[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 64 (Monday, May 10, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5054-S5056]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, we are in a period of what we call 
morning business. But we know when we go back to what is referred to as 
the JOBS bill we will be on the Cantwell amendment which is to extend 
unemployment compensation to workers who have worked hard over the 
course of their lives and contributed into the unemployment 
compensation fund, the fund that today is approximately $14 billion in 
surplus. The Cantwell amendment is about $5 billion and, if passed, 
would certainly ensure the funds would be retained in a very robust 
financial situation. It would help us address the fact there are 85,000 
workers every single week who are losing their unemployment 
compensation funds. As a result of losing their compensation funds,

[[Page S5055]]

they are hard pressed to pay for their mortgage, to continue to put 
food on the table, to pay for their utilities, the downpayment on their 
automobiles, and to continue to try to even be able to survive.
  Real Americans are hurting in many parts of the country, and it 
doesn't have to be this way. The Senator from Washington has tried to 
have this issue addressed in the Senate some 14 times over the period 
of the last 18 months. She was only once successful, and that was in 
February of this last year when a vote that was taken in the Senate 
showed 58 Members of the Senate agreed with the Senator's position. We 
have a lot of close votes around here; some are 50-49, and some are 51-
49. But when we have a vote that is 58-39, that demonstrates a strong 
bipartisan desire by the Members of this body to try to address the 
situation.
  It isn't only the Members of this body. There was another vote in the 
House of Representatives which was 227-179 for a similar proposal to 
provide help and assistance to those who are unemployed, who have 
worked hard and paid into the fund. When the unemployment compensation 
fund was established, the very purpose of the unemployment compensation 
fund was to provide in these kinds of circumstances.
  There are those who say we have seen and are seeing some significant 
changes in our economy and, therefore, this legislation is not 
necessary. Let me come back one more moment to address our procedural 
issue.
  Last week, on Thursday evening, when it finally became possible after 
the long week for the Senate to consider the Cantwell amendment on the 
unemployment compensation fund, we finally had that matter before the 
Senate. Our Republican leadership rushed to move off the JOBS bill and 
move into morning business where we have been for the last several days 
because they didn't want to address the issue of unemployment 
compensation. Then we find the situation where the majority leader 
files cloture because the Republican leadership does not want to permit 
the Senate to vote on this kind of help and assistance for workers--
basically middle-income families--to provide for themselves and their 
families, even though a broad majority of Republicans and Democrats 
favor it. They so fear, evidently, taking a vote on the issue of 
unemployment compensation that they say let us close out this 
amendment, prohibit Senator Cantwell from getting a vote, prohibit the 
Senate from voting up or down, let's end all debate on the underlying 
bill and cut off any future amendments as well, because under the order 
they will have to follow the cloture provisions because we do not want 
to risk having the Members of this body vote yea or nay on the issue of 
unemployment compensation.
  We are getting used to that by the leadership here. We see that 
similar technique followed when it comes to overtime, although with the 
persistence of my friend and colleague Senator Harkin, we were able to 
get an overtime vote. We saw an overwhelming majority of the Members of 
this body send a very clear message to the Bush administration to keep 
their hands off overtime payments for American workers.
  We have been trying to get an increase in the minimum wage for some 7 
years, and we have been denied the opportunity to get an up-or-down 
vote and let the Senate speak its will. Clearly, there is a majority in 
this body who understand it has been 7 years since we provided an 
increase in the minimum wage. And certainly now is the time when so 
many of those proud men and women are working on the bottom rung, but, 
nonetheless, working and working hard--men and women, primarily women, 
women who have children, and men and women of color who want to be able 
to provide for their families, and this institution denies them an 
opportunity to get an up-or-down vote on minimum wage. They tried to 
ensure that we would not have to vote on unemployment compensation, 
then deny the Senate the opportunity to get a vote on the increase in 
the minimum wage, try to avoid a vote on overtime--all the issues that 
affect the economic conditions for working families and middle-income 
families in this country.

