those individuals who are hiring the
least employable. So I think we got a better bill through the synergies
that exist.
I recognize that the Democrat Party has been pushing the minimum
wage, that they cut a clear majority on their side, they had a role to
play in this process. But this side of the aisle, and I do make the
point, as has been illustrated, but they did have 2 years when they
were in power they could have brought this bill up. And we do
understand that there is a lot of politics involved in this process, as
well.
But to the credit, we are moving forward, we will see Members
appointed to the conference committee, and I urge adoption of this
conference effort.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I merely say again we are here to appoint conferees,
which that means we want to move ahead, we do not want to delay, but we
have lost 50 minutes now. We probably could have solved it all in 50
minutes if we could have just named the conferees and sat down and got
in conference, and it may be all over by this time.
But again I know it is a political year. And I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee].
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for
yielding this time to me. And I might say to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania in fact this is an important debate. It is 50 minutes, but
I would say to the American people it has been a long time since the
Senate passed the minimum wage. I would ask my Republican colleagues,
why so long? Why not then, on July 1, and certainly before July 4? Why
not recognize that since the Senate passed the minimum-wage increase,
American workers, some 5 million of them who earn less than $4.70,
would have already gotten a raise?
According to the Labor Department, if we had gone ahead on July 1, we
would have provided the American people 3\1/2\ months of groceries, or
4\1/2\ months of utility bills or 2 months of rent. My own State of
Texas, the workers there have lost $19 million a week because we did
not increase the minimum wage when this House voted for it and the
Senate voted for it. Workers have lost nearly $4 billion because of the
Republican delay.
That is why we are debating this on the floor of the House.
And might I take on my colleagues on the issue of welfare reform? I
do not mind discussing it, because we are so eager to talk about
welfare reform, which I agree with, but at the same time we do not want
to give the American workers a decent working wage. I support welfare
reform with job training, with child care, with health care and jobs.
But I recognize that the fact that we have had a minimum wage that was
less than a minimum wage in 1962 in terms of buying power, we are not
doing anything to suggest to people get off welfare but yet do not have
the jobs or the income to be able to survive, for when one gets off
welfare they do still need health care.
This is an important step. I am just so sorry that we did not move
more sooner so that the billions of dollars that have been lost already
by the American worker could have been corrected, so that more families
could buy groceries, so more could pay utility bills, and, yes, those
who maybe were without homes could be in apartments now paying rent.
That is really the cause of the ire of those of us on this side of
the aisle. We did not need to be voting on this today. We could have
been voting for the American worker on July 4, really celebrating this
holiday of independence and celebration.
And so, Mr. Speaker, I think it is extremely important that we do
move forward. I hope the conferees will spend more time in discussing
how we can help the American worker. I hope it will spend time
listening to economists who will say that increasing the minimum wage a
mere 95 cents does not hurt small businesses, it does help the economy
, it does help circulate dollars into the economy so that consumers
will have more money. And we recognize that those individuals with the
least amount of money are our greater consumers. Give them the
opportunity to get a fair day's wage for a fair day's work. Vote for
this minimum-wage conference so that we can stand with the Americans. I
am sorry it is so late.
Mr. PAYNE of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of
American workers and in support of an increase in the national minimum
wage. Every day, we hear how the living standards of Americans are
steadily eroding. And finally, we are looking at a bipartisan effort to
increase the living standards for millions of Americans who are looking
to take personal responsibility and keep them and their families off
welfare.
Consider that since the early 1970's, the benefits of economic growth
have unevenly distributed among workers. Raising the minimum wage would
help ameliorate this trend.
The positive effects of the minimum wage are not felt solely by low-
income households, but minimum wage workers are overrepresented in poor
and moderate-income households.
Consequently, the minimum wage is an important component of a broad-
based policy to help low-wage workers, particularly in households that
are working hard to keep themselves and their families in self-
sufficiency.
With wages stagnant, people are spending less money. As a result,
companies profits are way up and inflation adjusted wages and benefits
are climbing at less than half the pace of previous economic
expansions.
And with growth in consumer spending down, that means that per capita
GDP growth is way below projected trend.
So what does all this mean for you? As many of my colleagues on the
other side are seriously considering reductions in the earned income
tax credit, workers who are impacted by a stagnant minimum wage are in
large part the same people who would be hurt by cuts in the tax credit.
And in this age of personal responsibility, here's the incentive to
move out of poverty.
I know that my colleagues vote in favor of this small effort to help
hard-working Americans struggle to keep themselves and their families
out of poverty. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
{time} 1245
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Torkildsen). Without objection, the
previous question is ordered on the motion to instruct.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct
offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling].
