[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 16, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H276-H283]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1915
THE STATE OF THE ECONOMY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Walz) is recognized
for 60 minutes.
Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, in coming today on the first day
back in this new session, the second session of the 110th Congress, I
wanted to take a little bit of time to reflect on some of the changes
that happened in this Congress but also more importantly to look
towards the future and look at the priorities that this new Congress is
bringing.
It's very apparent that myself and my 43 Democratic colleagues were
brought to this House, the reason we were sent here was to change the
way business has been done. It wasn't about maintaining a status quo.
It wasn't about talking about issues that weren't relevant to their
lives. It was very apparent that at least in my district of southern
Minnesota that they chose to send a schoolteacher without political
experience to Congress to speak about those issues that were most on
their minds, to talk about the issues of economic equality, to talk
about the issues of true national security, to talk about the issues
that were going to impact their children for generations to come.
And in doing so, they sent several loud and clear messages to us. And
I think first and foremost, as I'm joined with some of my other
freshman Democratic colleagues, it was very apparent to many of us that
we were sent here to talk about those issues in a manner that was about
effectiveness. It was not about ideology. It was not about espousing to
have a firm belief or the firm understanding that we had all the
answers. The belief was to work together, to work with the experts, to
work with local elected officials and come up with some of the most
pressing solutions.
And I think many of us understood during our campaigns and the time
that we've been here in Congress, it's not surprising to anyone, and my
colleagues tonight will talk about these things, they didn't need to
see a poll to understand that Americans were becoming very nervous with
the state of the economy.
They were told over and over and over again by this administration
that they were living in the best economy America had ever seen, and
they would quote facts and figures like the gross domestic product and
things like that. And when I would talk to my constituents in southern
Minnesota, they would come up with something that was very insightful.
They would say, I don't know. It's very possible that the GDP is
growing, but that's not filling my gas tank; and, I don't know about
you, but college is becoming more expensive; and, I'm concerned about
heating oil prices this fall; and, I'm concerned that what's happening
with the economy is not moving any closer to addressing those issues
that I care most about.
They were concerned about the loss of their jobs. They were
continuously told that this global economy and these trade agreements
that we were working on would grow these wonderful jobs, wonderful
prosperity, and what they continued to hear in the news was global
corporations making record profits as we saw real wages for working
Americans sink.
They were told that this great awakening of the global economy would
be so helpful to them, and then they would open up their gas bills for
heating and find out that they were having trouble making ends meet.
They were told that this great global economy would bring a lasting
prosperity to them, and they were receiving lay-off notices or many of
the other ills that had come with it.
I think many of us understood, and not denying that there is a global
economy, there is a need for an interconnectedness, but it needs to be
based on some solid principles that benefit those vast majority of
Americans.
So I think as we get ready to talk about some of those priorities we
get ready to talk about what this Congress can do and what this Nation
should do to make sure that our economic prosperity is not limited to a
small slice of the population, and in fact, it's limited to the slice
of the population that quite honestly isn't producing that well.
Americans over the last 5 years have got a record that I think they
can be very proud of. Their productivity levels are as high as any
Nation in the world. The thing that becomes a disconnect on that is, as
that productivity levels went up, their real wages went down. At the
same time, they watched CEO salaries and corporate profits reach an
all-time high. And that disconnect is breeding that sense of anxiety
amongst the public, and I think there's some things that this Congress
can do and will do to address those needs and to put policies forward.
I have a couple of interesting statistics that I think Americans
should know. First and foremost, on December 21, President Bush, giving
a speech on the economy, was clear to stress how strong this economy
is. And in fact, his outgoing economic policy adviser said, We just
don't see the reason the economy won't continue to expand. Had I been a
reporter in that room or a Congressman there, I might have asked, For
who will it expand? And the issue or the answer to that is not for the
working middle class.
