Congressional Record, Volume 150 Issue 92 (Wednesday, July 7, 2004)

[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 92 (Wednesday, July 7, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7691-S7697]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

ISSUES IMPORTANT TO AMERICAN FAMILIES

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, there is a lot of talk across this country
about the important issues in this Presidential campaign. Some people
are going to try to define those issues on the floor of the House and
Senate in the weeks ahead, but the issues in this campaign will not be
defined in Washington, not on Capitol Hill. Those issues will be
defined in homes across America where families will decide what is
important, and they will listen to the candidates for Congress--the
House and Senate--and those who are running for President and Vice
President. They will listen to hear whether those candidates are
responding to their real concerns.
There will be an effort here to manufacture issues to try to divert
American families from their real concerns. In just a short time, I
suspect we will have this rush of proposed constitutional amendments
coming to the floor of the Senate. It is suggested one will be on the
issue of marriage and one on the flag. Quite honestly, it is very
apparent why they are being brought to the floor. I personally think we
should pass one law--and do it quickly--which says no one can propose a
constitutional amendment in a Presidential election year, certainly not
within 6 months of an election. Such proposals are automatically
suspect and clearly political.
In this case, the Republican leadership is going to bring
constitutional amendments to the floor in the hopes that they can
divert the attention of American families from the issues they care
about to some new set of issues. Why would the Republican leadership
want the American people to look at issues other than those they take
personally? Because, frankly, they do not have many answers to the
questions most families ask.
The families in Illinois and across America with whom I talk are
working families concerned about their inability to keep up with costs.
Not surprising, take a look at this chart as an illustration. What
has happened to real earnings over the past year in America? For
families, average weekly earnings have gone down, but for corporate
profits, they have gone up dramatically. There is a disconnect. We want
business to be successful. Of course, we do. Successful business means
more people working and more good jobs in America. But what is wrong
with this picture? Why did corporate profits go up so dramatically and
yet working families fell behind so much? The obvious reason is because
there are elements in the budget of most families that are not being
addressed in Washington.

[[Page S7692]]