  As I have said many times, I don't know what these families have done 
to this administration or to the Republican Party that they should 
declare war upon them, but that is the result of their policies.
  I thought I would take a few moments of this time to review where we 
are in terms of the state of our economy because there may be those who 
believe because there has been an increase in the total number of jobs 
created, even though 40 percent of those created in the last report 
period of last week are basically low-income jobs. In the group 
announced in the earlier quarter, there was virtually no manufacturing 
jobs. These was the increase in low-wage jobs and the increase in the 
part-time jobs but not the kind of real growth which this country is 
familiar with when we come out of a recovery, which means good jobs, 
good benefits, good hope for the future, and a sense of hope for those 
workers and workers' families.
  These are April figures and do not include the latest of the May 
figures. In January of 2001, we had 6 million Americans who were 
unemployed. Now we have 8.2 million, 2.2 million more that were 
unemployed than we had 2 years ago.
  This is one of the most important charts because this shows the long-
term employment is nearly triple. Those are the number of workers who 
have been unemployed for more than 26 weeks. These are record numbers 
from recent history of 20 years; 20 years since we have had this number 
of unemployed workers looking for jobs for longer than 26 weeks. 
Therefore, it reflects the fact we have many workers out there looking 
for jobs; they want to work and they are not able to find the jobs.
  That is understandable when we have 8.2 million unemployed Americans 
yet we have only 2.9 million job openings, according to the Bureau of 
Labor Statistics. We have all these Americans looking for these jobs.
  I ask consent that I be allowed to speak as long as I desire to 
speak.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. KENNEDY. So we have 8.2 million unemployed Americans looking for 
these job openings. Clearly, they are not going to be able to squeeze 
into that funnel. It will mean many millions are going to continue to 
be unemployed.
  That is what the Cantwell amendment addresses, those unemployed 
Americans who paid into that fund are losing their unemployment 
insurance, at the rate of over 85,000 a week.
  The next chart is interesting because it shows the growth in the last 
3 years. This represents March of this year, and it goes back to March 
of 2001 where we had 3.3 million Americans with part-time jobs who were 
looking for full-time employment. That was in March of 2001 at the 
start of this administration. Now that is up to 4.6 million Americans 
in part-time jobs who want to have a full-time job.
  That is a great leap in terms of the unemployment numbers recently, 
the great numbers of those have been in the part-time jobs. As we know 
with part-time jobs, more often than not they do not get the health 
insurance, they are not given the overtime pay. Obviously, they are 
denied pensions and they are denied other protections which many full-
time workers receive.

  Americans want to work, they will work, but they are not given the 
opportunity to work in our economy, which gets back again to the 
Cantwell amendment. If that is the circumstance, why aren't we willing 
to extend the unemployment compensation fund when we know the 
unemployment compensation fund is in surplus?
  The next chart indicates clearly that 40 percent of the jobs that are 
being created are in the low-wage and low-paying industries. This is 
what has happened in recent times. Even with the increase in the total 
numbers of jobs, these are basically low-paying jobs and part-time 
jobs. Only a handful of those in the last employment figures would be 
manufacturing.
  The next chart shows 43 States still have higher unemployment than 
when the recession began. With the exception of the 6 States in yellow, 
43 States still have higher unemployment than when the recession began, 
which comes back to the basic rationale for the Cantwell amendment.