We see 47 million Americans without health care. I think a more
telling statistic is this. I came to this Congress as a high school
teacher. I was lucky to have years of experience and advanced degrees
that put me a little further on the pay scale. Had I been a first year
teacher teaching high school in southern Minnesota, I would have
started at just around $32,000 a year. My share of the premium for
family health care coverage would have been $7,200 a year right off the
top of that. And this is an issue that would expand that 47 million
into another possibly 50 million that are on the verge of being unable
to pay for it.
So we have issues of health care costs. We have issues of energy
costs. We have issues of tuition and those types of things. And as this
Congress came to session, those are the issues we were talking about,
making college more affordable, addressing the issue of moving into
renewable energies and passing CAFE standards to make our automobiles
reach that level of efficiency that will help working class families.
[[Page H277]]
So, as I'm joined here tonight by my colleagues from across this
great Nation, and I might add, a very optimistic group at that and a
very visionary group that understand, and the last statistic I will
give before letting some of my colleagues join in on this, we had a
piece of research that was done by the independent, nonpartisan
Congressional Research Service. And they did a study asking what had
added to our national deficit, and their conclusion was that 98 percent
of that was added by legislative choices, the biggest being tax cuts
for a very small percentage that, quite honestly, we were told on
theory would generate wealth back into the economy.
The fact of the matter is the tax cuts were not targeted at our great
entrepreneurial class. They were not targeted at those people who were
going to create jobs and reinvest. They were targeted to people that
would continue to build trust funds to pass on to future generations of
that very, very thin privileged class.
And because of that, this Congress has got work to do. This Congress
and these Members that were sent to this Congress that will speak
tonight were sent by their constituents not to talk ideology, not to
argue with the other side, but to look at the issues and not come with
facts and figures, but to say, Hey, I'm a schoolteacher sitting in
southern Minnesota and I'm having trouble making ends meet and I
actually could qualify for food stamps. What's wrong with an economy
that does that and what can be done to bring back a sense of fairness
to it?
I think the good news in this is, if 98 percent of the Federal
deficit was caused directly as a consequence of legislation, we've got
the opportunity to reverse that. And I'm proud to be standing with
three Members that I know have that as a priority, and I'd like to
first of all yield to my colleague south of the border in Iowa, Mr.
Braley.
Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank the gentleman for
yielding and also thank you for your outstanding leadership with this
special time we get to share together here on the House floor.
My district in northeast Iowa, the First District of Iowa, is in some
ways very similar to yours, my friend, Mr. Walz's. It's the rust belt
of Iowa. It's got a lot of agricultural, manufacturing history, and I
think it's a microcosm of what you've been talking about.
We have great manufacturers that I'm fortunate enough to have in my
district, companies like John Deere that have been around for years and
have stayed in the communities providing jobs and opportunity. But
we've also had a tremendous impact on our economy in Iowa this year
from our loss of our Maytag plant in Newton, one of those manufacturers
that people know as a brand name that used to be on the game shows we
used to watch as kids growing up. And then just recently, the Schaeffer
Pen Company in Fort Madison closed after over 100 years of being one of
those symbols of what American manufacturers can produce.
Those aren't just losses of jobs to people in those communities. The
ripple effect throughout those communities in terms of people who move
out and leave a void of volunteers who work in community service
organizations, who work as mentors to the next generation of leaders
that are going to be responsible for leading this country in a great
new direction, those are the disturbing trends we never hear about from
the President when he's talking about the rosy state of the economy.
And one of the things that brought all of us here to Congress is our
sense that the middle class was increasingly being shut out of the
American Dream, that the opportunity for our children and the next
generation of children to follow them was being limited by economic
policies that did not provide incentive for the middle-class
entrepreneurs to make risks and create jobs and provide opportunities
in their home communities. And what we want to do as a Congress is make
sure that our fiscal policies are creating those types of opportunities
in our own districts and throughout this country, because that's what's
going to make us competitive in the 21st century.