What is causing this middle-class squeeze across America that is
basically denying families their weekly earnings? Why won't the
Republican leadership in the Senate and the House address the middle-
class squeeze? Why won't we address issues with which people are
concerned? Let's be more specific about what that squeeze consists of.
Look at this chart which shows real growth during President Bush's
administration. Average weekly earnings have gone up 1 percent since
President George W. Bush has come to office--1 percent. What about
college tuition costs? They have gone up 28 percent; gas prices, 28
percent. And here is one, this is the killer for business, labor, and
families: family health care premiums.
One can say to oneself: What in the world can Congress do about these
issues that are raising the cost of living for working families? The
answer is, ``plenty.'' What have we done? Nothing, absolutely nothing.
What we have done, unfortunately, is to ignore the real issues facing
families. We have ignored the issues they are coping with on a regular
basis. College tuition costs: My colleague, Senator Schumer of New
York, when we were discussing tax cuts, said the most important tax
cuts for working families and for our future include the deductibility
of college education expenses.
Well, that is obvious. What do I hope for for my kids, for the kids
of my colleagues, and for all who are following this debate? A chance
for a good education. What stands in the way? Well, certainly their own
achievement--they have to do a good job in school to be eligible to go
to college--but then the cost. My colleagues know what I am talking
about. How many college graduates today face college tuition costs
which are absolutely crippling?
Senator Schumer and others said if we are going to talk about tax
cuts to help working families, why do we not allow them to deduct the
cost of college education expenses? We offered that amendment. It was
defeated by the Republicans. They said, no, the tax cuts should go to
the highest income individuals and they will decide what to do with
that extra income and they will ultimately help working families.
Gasoline prices----
Mrs. BOXER. Will my friend yield?
Mr. DURBIN. I will yield in just one moment.
Gasoline prices are another illustration. These prices have gone up
dramatically in the State of California and in the State of Illinois.
What has this administration done about it? Nothing. A cost to
business, a cost to families, a cost out of the bottom line of the
paycheck people bring home, and this administration refuses to confront
OPEC about fair gasoline prices.
Why do family health care premiums continue to be the No. 1 issue
across America, ignored by the Bush administration, ignored by the
Republican leaders in this Congress? Because the leaders in this
Congress and the Republican Party refuse to confront the health care
insurance industries, the pharmaceutical companies, and those that are
driving up the cost of health care. Those special interest groups are
sacred cows in this town, and because the Republican leadership will
not confront them, American families are being victimized by them.
These are the issues that families care about. They are the ones we
are going to bring to this Presidential campaign, and they are the ones
the Republican leadership wants to ignore. They want us to rush off and
debate at length constitutional amendments that, frankly, are going
nowhere.
I am happy to yield to my colleague from California for a question.
Mrs. BOXER. I came to thank the Senator for bringing out that chart,
if he would keep it up there for a minute, and for making this point to
our colleagues and anyone else who might be listening. It is one thing
for us to critique the administration and say they are not addressing
the real issues. When I go home, people say this administration cares
about everybody else in the world; there is money for everybody else in
the world; we are going to help everybody else; we are going to help
the people of Iraq. Fine, but they are going to have universal health
care and we are not? They are going to have their classrooms built and
we are not? And it goes on.
So what I believe our people want us to address is what is happening
to them, and what my friend has done in a most eloquent way, as he
always does, is to point out this middle-class squeeze that is hitting
our people.
These are the problems I care about. I say to my friend, we have a
bill about reforming class action. I have taken a look at some class
action lawsuits, and I have realized that is one tool to help middle-
class families who may be harmed by products that are not safe. So I do
not know why they are running off to do that and they are ignoring all
of these other things.
I guess my question to my friend is, As we debate the Presidential
election and we have a point of view that this administration is
ignoring this middle-class squeeze, do we not find that happening right
here with the Republicans who are in charge of this Senate? Are they
not ignoring this middle-class squeeze? The best way to prove the point
is what they bring up before the Senate. Are they bringing up anything
to deal with college tuition and giving tax breaks to those folks who
so desperately need it? Are they doing anything at all to help with gas
prices, health care premiums, or prescription drugs, or are we going to
face, after this class action debate, these constitutional amendments
my friend referred to that I have to say in all honesty and frankness I
have never had one person in California come up to me and say: Senator,
the most important thing facing us is gay marriage. That is just
ruining my life. Take that up. Ban it because that is what I think
about night and day. No. They tell me they are worried about paying
college tuition; they are worried about filling up their gas tank; they
are worried about not being able to afford prescription drugs.
So my question to my friend is, Could we not do more to implore this
leadership to take up some of the issues that are really affecting the
people we all represent?
Mr. DURBIN. I thank the Senator from California for her question. The
answer is clear to all of us. This Congress, under the Republican
leadership and this administration, has decided that the special
interest groups are more important than these issues that are facing
working families. They have decided that giving tax cuts to the
wealthiest people in America is more important than giving working
families the deductibility of college education expenses. They have
decided that giving breaks to oil companies is more important than
confronting those oil companies and OPEC to bring down gasoline prices.
They have decided that the pharmaceutical companies and the health
insurance companies in America are more important, their bottom line
profits are more important than the cost of health insurance to
businesses, to labor union members, and to families across America.
They have caved in time and time again to special interest groups, and
they refuse to listen to the real concerns of America.
That is why Americans are saying, by a margin of almost 2 to 1, that
we are headed in the wrong direction as a nation. They want leadership
in Washington that responds to the real issues, the family room issues,
the kitchen table issues families face every single day. This
administration has refused to do it. Frankly, this Congress has refused
to do it. They want to divert attention. They want to have the old
sleight of hand. Let us talk about constitutional amendments. Let us
not talk about things that deal with the real issues facing families.
I am happy to yield to the Senator from Nevada.
Mr. REID. Will the Senator from Illinois yield for a question?
Mr. DURBIN. I am happy to yield for a question to the Senator from
Nevada.
Mr. REID. I say through the Chair to my distinguished friend from
Illinois, also the two constitutional issues, gay marriage and flag
burning, no matter how strong someone may feel about each of those,
would the Senator acknowledge they have no chance whatsoever of
passing, so we are not only taking up issues that may be secondary to
the vast majority of the American people, but also they have no chance
of passing? All they are doing is bringing these up to try to satisfy a
small number of people in this country to divert attention from the
real pocketbook