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 365,
nays 26, not voting 42, as follows:
[Roll No. 369]
YEAS--365
Abercrombie
Allard
Andrews
Archer
Bachus
Baesler
Baker (CA)
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Beilenson
Bentsen
Bereuter
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Bliley
Blute
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Brewster
Browder
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Brownback
Bryant (TN)
Bryant (TX)
Bunn
[[Page H8581]]
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Canady
Cardin
Castle
Chabot
Christensen
Chrysler
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clinger
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins (GA)
Collins (MI)
Condit
Conyers
Cooley
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Crapo
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis
de la Garza
Deal
DeFazio
DeLauro
Dellums
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Dooley
Dornan
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Durbin
Edwards
Ehlers
Engel
English
Ensign
Eshoo
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Fawell
Fazio
Fields (LA)
Fields (TX)
Filner
Flake
Flanagan
Foglietta
Foley
Forbes
Fowler
Fox
Frank (MA)
Franks (CT)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frisa
Frost
Funderburk
Furse
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Graham
Green (TX)
Greene (UT)
Greenwood
Gunderson
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Hansen
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Hefner
Heineman
Herger
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hobson
Hoke
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hunter
Hyde
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jacobs
Jefferson
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (SD)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Johnston
Jones
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kim
King
Kleczka
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
LaFalce
Lantos
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Lightfoot
Linder
Lipinski
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Longley
Lowey
Lucas
Luther
Maloney
Manton
Manzullo
Markey
Martini
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy
McCollum
McCrery
McDermott
McHale
McHugh
McInnis
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meek
Menendez
Metcalf
Meyers
Millender-McDonald
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Molinari
Mollohan
Montgomery
Moorhead
Moran
Morella
Murtha
Myers
Myrick
Nadler
Neal
Neumann
Ney
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Orton
Owens
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Parker
Pastor
Paxon
Payne (VA)
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pickett
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Poshard
Pryce
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Reed
Regula
Richardson
Riggs
Rivers
Roemer
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rose
Roth
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Salmon
Sanders
Sawyer
Saxton
Schaefer
Schiff
Schroeder
Schumer
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Shaw
Shays
Shuster
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Solomon
Spence
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Stockman
Stokes
Stupak
Talent
Tanner
Tate
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Tejeda
Thomas
Thompson
Thornton
Thurman
Torkildsen
Torres
Towns
Traficant
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Volkmer
Vucanovich
Walsh
Wamp
Ward
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
White
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
Young (AK)
Zeliff
Zimmer
NAYS--26
Armey
Barr
Barton
Campbell
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Combest
Crane
DeLay
Doolittle
Ehrlich
Goss
Hoekstra
Inglis
Kingston
Kolbe
McIntosh
Royce
Sanford
Shadegg
Souder
Stump
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Walker
Wicker
NOT VOTING--42
Ackerman
Baker (LA)
Berman
Bevill
Blumenauer
Boucher
Chapman
Coleman
Collins (IL)
Cramer
Cremeans
Doggett
Ford
Gejdenson
Geren
Hancock
Hastings (FL)
Hayes
Holden
Hutchinson
LaHood
Laughlin
Lewis (CA)
Lincoln
Martinez
McDade
Meehan
Mica
Miller (CA)
Miller (FL)
Nethercutt
Payne (NJ)
Pelosi
Peterson (FL)
Quillen
Roberts
Scarborough
Seastrand
Studds
Torricelli
Waters
Young (FL)
{time} 1304
Messrs. TIAHRT, STUMP ARMEY, DeLAY, COMBEST, EHRLICH, INGLIS of South
Carolina, DOOLITTLE, WALKER, SANFORD, and GOSS, Mrs. CHENOWETH, and
Messrs. ROYCE, WICKER, CHAMBLISS, BARTON of Texas, and KOLBE changed
their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the motion to instruct was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Torkildsen). Without objection, the
Chair appoints the following conferees:
From the Committee on Ways and Means, for consideration of the House
bill, except for title II, and the Senate amendment numbered 1, and
modifications committed to conference: Messrs. Archer, Crane, Thomas,
Gibbons, and Rangel.
As additional conferees from the Committee on Economic and
Educational Opportunities, for consideration of sections 1704(h)(1)(B)
and 1704(l) of the House bill and sections 1421(d), 1442(b), 1442(c),
1451, 1457, 1460(b), 1460(c), 1461, 1465, and 1704(h)(1)(B) of the
Senate amendment numbered 1, and modifications committed to conference:
Messrs. Goodling, Fawell, Ballenger, Clay, and Owens.
As additional conferees from the Committee on Economic and
Educational Opportunities, for consideration of title II of the House
bill and the Senate amendments numbered 2-6, and modifications
committed to conference: Messrs. Goodling, Fawell, Ballenger, Riggs,
Clay, Owens, and Hinchey.
There was no objection.
____________________