So what I'd like to do at this time is let my friend Mr. Yarmuth, who
comes from the great State of Kentucky and has probably a different
perspective on what he sees in his home district, share with us some of
the things he observes that are directly related to the state of the
economy that brings us here tonight.
Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and thank him for his
comments and also Mr. Walz for his leadership as well.
I will say, no, the situation in Kentucky is not much different than
it is anywhere else in the country, and throughout the campaign 2 years
ago and before that, as I talked to people in my district and around
the State of Kentucky, what I heard was the same message you have
heard. You know, we're working harder and harder, we're struggling,
we're doing the best we can, and yet we're falling behind. We're not
making progress. Our standard of living is not getting better, not
improving.
And I know that we don't want to burden the audience with too many
statistics, but Mr. Walz talked about productivity, and one of the most
astounding statistics I've heard recently is that 25 years ago, when
there was a productivity gain in the United States, workers benefited
to the tune of 70 percent of that productivity gain. So for every
dollar increase in productivity, workers got 70 percent, owners got 30
percent.
In the current era, that number is down in the 20s. So while American
workers are working harder and harder, most of the gain in their
productivity is not going to them. It's going to owners. It's going to
the corporations, and the workers working harder and harder are not
getting the benefit of that.
And we're seeing it day in and day out. And not only that; we're
seeing instances in which people who have worked their entire lives,
because of emergencies, because of businesses going out of business,
are losing their life savings.
I will never forget being at a Catholic picnic one day in 2006 and
talking to a man who had worked for Winn-Dixie Corporation. He had
worked 28 years for Winn-Dixie, and he had accumulated $150,000 in his
retirement plan. Winn-Dixie had gone into bankruptcy. He was left with
$30,000. He lost 80 percent of his life savings because of the problems
inherent in his corporation, and they had not planned adequately to
secure his retirement benefits.
So these have ripple effects. These are stories that are heard by
relatives, by friends, by neighbors, and that increases the anxiety
throughout society. And this is what I sense that we face in this
country today is not just the actual fact of people's standard of
living not increasing despite the fact they're working harder and
harder, but their faith in the future is declining and faith in the
future of their neighbors and their friends because they see the
threats to them, and they say what am I working for, what am I trying
so hard to accomplish.
Then we had the added specter, as I know one of our colleagues will
discuss this evening, of the incredible crisis in the health care
system where 50 percent of the bankruptcies that we now experience in
this country are due to health care costs and people, again, who have
done everything the right way and have lost everything because of bad
luck of the draw. They've come down with cancer. They've come down with
a serious injury that's preventing them from working.
So as we go across the entire spectrum of American society that's
what we find day in and day out. I like to think of government as the
way we organize our responsibilities to each other, and in this day and
age we do face these very serious choices and very clear choices in how
we perceive our economy and what government's role should be.
{time} 1930
And the question is, do we reward wealth versus work? And I think
this group that was elected in 2006 has a clear position on that; we
want to reward work and not necessarily wealth. We want to make sure
that when people work harder, they benefit. And we want to make sure
that the economy is
[[Page H278]]
fair to everyone and works for everyone. And if we can't do that, then
we don't deserve to be representing the American people because we have
let them down. And I know that this group is not going to let them
down; I know that's why we came here. And I'm proud to be here for that
reason, and I'm not going to stop fighting as long as I'm here.
So, I thank all of you for your collegiality and all of your efforts
in this behalf. We are part of a great cause for the working families
in America, and I'm very proud to be a part of that.
With that, I will yield to my colleague from out west, the site of
this year's Democratic convention, Mr. Perlmutter.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, Mr. Yarmuth.
