[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 119 (Thursday, September 10, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10192-S10194]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 CONSUMER BANKRUPTCY REFORM ACT OF 1998

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, in his capacity as a Senator from 
the State of Indiana, asks unanimous consent that the debate on the 
pending bankruptcy bill continue in status quo until the hour of 6 p.m.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, just a short while ago I was informed 
that the majority leader was looking for amendments to the bankruptcy 
legislation and also mentioned my name during that discussion. I am 
quite prepared to call up our amendment at the present time, Amendment 
Number 3540, and move for consideration of that amendment.
  The majority leader indicated--I am getting the transcript--that he 
was prepared to enter in a time agreement on this amendment, and that 
he was inviting amendments to the bankruptcy bill. I am here on the 
floor now prepared to move ahead, and I am also willing to enter into a 
reasonable time limit. Therefore I am constrained to object given what 
the majority leader has stated.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Chair, in its capacity as a Senator from the State of Indiana, 
suggests the absence of a quorum.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, in his capacity as a Senator from 
the State of Indiana, objects and announces that very shortly someone 
from the leadership of the Republican side will be appearing on the 
floor to discuss this issue with the Senators.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I hope to have an opportunity to talk 
about the economy and agriculture and what is happening in my State.
  I ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, in his capacity as a Senator from 
the State of Indiana, reluctantly objects to the Senator's request and 
asks the clerk to call the roll.

[[Page S10193]]

  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  I ask unanimous consent that debate on the pending bankruptcy bill 
continue in status quo until the hour of 6 p.m.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Let me say, Mr. President, I indicated to the Senator from 
Massachusetts that I think we have an agreement worked out in a fair 
way to handle his amendment with regard to minimum wage, but we are 
still having to work to see if we can get something agreed to on the 
bankruptcy reform bill. I understand that may take some considerable 
time yet, but Senator Grassley is working on it, as well as Senator 
Durbin and others who have been in contact with the White House.
  I think a good-faith effort is underway. If it can be worked out in 3 
hours, that would be magnificent. We would have the vote on Senator 
Kennedy's amendment and we could go to the bankruptcy issue and have 
votes and get this issue completed. If we can't get the agreement 
worked out on bankruptcy reform, then we would have a cloture vote 
tomorrow as is scheduled, and we would go on to other issues. I am sure 
Senator Kennedy will then offer his amendment on something else. That 
is where we are now. Everybody is working in good faith. We will hope 
for the best.

  I yield the floor.
  Mr. KENNEDY addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.