[[Page S5056]]

  We still have significant unemployment in great parts of this country 
of ours. People just cannot find other work. If that is the condition--
and it is the condition because this is the Bureau of Labor Statistics 
figures--then we have to ask ourselves, Why are we cutting off and have 
ended effectively providing help and assistance with unemployment 
compensation? It does not have to be this way.
  This chart is very instructive because it shows what a different 
administration did when we had economic challenges. This is in the 
early 1990s, coming out of the recession of the early 1990s. Under 
President Clinton, we saw the spiking of 2.9 million jobs. It took the 
spiking of up to 2.9 million before the administration terminated the 
extended unemployment compensation funds. They were facing significant 
unemployment. With Presidential leadership and with the support of a 
Democrat House and Senate--that is true; because we did not get a 
single Republican vote in the Senate or in the House of 
Representatives--President Clinton put that into effect. We had the 
longest period of economic growth, price stability and job expansion 
than we have had in the last century. Finally, they cut off the 
unemployment compensation after it reached 2.9 million.
  We have 2 million still unemployed and this administration has said, 
No way, to those workers and denied them unemployment compensation.
  This chart rebuts modern thinking about who is now suffering from the 
unemployment and who is not. The green line represents less than a high 
school degree and the red line signifies college graduate. It has been 
the belief that with more education, there is a greater and greater 
opportunity to get a job. Right? Wrong. It does not necessarily follow. 
It can follow but it does not necessarily follow.
  Over the period of the last year, we find those with college degrees 
are increasingly those who are affected with unemployment, even more so 
than those with less than a high school degree which, effectively, 
remains flat.
  What is happening is higher unemployment is moving into the middle 
income. This is going to college graduates--not those who just 
completed 1 year but those who completed college. The red line on the 
chart indicates they are the ones now who have college degrees. Yet 
they are increasingly unemployed.
  I bring back to the Senate this very important chart because it very 
clearly shows what is happening out there in Main Street America to the 
middle-income working families in this country.
  Over the period of the last 5 years, what we have seen--and we are 
looking now from 2000 to 2004--in the purchasing power of middle-income 
families is their income has gone down 2 percent. But the prices for 
their homes or rentals have gone up 17.8 percent; health care, 50 
percent; tuition for their children, 35 percent; and utilities, 15 
percent. You talk about the middle income having challenges holding on 
to their economic security, this is what is happening to them. Their 
income, in terms of purchasing power, has effectively been stable, but 
the costs which they have had to pay in health insurance, tuition, 
utilities, and home prices, let alone what has been happening in terms 
of their local taxes, have been going up, and they have been feeling 
the squeeze.
  Can you imagine families with these kinds of obligations and suddenly 
they do not have any income at all. The only lifeline they have is the 
unemployment compensation. They have paid into it, and they wonder if 
they are going to get it. The unemployment fund is in surplus, and the 
Republican leadership says: No, we are not going to let you have a 
vote.
  Finally, we should understand this very clearly about what has been 
happening on Wall Street. With the Wall Street recovery, the corporate 
profits have gone up in the last 3 years by some 37.5 percent. Yet the 
change in workers' wages, as this chart shows, is 1.5 percent; 
basically the same figures we had before.
  So this is what is happening. There are those who are doing very 
well, and there are those who are able to go through this period of 
time and have a great deal of financial security. But not middle-income 
working families; they have not been able to do so. And this 
institution is not helping them. We are not helping them with any kind 
of increase in the minimum wage. We do not help them with the 
unemployment compensation. We do not help them, although we did have a 
positive vote. The administration certainly did not help them on the 
issue of overtime. We have left out 9 million Americans when it comes 
to pensions, which leads me into another issue in terms of health care 
coverage, which is another issue for us to consider.
  What the Senator from Washington is attempting to do is to provide at 
least some temporary relief until the economy gets strong for those 
millions of Americans who are trying to make it, who worked hard and 
paid into the unemployment compensation fund so they will be able to 
meet the most basic and fundamental needs of their families.
  Without this relief, 85,000 American workers a week are losing their 
unemployment compensation. Surely we can do something about it. We have 
a surplus fund of in excess of $15 billion. So I would hope we would 
cease the obstruction of the Cantwell amendment and permit us to have a 
vote on the Cantwell amendment. We have had a clear majority of this 
body that wants to vote in favor of it. Yet we are being obstructed 
from being able to do that, as we have been obstructed by the 
Republican majority on the issue of the increase in the minimum wage.

                          ____________________