It's great to be standing on the floor with gentlemen who have been
elected by the people in 2006 to change the way this Nation is being
run, and to provide the hope that we need to deal with the problems
you've outlined. And we can do this, we know we can do this. This is a
time where we change the focus from the wealthiest 1 percent to the
hardworking people of middle America. This is the time for hardworking
Americans. And we're going to provide, based on this stimulus package,
a package of different approaches to help middle Americans, hardworking
Americans, we're going to provide them with refunds so that there will
be some money in their pocket, not just in the pocket of the wealthiest
1 percent, but in the pockets of everyone across America. Ronald Reagan
used to talk about trickle down. Well, that's not how the economy
works, it works trickle up. It's a flood up. If people in the middle
have money, they spend it, and that will generate all sorts of new
business in America.
We're also going to provide stimuli that will create many new jobs,
whether it's in the energy sector. We can improve how we're dealing
with health care and increase jobs there. But this is a time when we
really are going to change how Washington is conducting business. The
President would like us just to focus on the wealthiest. He would like
us just to keep things the same. We're not doing that. We're here to
provide hope to people and change so that people in their everyday
lives know that they've got folks here who were elected to fight for
them. And we are going to change things by providing a whole new
approach to the economy this year.
We hope to provide a package that will be $100 billion, that's about
10 months in Iraq, that's nothing, where we can help this country
really get on a solid footing economically, and then for the long-term
future, really develop a whole new energy system that will provide
thousands and thousands and thousands of jobs across this country, as
well as revamp our health care system that has become such a drag on
the economy.
This is a time when we have to look very hard and be realistic about
the problems that face us. But when America really turns its attention
to something, it changes the future. And that's what this Congress is
going to do. That's our job. That's why we were sent here was to change
the future and to provide hope to people.
With that, I would like to turn this over to my friend from
Wisconsin, Steven Kagen. And with that, sir, would you let us know what
you think of this stimulus package that the Speaker is talking about.
Mr. KAGEN. Well, thank you very much, Congressman Ed. I really
appreciate being with you, not just here on the floor, but many people
don't realize that you're my roommate. We've got an apartment. We're
working together to pay our rent, we're working together to pay our
Nation's bills, and we're working together to build a better nation for
everyone.
And before I mention anything about our economy, you have to all be
thinking about the Green Bay Packers this weekend. We've got a football
game up in Green Bay that we're going to rock the world. We're going to
demonstrate not just how professionals can work together as a team in
athletics, but we have to imitate them here on the House floor by
beginning to work across party lines.
And if you're looking for a good example of how corporate America
should be run, look no further than the Green Bay Packers because they
will never, ever be outsourced. They cannot be shipped overseas. Why?
Because the community owns the Green Bay Packers. Not a bad example.
I'd like to turn your attention to two questions, questions that I
think are important for all of us in this class of '06, what some of us
call ``America's Hope,'' whose side are we on? Now, does anybody
sitting here, standing here having this conversation with America,
anybody here sitting in a board room of a major corporation? I don't
think so. We're working hard for everyday people who are trying to make
it through the day.
The second question is, what kind of Nation are we, what kind of
Nation are we when we don't educate our children, when we don't
guarantee access to affordable health care for every child in America,
for every citizen, every legal resident of this country? Who are we now
as a Nation? Now, you don't want to talk much about statistics because
it will put people to sleep at this hour of the night, but the
Department of Labor has given us these numbers. The Consumer Price
Index went up by .3 percent. That's a little bit of inflation, a little
whiff of what we're going to get at the end of 2008. The unemployment
rate up to 5 percent nationwide; some areas of my district even more.
We got the news today earlier this morning that a paper maker in
Niagara, Wisconsin, they're going to shut down 320 jobs. That's 320
homes in a very small neighborhood that won't have a bread earner, in
Kimberly, Wisconsin, just outside of my district, 120 paper making
jobs.
Now, how does it happen in this country at this time, how does it
happen when we allow Communist China to target each and every sector of
our economy and our manufacturing economy for extinction? They've
targeted our steel. And what happened to steel production? It went down
here and went overseas. They've targeted textiles. They've targeted
auto production. So, what are we going to make in America? Because if
we don't make anything, quite simply put, we won't have anything.