[[Page S7693]]

issues the American people deal with every day. Would the Senator
acknowledge that?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Graham of South Carolina). The Democratic
time has expired.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, if the Democratic time has expired, the
Chair has not properly advised the minority. I yielded 25 minutes this
morning to Senators Lincoln and Senator Harkin, leaving 5 minutes. So
where has the 5 minutes gone?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Senator Harkin asked for an additional 5
minutes.
Mr. REID. I am sorry. I should never step off the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Which completes the Democratic time.
Mr. REID. No problem. I should never step off the floor.
I ask unanimous consent that each side have an additional 5 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DURBIN. I say to my colleague from the State of Nevada, he is
going to find out in the rollcall votes, in the ultimate vote, that
these constitutional amendments are not going to pass. This is a
political grandstand. Frankly, we should pass a law that says a
constitutional amendment cannot be proposed within 6 months of a
Presidential election. That is what this is all about. It really
demeans this great Constitution we have sworn to uphold that we are
playing games by bringing issues like the gay marriage amendment to the
floor of the Senate without even a markup in the Judiciary Committee.
Why? Frankly, it should not be done. Maybe one or two times in the
recent history of this body have we brought an amendment to the Senate
floor without a markup in the Judiciary Committee--I think Senator
Hollings, through unanimous consent, discharged a proposed
constitutional amendment from committee. So they are not taking it
seriously. It is just a record vote to put Members on the spot and to
try to gas up the special interest groups that feel strongly on this
issue. That really does not address the issues working families care
about.
If this Senate is going to be relevant to the people we represent, we
ought to speak to the issues they care about. Whether the people are
coming to this gallery or watching the proceedings by television, they
know what working families care about. It is the cost of health
insurance. It is the fact that one may have a dollar an hour more in
their contract this year and do not have a penny more in take-home pay
because health insurance has gone up. It is the cost of sending your
kids to college. Your child works hard and has good grades, gets into a
great college, and look at the cost: I'm sorry, you can't go to school;
we can't come up with $20,000 a year.

It is the cost of gasoline which is killing small businesses and
families alike.
These are issues we ought to be talking about and these are issues
this Republican leadership consistently ignores.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. DURBIN. I am happy to yield.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. It is also the cost of prescription drugs, I
add to my colleague from Illinois. I will tell you of the riveting
experience I had last week as I was doing townhall meetings in my State
of Florida, where a senior citizen, a lady, broke down crying in the
middle of a jam-packed townhall meeting as we were talking about the
issues of the day such as Iraq. She said: I cannot afford a roof over
my head and the cost of prescription drugs. She said: I don't have any
choice; I have to provide a home. That means I cannot buy prescription
drugs.
Yet what did we do in this Senate? The Senator from Illinois and I
did not vote for the prescription drug bill because it said Medicare
could not negotiate by using bulk purchases, negotiating the price of
drugs down as does the Veterans' Administration.
It is inexcusable. It is unexplainable, except that it rewards
special interest politics to the neglect of senior citizens and allows
those prescription drug prices to stay as high as they are so seniors
cannot afford them.
Would the Senator reflect on that experience I had in my townhall
meeting?
Mr. DURBIN. I would say to the Senator from Florida, he will hear the
same response in Illinois, in California, in Nevada, in South Carolina.
People can't afford prescription drugs. They can't afford college
tuition. They can't deal with health insurance costs. They can't deal
with these rising gas prices.
Here is the problem. We need to create a special interest group
called Working Families in America. Wouldn't it be great if they had a
lobby here? Wouldn't it be great if we walked out in that hallway and
men in three-piece suits and Gucci loafers were representing working
families in America? There are plenty out there for the drug companies,
plenty out there for the health insurance companies. But this Senate
and this Congress only responds to special interest groups and those
are groups such as the pharmaceutical companies that have record
profits at the expense of consumers across America.
When are we ever going to address issues that real families care
about? If we are not here to address those issues, then, frankly, we
ought to just close up shop and go home, and I don't think we should. I
think we have a responsibility to stay here and work and make certain
that we deal with the issues real families care about instead of all
these special interest groups that come in.
Now they want to get rid of class actions. They have said class
actions, that is a dirty phrase. We should not say that in America
because the people who go to court and sue on behalf of a large group
of people have no business doing it. They are frivolous lawsuits. They
are unproductive.
Then take a look at those class action lawsuits. Those end up being
lawsuits by consumers across America who may have just lost $100
personally, but when aggregated turn out to be a large group of people
who have created a great profit for a company that didn't deserve it.
Those are ways that Americans speak to the issues that concern them.
Those are opportunities which the Republican majority wants to silence.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic time has expired. The Senator
from Arizona.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, it has been interesting to hear some of our
Democratic colleagues this morning make the charge that the Republican
leadership is somehow diverting attention from the real problems of the
day by scheduling a vote on an issue which, when I was back home this
last weekend, was certainly on the minds of a lot of my constituents,
and that is this question of whether judges in America are going to
redefine what they have always understood to be their definition of
marriage.
To take 1 day, or perhaps as much as 3 days, to debate that issue and
get that issue resolved in the Senate does not seem to me to be too
much to ask, in terms of conducting our business.
With respect to the claim that it is diverting us from attention to
the economic issues that are of most concern to Americans, I have two
responses. First, Americans seem to be concerned about more than one
thing. They are concerned about raising their families; they are
concerned about a good home for their children; they are concerned
about a good economic future for their children. All of these are
wrapped up in the totality of the things that were expressed to me over
this Fourth of July break.
I don't think it is either fair or accurate to say there is only one
thing Americans are concerned about and that is their economic future.
But to the extent that is an issue and it becomes an issue in the
Presidential campaign this year, I think some facts are worth pointing
out.
I realize that sometimes facts get in the way of arguments. One of
the main arguments of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle is
that this is a bad economy. The Democratic Presidential candidate has
talked about the Depression and the worst economy since--I don't know,
Hoover, I guess. But the facts belie that claim. So perhaps this
morning we should take a little time to discuss some facts, some actual
statistics, some reality about the economy and not just the economy in
general but the economy as it affects the average American.