                         Minimum Wage Amendment

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I thank the leader for his explanation. 
As I mentioned earlier, I am prepared to enter into a reasonable time 
agreement for this amendment. But I do want to give the Senate the 
opportunity to express itself on this amendment because it is of such 
vital importance for so many millions of Americans who depend upon the 
minimum wage for their survival, and who have seen, over the past 
several years, a decline in the purchasing power of the minimum wage.
  I will just take a few moments now to continue some of the thoughts 
that I expressed last evening. I see that Senator Wellstone wants to 
address some of the needs of his own State. I will not take much of the 
Senate's time now. But I will either take additional time this evening 
when the Senate concludes its business, or at other opportunities, 
because this is an issue of great importance.
  Mr. President, I pointed out last night what has happened to the 
purchasing power of those who earn the minimum wage. Even with the 
increase I propose, which is 50 cents in January of next year and 50 
cents the following year--even if we are successful, the purchasing 
power of those at the lower economic levels will still be substantially 
lower than it was during the 1960s, 1970s, and the early 1980s.
  This is at a time of extraordinary economic prosperity--the greatest 
prosperity we have had in this country, with great economic growth, and 
low inflation, a budget that is balanced, and an increasing surplus. 
The real issue is: Are we going to reward work? Are we going to say to 
men and women who work 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, that they are 
going to be out of poverty in the most powerful Nation in the world, 
with the strongest economy in the world? That is something that I 
believe is very basic, very fundamental. It is an issue of fairness, 
and an issue that will not go away. That is why those of us who support 
it are going to be persistent in insisting that we are going to have a 
vote on the issue in these next several days. Because we are not 
permitted to have a freestanding bill, we have to use an amendment 
strategy so the Senate can address this issue. But address it the 
Senate will.
  Last evening, Mr. President, I pointed out and responded to 2 of the 
arguments that are constantly made in opposition to an increase in the 
minimum wage. The first argument is that it adds to the rate of 
inflation. I also pointed out last night that we have the lowest rate 
of inflation of any time when the Senate has considered an increase in 
the minimum wage since the end of World War II.
  The second argument is that raising the minimum wage increases 
unemployment. Last night I pointed out that we have the lowest 
unemployment rate of any time we have considered an increase in the 
minimum wage since the end of World War II.
  These two claims are continually offered by opponents of an increase 
in the minimum wage. But they do not hold water. The facts belie those 
claims.
  Other issues have been raised, Mr. President. One was, what will be 
the impact on small businesses? A recent survey by the Jerome Levy 
Institute for Economics shows that 90 percent of small businesses said 
the last increase in the minimum wage had no impact on their hiring or 
employment decisions. Only one-third of 1 percent said they laid off 
workers. If the minimum wage were increased to $6 an hour, fewer than 3 
percent said they would hire fewer employees or lay off existing 
workers. Over 90 percent said they anticipated no ill effects from such 
increases.
  That data has been substantiated by the Small Business 
Administration, which pointed out that, in 1997 alone, industries 
dominated by small business created 60 percent more jobs than did 
industries dominated by the large firms. Last year, over 1.2 million 
new jobs were created in the sectors dominated by small businesses, 
which often are those that pay minimum wage to their workers.
  This data contrasts starkly with the rhetoric from the National 
Restaurant Association, the National Federation of Independent 
Business, and other naysayers. Those groups continue to cry ``wolf'' 
about the impact of raising the minimum wage. They should ask their 
members what really happened after the last increase, before they try 
to feed Senators the same empty arguments.
  These interest groups do not speak for all small businesses in the 
country. 115 small businesses from across the country have joined the 
Campaign for a Fair Minimum Wage. They come from 16 States and the 
District of Columbia, and they include restaurants, retail stores, 
banks, investment firms, publishers and communications companies.
  These firms understand that raising the minimum wage is good for 
employers as well as employees. Fair pay for workers improves 
productivity and reduces turnover. That is extremely important.
  Another point I want to mention, Mr. President, is what is happening 
to living standards for low-income Americans, including minimum wage 
workers. Many low wage workers are desperate for this kind of 
assistance. Nationwide, soup kitchens, food pantries and homeless 
shelters are increasingly serving the working poor--not just the 
unemployed. According to a U.S. Conference of Mayors study in 1997, 
requests for emergency food aid increased in 86 percent of the cities 
surveyed, and 67 percent of cities cited low-paying jobs as one of the 
main causes for hunger.
  Here we have individuals who are making the minimum wage and don't 
earn enough to keep themselves and their children out of soup kitchens. 
This is powerful evidence about what is happening to the working poor. 
The purchasing power of these workers has declined, as I discussed last 
night. This is more dramatic evidence about the significant increase in 
working poor families who are forced to rely on soup kitchens and 
charities. This is something that the mayors understand. This is 
something the mayors have indicated is of increasing concern to all of 
them. We have an opportunity to do something about that for families 
who are making the minimum wage, and that is an additional reason for 
this increase.
  Mr. President, we can also look at the effect of the increase that I 
am proposing--the two 50-cent increases that will bring the minimum 
wage to $6.15 in the year 2000. But that amount translates to just 
$5.74 in purchasing power in the year 2000, even if we go ahead.
  Now, what else is happening to wages in our country? Salaries and 
bonuses paid to executives have never been higher, Mr. President. In 
April, the Wall Street Journal surveyed executive

[[Page S10194]]

pay at 350 of the country's largest firms. The median CEO salary and 
bonus in 1997 was $1.6 million, or $770 an hour. The CEO takes less 
than 2 days to earn what a minimum wage worker earns in a full year.
  The same groups that complain about an increase in the minimum wage 
are the ones that have made dramatic increases in the payment of their 
officials, Mr. President. On the one hand, they say, ``We can't afford 
to pay a 50 cent or $1 increase in the minimum wage''; yet, they are 
able to afford millions more in salaries and stock options to their 
executives.
  Over 170 groups have joined the Campaign for a Fair Minimum Wage. 
They include religious groups, such as the American Friends Service 
Committee, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, the United 
Methodist Board of Church and Society, the United States Catholic 
Conference--and dozens more.
  Women's organizations are also represented: the American Association 
of University Women, the National Committee on Pay Equity, the National 
Partnership for Women & Families, the National Women's Political 
Caucus, the Older Women's League, and many others.
  Civil rights groups also support the Campaign. These groups and 
others understand that the minimum wage is a civil rights issue--a 
partial list includes the American-Arab Anti-discrimination Committee, 
the Asian American Legal Defense Fund, the NAACP, the National Council 
of La Raza, the Rainbow Coalition, the Southern Christian Leadership 
Conference, and many more.
  Trade unions have joined the Campaign, too. Virtually every union 
member earns more than the minimum wage, thanks to union representation 
at the bargaining table. But that hasn't stopped the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, 
the Communications Workers, the Steel Workers, the Service Employees 
and other unions from strongly supporting this increase. They believe 
that every working American deserves a decent wage, and they are 
working hard to achieve that result.
  Mr. President, we will continue to consider the issues that have been 
raised in past debates on the minimum wage. We are eager to debate 
these issues on the floor of the U.S. Senate and give the membership an 
opportunity to vote on this issue.
  As I have mentioned, and will continue to say time in and time out, 
this is an issue of fundamental fairness and decency. It is a real 
reflection of the kind of values which this institution has.
  This is a women's issue because the majority of minimum wage workers 
are women. It is a children's issue because many of those women have 
children.
  It basically is a fairness issue. And we are very hopeful that we 
will have the opportunity to debate this and have a decision on this 
issue in the U.S. Senate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah is recognized.

                          ____________________