The unemployment claims for the month of December, 322,000 jobs lost,
people looking for work. What about the minimum wage, $5.85? You can't
feed a family on $5.85 per hour. You can't educate yourself and your
children.
So, we have got a lot of work to do, not just in the Green Bay
football game. I don't know who we're playing, some team from New
Jersey or the New York Giants. I wish them well. I hope no one is
injured because--well, they do have pretty good health insurance, I
hear.
So, we've got a lot of problems that we have to face together. I am
very proud and honored to be able to serve with all of you here tonight
as we talk about this economic stimulus, as I send it over to my
colleague, Mr. Ellison, who represents the great State of Minnesota.
And he is going to, perhaps, allude to the fact that we have to have an
economic stimulus that's timely, that's targeted to those who really
need it, and temporary.
Mr. ELLISON. Well, Doctor, let me just add my voice and say I love to
be on the House floor with my colleagues. You guys are servants of the
people of the United States, whether we're from the upper Midwest or
Iowa, Kentucky, or all the way out in Colorado, it's a joy to be in the
company of people who care about the American working class and are
willing to get out there strong to speak up for what working class
people need.
You know, this stimulus package is to signal change in a broader
sense to make our economy fair and more productive. It's signaling
change. One hundred billion dollars is a whole lot of money, but when
you think about this trillion-plus-dollar economy we live in, it's not
a whole lot by comparison. But it's not designed to solve every
problem, it's supposed to spark economic change, signal an overall
change in the way our economy is structured so that we can have working
class people prosper and grow.
My colleague from Colorado pointed out that it's not a matter of
trickle down, it's bubble up. You put the money in the hands of middle-
class people, they go out and buy washing machines, they go out and buy
food, they go out and buy groceries, they put
[[Page H279]]
their kids in school, and the next thing you know more deals are being
done and you see an overall increase in the economy, a rising tide
lifting all boats. You take care of the middle class and the rest will
take care of itself.
If you give tax cuts to the wealthiest of the wealthy, the very
definition of being rich is that you don't need the money. So, what do
you do? You don't spend the money. You merge. You go buy some company
overseas and then they take advantage of comparative wage differentials
and the next thing you know we're exporting jobs. The fact is is that
an economic stimulus targeted to people who really will spend that
money and really do need that money and can spend that discretionary
income will spark our economy. But it will only be a signal of an
overall shift of economic fairness that has to do with our innovation
agenda, that has to do with increasing the minimum wage, that has to do
with decreasing the cost of college loans, an overall economic package
that is big and that is structural that has to do with making changes
to predatory lending laws, that has to do with our housing markets, an
overall package that will take a little more time to implement, but an
economic stimulus package that will happen soon and will spark economic
growth directly affecting the unemployment numbers that jumped in
December, and as Mr. Perlmutter correctly points out, directly
affecting the increase in the Consumer Price Index as well.
Now, you know, the underlying source of this economy's weakness is
the collapse in the housing market. In 1995, what happened to the
housing market? Bam, straight to the moon. People thought it would
never end. As a matter of fact, people bought houses, some of them
subprime. Some of them found themselves thinking, well, if I buy this
house right now, get into this subprime mortgage, the increasing
housing values gives me wealth; I can refinance when this house is even
worth more. But, you know, everything that goes up must come down. And
as a matter of fact, when we saw people refinance these homes, they
consumed that increased wealth in their house. That helped drive the
consumer sector, but eventually these things come down and we are
hitting the wall.
People are not making it, folks. We have a negative savings rate in
America. Negative savings rate. That means if you get paid on Friday,
you're out of money Wednesday night. That means you're hanging on and
you're hoping that you can stretch that penny out to get to the end of
the week. That means that instead of steak you're eating hamburger and
instead of salmon you're eating tuna fish. And it's not funny. It's
serious business. People are really, really struggling.