On the question of jobs, one of the criticisms has been--originally
the idea was there was no economic recovery. Then the economic recovery
became undeniable. Then the claim was

[[Page S7694]]

it is a recovery in every sense except the creation of jobs. Then for
several months in a row we began creating record numbers of jobs. Then
the argument became: But they are not really good jobs.
There are some people you can never please, of course. In an election
year, the party that is on the ``out'' has to criticize the party that
is on the ``in.'' It is just that it is becoming harder and harder to
criticize the Republicans because the economy has rebounded so well,
largely because of policies that have been pursued by the Bush
administration.
Let's examine the specific claim about employment and about wages and
about what kinds of jobs Americans have and how the economic recovery
is positively impacting the average American. Look at the June
employment figures, which are the latest numbers we have. They
demonstrate several things.
First, the quality of new jobs is rising. Nearly 80 percent of the
new jobs created in June were in industry categories that pay an
average hourly rate in excess of the overall average hourly rate in the
private sector. So these new jobs in manufacturing pay a higher wage
than the average. The inflation-adjusted average hourly earnings have
increased 2.224 percent during the first 3.5 years of the Bush
administration, compared with only a .13-percent increase during the
same period of the first Clinton administration.
People say, What about disposable income? Not just wages but
disposable income. Per capita aftertax disposable income, adjusted for
inflation, has increased 7.1 percent, since President Bush took office,
well above the 5.2-percent increase during the same period of the first
Clinton administration.
It doesn't much matter how you look at it, statistics in every
respect are superior to the Clinton administration statistics. They
represent economic growth. They represent real return in terms of wages
and inflation-adjusted wages for the average American as well as the
American working in manufacturing.
Since the start of the Bush administration, full-time employment has
averaged 82.56 percent, nearly a full percentage point higher than
full-time employment during the same period of the first Clinton
administration. So, again, no matter what comparison you make,
Americans individually are better off today. It is not just a matter of
the economy performing better, but they are individually better off
today in terms of employment, in terms of jobs, in terms of earnings.
In the past year, the number of full-time positions has increased by
nearly 1.3 million. I mention that because some make the argument that
some of these are called ``McJobs''--a play on McDonald's--that they
are just hamburger-flipping kinds of jobs. No. We are talking about
full-time positions. And I talked about manufacturing jobs earlier.
More than 81 percent of part-time workers in June indicate they have
chosen part-time employment for noneconomic reasons. The point is that
while full-time jobs are increasing, those who are working part time
are primarily working part time according to their own testimony for
reasons that do not have anything to do with economics.
I also mention the fact that temporary jobs in June represented only
2.225 percent of all payroll jobs in the private sector.
I make all of these points not to suggest that we can't do better. In
fact, the President has said we will not rest until everybody who wants
to work can find a job.
When you look at some of the counties in Arizona, for example, in
Pima and Maricopa Counties where the employment rate is 4.1, 4.2, or
4.3 percent, something in that order, and when you look at an area
where there is a substantial amount of illegal immigration with the
people working in sectors that Americans have not wanted generally to
work, you can see this is the closest thing to full-time employment we
could possibly have in this country.
Let me give some more statistical data because part of the problem in
the debate has been claims by one side and facts on the other side. I
know that sometimes people's eyes glaze over when they hear too many
numbers, but the reality is that numbers tell the story here. They are
like pieces of a puzzle. They are reality. When you put them together,
what they represent is not just a strong economy but an economy that is
helping individual families provide more income and more security for
their work situation.
The employment data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
earlier this month demonstrate this strong job growth. In June, nonfarm
payroll employment increased by 112,000 net new jobs. So far this year,
nearly 1.3 million net new payroll jobs have been created, and over 1.5
new payroll jobs since last August. According to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics' current population survey, which is the household survey,
the unemployment rate remains steady at 5.6 percent, which is well
below the peak of 6.3 percent in June of 2003. In other words, more
Americans are working than at any time in the country's history--139
million individuals. I think that is a record we can be proud of.
I make this point: There is a certain sense in which talking down the
economy creates a psychology in the market and becomes a self-
fulfilling prophecy. I notice there has been criticism in the past by
Members on the other side when Republicans have, during the Clinton
administration, noted certain problems with the economy. They said
don't talk down the economy, that it will have an effect itself on
confidence in the market and confidence among consumers.
This is what disturbs me about some of the rhetoric from the other
side. Every measurement of the economy is improving and every
measurement with respect to individuals within the economy is improving
substantially and is better than the comparable times during the
Clinton administration, yet you hear people constantly talking it down.
There is a point at which this itself can have a negative impact.