And so the fact is, folks, that we have a negative savings rate and
that is why people are turning to the credit cards. That's why, when
they get a big purchase, they've got to refinance their homes, although
that's tough to do today, and that's why they go to title loans, payday
loans and pawnshops. This is what is driving that move. We are drying
up the consumer sector.
And I just want to say that we have seen record foreclosures in
America, record foreclosures. We haven't seen this many foreclosures
since the Great Depression.
Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. ELLISON. Absolutely.
Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Like all of you, I spent time out of my district
during the recess between the holidays and coming back this week. And I
was shocked to visit Davenport, Iowa, the largest city in my district,
and learn that Davenport leads the country per capita in the number of
subprime mortgage foreclosures. And I know that all of you have
constituents in your districts that are being impacted directly by the
subprime crisis. And although our friend from Wisconsin certainly spent
a lot of time talking about the Green Bay Packers, and I know that's
heresy in the State of Minnesota, what I thought maybe we could do is
share some of the personal stories we've heard from people who are
directly impacted by these mortgage foreclosures by the need to convert
their spending habits to credit rather than cash because they're being
pinched in the middle, and put a human face on the problems we're
talking about and why this economic stimulus package is so important.
With that, I will yield back.
Mr. ELLISON. I want to respond directly to your point, Congressman,
because I think this is one of the things that in a very palpable
feeling way really struck home to me, and that was when I was
campaigning back in 2006. I met a gentleman who kind of came to the
front door when I knocked on his door. And he came in a very gingerly
way; it was clear that he had suffered some kind of injury and wasn't
feeling very good. And he said to me, you know, Keith, about a year ago
I was up on my roof because me and my partner make a little more than
minimum wage, not that much more than minimum wage, but we were able to
get into the house because we got into the subprime mortgage. We got
some credit cards that they sent to us that we didn't ask for. But
because I didn't have a whole lot of money, I climbed up on that roof
to fix it because it was leaking. I didn't want to see more damage
happen to the house, we had to patch it. And I, as you might guess,
fell off that roof. The guy fell off the roof and sustained some
serious injuries. The injuries were too bad, his partner was going to
try to put him in the car but he couldn't move him because he was
hurting, and it was dangerous, and so he called the EMS truck,
Emergency Medical Services. They came to get him. That was about 1,800
bucks right there. He didn't have health care insurance. He put the
medical bills on the credit card as long as he could, couldn't pay
that; as a matter of fact, paid one credit card, but on the other one
he was late. Guess what happened to the interest rate on the credit
card that he was on time for? It went up. That's called universal
default. So, now he's paying 32 percent interest. He's getting further
and further behind. He's not working. His partner is struggling to keep
the mortgage paid. They see a reset in the mortgage. Now they are
totally up. They are just really in bad shape now, and they are facing
foreclosure.
When the man told me this story, he was dry in the eye but I was
misty. I couldn't believe, I said, you know, not in America. People who
work hard, 40 hours a week every week, cannot be in this situation.
It's wrong. And I felt it was my responsibility to do something about
it.
{time} 1945
So when I stand on the floor to talk about working class prosperity
with you here tonight, six Members of Congress, and when I heard our
Speaker talk about this stimulus package, I was reminded of what
happened when the great President Franklin Delano Roosevelt died. Back
in those days, Representative Yarmuth, they used to have the coffin of
the President loaded up on the trains. You know what I am talking
about, Representative Walz? And that train was carrying that casket
across the country. And there was a man who appeared at one of those
train stops where that casket was being carried across the country, and
there was a journalist there too, and the man was crying about the
President. He was in tears over President Roosevelt. And as you know,
he was the President during the Great Depression.
And the journalist walked up to the man and said to the man, ``Sir, I
see that you're crying and very emotional over what happened to the
President. Did you know President Roosevelt?''
And the man gathered himself, cleared his threat, and he said, ``No,
I didn't know President Roosevelt. But he knew me.''
Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Absolutely. And as I said, it's very
encouraging, and I think it should be, Mr. Speaker, to the American
people to see the dedication and the commitment. I know my colleague
from Minneapolis has taken a lead role on this issue of foreclosures.
And as my colleague from down in Iowa has said, this is an area that no
one is escaping being touched by this. Mr. Ellison may represent a very
urban area in Minneapolis, but Mr. Braley and I and the rest of us here
have areas that are somewhat rural, and we are feeling that pinch.
We're feeling it.
One thing I would say is it reminds me, in thinking of the story that
you just recalled about President Roosevelt's knowing us, I'd like to
give
[[Page H280]]
you a quote from our current President when he was out meeting
constituents. And this was out in Omaha, Nebraska, a little while back,
and it was with a woman named Mary Mornin. And Mary was explaining, she
was a woman in her fifties, a divorced mother of three, including a
special needs child. And she was explaining to the President at that
time, just several years ago already, of the growing anxiety she had
about what was happening. And she mentioned to the President that to
make ends meet, she was working three jobs. And the President said,
``You work three jobs?''
Ms. Mornin said, ``Yes, sir, three jobs.''
And the President said, ``Wow, that's uniquely American, isn't it? I
mean, that's fantastic that you're doing that.'' And then he laughed
and said, ``laughter'' in parentheses here, ``Do you get any sleep?''
And Ms. Mornin said, ``No, not much.''
This President has been so out of touch with the reality that affects
most Americans that he can stand in front of them and tell us this is
the greatest economy ever. He can stand there and watch as the housing
market imploded and the indicators were there and people were asking
him to do things about that. He can stand there and talk about this
being the greatest economy under his watch full well knowing that the
facts indicate he took office with a $126 billion surplus and he has
continuously driven us into debt.
We are at a point in this great Nation now that last year alone we
spent $406 billion servicing the interest on the debt, not the
principle.
Mr. ELLISON. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. I yield.
Mr. ELLISON. How much is your debt for this big debt that he has run
up?
Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. It's $30,000 for each and every one of us.
Mr. ELLISON. How about little Gus, your son?
Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. Gus is 14 months. His is $30,000, not counting
the interest.
I would just make this point that the President, in the theatrics of
the appropriation bills to run this country, held up funding across the
spectrum from veterans to health care research to our soldiers' pay
increase that he pocket vetoed, all of these things, over $22 billion.
And I want you to put this into perspective. What this President has
done in his fiscal irresponsibility, which should not surprise a single
person in this country given his track record on the private sector and
given that he was practicing, as my colleagues have said, a very
tenuous principle of trickle down, that took the complexity of the
entire economy and shook it down into one mantra. Today as this economy
and this Democratic Congress is looking for real solutions for working
Americans, the President is concerned about making tax cuts permanent
in the year 2011 when they expire. All of the money that we spent last
year on higher education, on our veterans, on conservation, and on
medical research does not equal the amount we spent servicing the debt.
Think what this great Nation can do.
And with that, I yield to the doctor from Wisconsin.
Mr. KAGEN. Thank you very much for yielding. I just wanted to make a
more accurate diagnosis of the condition that you are in. Mr. Walz,
it's not $30,000 of Federal debt sitting over your head or your newborn
son. It's $375,000 on an accrual basis when you factor into all the
debts that we're going to owe to those of us who very soon will be on
Social Security or Medicare as we retire.
So you have to begin to accurately diagnose the problem in health
care, physically, or an architect has to do it, a plumber has to do it.
Let's identify what's really going on here. What is it that has caused
millions and millions of manufacturing jobs to jump overseas, to be
taken away from the workers that we represent, the families that we
represent? Because people back home are asking me, as they are asking
you, Hey, Kagen, what are you going to do for me? The first thing you
have to do is identify the two causes I believe are doing this.