I would like to quote from a Wall Street Journal commentary that sort
of describes this phenomenon I am talking about. Here is the Wall
Street Journal:

Here's a quick primer on how to track an economic recovery.
When the media fret that the U.S. is heading for a decade of
stagnation like Japan, that means profits and investment are
picking up. When you hear that profits have risen but we're
stuck in a ``jobless recovery,'' businesses have started
hiring. And finally when a cry goes up that American workers
can find only low-paying menial jobs, that's the tip-off that
the economy is booming.
Congratulations, America. The return of ``McJobs'' rhetoric
signifies that an expansion is in full swing.

Of course, the Journal goes on to detail a lot of the statistical
information I have been talking about.
By focusing on the quality of the jobs that are being created, the
pessimists are once again counting on the public to overlook the facts
we have been talking about here. As I have indicated, the facts
demonstrate that the U.S. economy is not only producing a steady stream
of jobs, but the new positions are well paying and they are industrial
jobs. So whether you are talking quality or quantity, it is very hard
to deny that this economic recovery is helping all Americans.
One of the concerns has been about manufacturing. There is no
question that there are shifts occurring all around the world to an
information technology kind of economy, and a lot of the old industrial
base of this country has been affected by that. But there are also some
statistics that I believe give hope with respect to manufacturing in
this country, which is still the No. 1 country for manufacturing in the
world.
In June, nearly 80 percent of the new jobs were created in major
industry categories which pay an average hourly rate in excess of the
overall average hourly rate in the private sector of $15.65. In June,
39,000 new professional and business services jobs were created in an
industry with an average wage of $17.38 per hour--11 percent more than
the overall average hourly wage; 19,200 new transportation and
warehousing jobs were created in an industry with an average wage of
$16.50--7 percent above the overall average. In contrast, because some
speak about the leisure or hospitality industry where wages are less,
the average wage there is $8.86. That only accounted for 6 percent of
the new jobs created.
Again, for those who say there are new jobs being created but they
are in

[[Page S7695]]

the lower paying categories and not in the industrial categories, the
statistics simply belie that. They say that is not true.
The point is, very broadly speaking, the employment figures in June
are consistent with an upward trend of well-paying industries creating
valuable jobs, and this has been occurring for more than a year.
In June, the average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory
workers increased at an annualized rate of 1.2 percent, the sixth
consecutive monthly increase. Importantly, the growth in hourly
earnings was broad based, with wages increasing in 9 out of the 11
major industry sectors and unchanged in 3 sectors since June.
Since the beginning of the Bush administration, real average hourly
earnings--that means adjusted for inflation --have increased by 2.224
percent compared to the Clinton administration. In the first Clinton
administration, real average hourly earnings grew by only 1.3 percent.
Moreover, in the 2\1/2\ years following the 1990-1991 recession, real
average hourly earnings fell .66 percent. So the current increase
demonstrates that earnings are outpacing inflation to the benefit of
American workers and their families--again, in sharp contrast to the
Clinton years.

Finally, using the broader measure of ``compensation,'' which
includes both wages and benefits, the earnings picture improves even
more. Between the first quarter of 2001 and the first quarter of this
year, compensation paid to workers in the private industry has
increased a total of 12.18 percent. Specifically, wages have grown by
9.44 percent, and employment benefits, including health and pension
benefits, have increased by 18.98.
No matter how you look at this, individual employees are doing better
in terms of the kind of jobs they have, what those jobs are paying both
in terms of compensation and in terms of money, as well as compensation
in terms of other benefits. There is no way to look at the economic
growth and its impact on individual families and workers without seeing
the good news. As I said, the only explanation I have for pessimistic
talk is the reality of politics.
If you are going to try to replace somebody in an office, you have to
complain about something. In this case, however, I think those who are
complaining about the economy and are somehow suggesting that President
Bush and the Republican administration have not done enough to improve
the economy for working families basically have not been looking at the
facts. The facts have demonstrated quite clearly that this economic
recovery is helping a very broad spectrum of people in this country,
from industrial jobs to all other kind of jobs.
Disposable income is another measure by which you can determine
whether families are better off--dollars left after taxes. Here is
where the Bush administration has really made big strides because of
the tax cuts we passed, which some on the other side of the aisle would
take away.
In the first 12 quarters, the Bush administration's per capita
aftertax income increased by 12.5 percent, in large measure as a result
of the individual tax rate reductions we enacted in 2001 and 2003 that
were part of the Bush tax reduction programs which he signed into law
and is asking us to make permanent. With that kind of improvement in
per capita income--this is disposable income, dollars left over after
you pay the taxes that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle
ought to be joining in making the tax cuts permanent and not that the
tax cuts should be eliminated--per capita aftertax disposable income in
real, meaning inflation-adjusted, terms has increased 7.1 percent since
President Bush took office. That is a significant improvement over the
5.2-percent increase during the same period in the first Clinton
administration.
In a courtroom, I would say I rest my case. By every conceivable
measure of how Americans have been affected by this economy and the
economic growth spurred by the position of the President and the action
of the Republican House and Senate in support of the administration, by
every measure, Americans' lives have improved. We ought to count that
as good news, whether we are Democrats or Republicans, regardless of
what economic strata we are in. It represents the best in this country,
the opportunity we all have, the kind of idea that President Kennedy,
all the way through President Reagan, talked about.
When the economy is improving, everyone in this country is better
off, and we should be grateful. We should understand the causes. We
should support those legislative policies that represent those causes
and not denigrate an economy which is helping the American public.
It is time to be a little bit more optimistic about our future. This
is a great country. It is a great country because of the people who
create the jobs and who do the work. We should give them a lot more
credit than some people on the other side of the aisle have, credit for
helping this country to become everything it can become for the benefit
of American families.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. COLEMAN. How much time remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Sixteen minutes.
Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I will talk about good economic news, the
optimism that my friend and colleague from Arizona has discussed. I
have always been a believer in looking at the cup half full rather than
half empty. This cup is pretty full right now and is filling every day.
It tastes good to drink from it. There is good news out there and we
need to talk about that.
We used to have an expression that politics ends at the water's edge.
We did not allow debates between candidates to confuse the way foreign
policy was conducted abroad. There is something akin to that with the
economy. Certainly the issue of jobs and economic growth are
appropriate for political discussion. No doubt about that. I worry when
it reaches a point that the volume and nature of the debate is actually
hurting the economy.
Maybe we have gone too far. So much of our economic activity is based
on the way we perceive the direction of the economy. Perception does
have some impact on reality. Those who try to shape the negative
perception for political ends should reflect a little more on that. It
is the political season, the Presidential race is coming up, but the
volume of negative statements in absolute denial of what is happening
with this economy is a little disconcerting.
I am concerned about those who are tempted to believe good economic
news is bad political news, and bad economic news is good political
news. We should be better than that. It reminds me of the Lutheran
Church in Minnesota that got their first female pastor. Some of the
older guys in the congregation were skeptical. They thought she would
not be able to preach. After her first sermon, they were very
impressed.
Then they said, Well, she will not work very hard. But after she
balanced the congregation's books, organized the church picnic, and got
the Sunday school on track, they were impressed.
Then they thought, Well, she will not relate to guys like us. Then
she asked if she could go fishing with them. They did not like the
idea, but they could not say no. After a couple of hours on the water,
the pastor said: Guys, I need a restroom. A little annoyed, they
started pulling up their line. She said: That's okay, and stepped out
of the boat and walked on water to the shore. And one of the guys said:
Figures, she can't even swim.
For those who continue to be skeptical about the progress of this
economy, I am beginning to think they would be discouraged even if it
walked on water. I read an estimate that the economy will grow at a
rate of 4.8 percent this year. That sounds good. It would be the
highest growth in two decades. This is an economy that is carrying on
its back a war on terror, the aftermath of September 11, the corporate
scandals, the uncertainties of a Presidential campaign. The economy is
not just walking on water, it is running.
Economic growth is at a 20-year high. Work and productivity rose by
almost 4 percent last quarter and remains above its historic average as
businesses continue to utilize technology in a more efficient manner.
We are increasing productivity at the same time. We are growing jobs.
The manufacturing sector on balance has grown since the beginning of
the year as factories have

[[Page S7696]]

boosted employment to meet strong consumer demand.

Why do we have strong consumer demand? Because we cut taxes, because
we put more money in the pockets of moms and dads. And when moms and
dads spend that money on a good or service, the person producing that
good or service has a job.
That makes it more likely, more profitable, easier for small business
folks to reinvest in their business. By cutting capital gains,
providing bonus depreciation, you increase expensing, opportunities and
options for small business. They invest in the business and they grow
jobs. The manufacturing employment index is pointing to an expansion in
hiring.
The National Association of Business Economics, at its quarterly
survey on business conditions, shows that 41 percent of the respondents
expect their companies to increase employment over the next 6 months,
up from 34 percent 3 months earlier.
Consumer and producer confidence remains solid. In fact, consumer
confidence got a huge boost last week, reaching a 5-month high.
Consumers are optimistic. The politicians who benefit, unfortunately,
seem to think they benefit from bad news. They are the pessimists.
The reality is, this economy is moving forward. The consumers
understand that. Unfortunately, my friends on the other side of the
aisle seem to find it difficult to accept that, difficult to admit
that, difficult to recognize that there is consumer and producer
confidence today. That is good for the economy. That helps grow jobs.
The housing market is strong. The national home-ownership rate in sales
of new homes are at a record high.
My friend from Arizona talked about per capita, aftertax disposable
income; in other words, the amount of money people get to spend
themselves after they pay taxes. It has increased 7.1 percent. This is
higher than it was after the first 4 years of the Clinton
administration during this boom period that folks talk about. Last
month, 112,000 jobs were added to the economy. In the past 4 months,
payrolls have grown by almost 1.1 million, a pace of more than 3
million jobs annually.
It is fascinating that although the amount of jobs increased last
month by 112,000, the pessimists will say that is less than what was
projected, as if that is a negative. Over 1.1 million jobs in the past
4 months. I remind the pessimists that in every year of the job boom of
the late 1990s, it included at least 1 month where payroll growth fell
below 150,000 and in a few instances it went even negative. This is the
ebb and flow of the economy. Everyone can forecast but no one can
guarantee economic growth.
The trends are clear, the movement is clear. It is like you have a
chance to do a little fishing over the break. You kind of watch that
stream and it is moving in a direction. The economy is moving in the
right direction.
There was an article printed in USA Today a couple weeks ago by
former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, author of ``Reason: Why Liberals
Win the Battle for America.'' He wrote this at the request of the Kerry
campaign. What is the title? ``Gloom Is Reality for Citizens.'' Senator
Kerry talks about misery indexes. Robert Reich, ``Gloom Is Reality for
Citizens.''
That is not the reality of what is happening in the economy today.
Part of this discussion Reich talks about is saying, well, we have a
lot of jobs. They recognize there is an increase--1.1 million jobs--but
they talk about the quality of jobs. They talk about wages that are
stagnant.
If you look at, again, the facts--look at the facts, the facts,
ma'am, the facts--three-quarters of the new jobs created in May were in
industry categories that pay an hourly average rate in excess of the
overall average hourly rate in the private sector. Inflation-adjusted
hourly earnings have increased 2.3 percent during the first 3\1/2\
years of the Bush administration, compared with only a 0.13-percent
increase during the same period of the first Clinton administration.
I mentioned before that the aftertax disposable income is way above
what it was during the Clinton administration.
Then the pessimists say: Well, these aren't full-time jobs. They are
a lot of part-time jobs, but ``jobs'' they call it. Again, as I said
before, three-quarters of the new jobs created in May were in industry
categories that pay an hourly average rate in excess of the overall
average hourly rate in the private sector.
Since the start of the Bush administration, full-time employment has
averaged 82.57 percent, nearly a full percentage point higher than
full-time employment during the period of the first Clinton
administration. In the past year, the number of part-time positions has
declined about 240,000, while full-time positions have increased by
more than a million.
More than 80 percent of part-time workers in May indicated they have
chosen part-time employment for noneconomic reasons. Some people choose
to work part time. But, again, the number of full-time jobs is
increasing at an all-time high. The number of unemployed is decreasing.
In Minnesota, a few months ago, the drop in the rate of unemployment
went from 4.8 percent to 4.1 percent in 1 month. That .7 percent drop
was the largest monthly drop since we began keeping records in over 20
years. That is significant. Does that mean there are people out of
work? Absolutely. As long as one American is out of work, then we have
to do something about it.
That is why, by the way, we have to pass the class action bill. It is
being filibustered. That is why we have to pass an energy bill. It is
being filibustered. That is why we have to get a highway bill through
this Congress. We have to get some things done, but we are moving in
the right direction.
And again, in Minnesota--back at home--the President's tax relief led
to the creation of 7,200 new jobs in May. Over the months of April and
May, Minnesota gained almost 20,000 new jobs, leading to the highest 2-
month gain in the last 5 years.
Both the construction and manufacturing sectors in Minnesota continue
to improve. Construction employment grew by 2,200 in May, building on
April's 2,800 new jobs, and 1,600 new manufacturing jobs were created
in May, while 7,400 manufacturing jobs have been created in the last 10
months.
The employment outlook for the third quarter for Minnesota employers
is the strongest in more than 25 years; 30 percent of Minnesota
employers expect to hire more employees.

There is an article in today's Minneapolis Star Tribune talking
about: ``Analysts expect excellent economy.'' I will read from the
article:

The economy appears headed for a banner year despite a
springtime spike in energy prices and a recent increase in
interest rates.
In fact, many analysts are forecasting that the economy, as
measured by the gross domestic product, will grow by 4.6
percent or better this year, the fastest in two decades.
There were strong 4.5 percent growth rates in 1997 and
1999, when Bill Clinton was president and the country was in
the midst of a record 10-year expansion.
But if this year's growth ends up a bit faster than that,
it will be the best since the economy roared ahead at 7.2
percent in 1984, a year when another Republican President--
Ronald Reagan--was running for re-election.

A survey of top economists showed further optimism:

Ninety-one percent said they expected the economy to grow
at an annual rate of anywhere from 2 to 5 percent in the
second half of this year . . .
Forty-one percent said they expected stepped-up hiring in
the next six months . . .
``By almost any measure--output, employment, profit
margins, capital spending--this economy is strong,'' said
Duncan Meldrum, the association's president and the chief
economist for Air Products and Chemicals Inc.

The reality is the economy is moving forward. More needs to be done.
I do hope we get class action passed here. A report by the National
Association of Manufacturers found that domestically imposed costs,
including tort litigation, reduced America's manufacturing cost
competitiveness by 22 percent in the world market. There is no doubt
about it, our legal system puts American jobs at a competitive
disadvantage with foreign firms. Money it has spent fighting frivolous
lawsuits should be spent back in the business growing jobs and growing
the economy.
So instead of making speeches downplaying the positive economic
numbers, instead of casting about with doom and gloom, instead of
writing articles about gloom being reality for Americans, instead of
talking about misery indexes, let's celebrate what we have. Let's
commit to keep moving forward. Let's get the class action bill passed.
Let's get the Energy bill

[[Page S7697]]

passed. Let's get the highway bill through. And let's keep doing the
things we are doing. Let's make permanent the Bush tax cuts that
increase particularly the low and middle class, the per-child tax
credit, get rid of the marriage penalty, make sure we make permanent
the expansion of the 10-percent bracket, do those things that put money
in the pockets of moms and dads so when moms and dads spend that money,
the economy grows.
If we do that, if we keep moving forward and we get some stuff done,
and put the politicking aside, we put the election-year politics aside,
and we put the doom and gloom and negativity aside, this country can be
all that it is and all we know it to be: the greatest country in the
world, the economically strongest country in the world.
But we have to keep moving in the right direction. We are committed
to doing that. Let's stop the pessimism. Let's stop the gloom and doom.
We have a job to do, and I hope we can work it in a bipartisan way, to
finish the work we need to do.

With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, how much time, if any, remains in morning
business?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 1 minute 45 seconds.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, if my distinguished friend, the chairman of
the Judiciary Committee, would yield that back on behalf of the
Republicans, we could get to the bill.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I would be happy to yield it back.
Excuse me, let me withhold that.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________