First, it's the trade policy. A trade policy that allows corporations
to take away our jobs. Listen, Mr. Perlmutter, if I go to your home and
I take your car and you don't even know about it, if I steal your car,
I go to jail. I get punished for stealing, for taking away your
property. But if I go to where you are working, if it's a paper
company, if it's a steel factory, if it's some auto manufacturer in
Detroit, if I take away your job, I get rich. So there is something
wrong with our trade policy that allows communist China to compete
unfairly using an abundance of what I would call slave labor.
The second reason is we have had a fiscal policy by the Republican
administration that has plowed more debt onto everybody. The debt in
2000 on an accrual basis, according to the most trusted man in
Washington, David Walker, the Comptroller General of the GAO, was $20
trillion and at the end of 2006 was $53 trillion. From $20 trillion to
$53 trillion is a debt no one in this room, no one living today can
afford to repay. So we have to repair our trade policies, and we have
to come to an end with this policy of borrow and spend and borrow and
spend and borrow and spend. We cannot afford to stay on this path.
I believe in large part those are the reasons why we came here to the
House to do the people's work and why we are going to speak up every
day for the people that tell us their problems. And I will share with
you just one story of my constituents.
I went up north to northern Wisconsin. On the way back, I stopped
into Two Angels Restaurant in Antigo to see what's going on, to put my
finger on the pulse of their community. And there at the counter was a
55-year-old former carpenter, a former carpenter because he has gone
through bankruptcy not once but twice because of health care bills. The
first time, since he works by himself, he's his own employer, he went
bankrupt because he didn't have enough health insurance when he had
cardiac surgery, and the second time he had a new heart valve put in.
The second bankruptcy he went through, and he went through it twice,
was due to an abscess in his brain. He can't think straight. He can't
work. And he's counting on us to do something to help him, to guarantee
he has access to health care he and his wife can afford. They can't
take away his home, but they have destroyed his spirit.
So I think we are here to give hope to everybody, that by working
together we will repair not just this idea of borrow and spend with pay
as you go, with fiscal responsibility, but also ultimately, and we
won't get to it tonight, we have to fashion a trade policy that is not
just fair but is balanced.
I yield to Mr. Perlmutter.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I think we have got again to realize and
understand why the people sent us here to change America, to change the
way Washington runs, and they want us to look out for middle America,
hardworking people. They want us to look out in the short term, the mid
term, and the long term.
And in the short term, you talked about it. We want to provide in a
bipartisan way, working with our friends on the other side and with the
administration, real relief to millions of people across America. And
you described it as timely, targeted, and temporary. Relief that gets
right into people's pockets where they can then buy those necessities,
whether it's a washer or they have got to fix the sink or whatever it
might be, because people, even those that don't run into terrible
problems as you described, are having a heck of a time making ends
meet. They're working 40 hours. They're working 60 hours. But if there
is one bump in the road, a kid who has to have braces or any little
thing just sets you back, because everybody is that close, as energy
prices go up, as tuition goes up, as health care costs go up. So our
job is to give them some relief. And when we do that, that will help
the economy as a whole.
Then we have the mid term and long term, the trade policies. But for
me in my area, which is primarily the suburbs of Denver, it is middle
America. It is right down the middle politically. It is right down the
middle financially. It's not rich. It's not poor. It's not Democrat or
Republican. It is right down the middle as an independent kind of an
area. And they are expecting
[[Page H281]]
of us to turn the attention to them, to middle America, and not just
the wealthiest people. And when we do that, we're going to change the
face of this Nation again.
John Yarmuth was talking about the fact that as we have improved
productivity, the worker, the average guy, hasn't seen the benefit of
that, but it's been more of the owner. And that's okay, too, that the
owner sees some benefit, but it should be shared across the board,
because at the end of the day you have this disparity between the rich
and the poor continue to grow, and that's not healthy for any country.
This country has thrived and progressed because of the middle class,
because of the hardworking people in the middle.
So we have long-term strategies, which would be investments in
energy, rebuilding our infrastructure. The speaker comes from the city
where we had the bridge collapse. We have too many roads, too many
things that have to be repaired in this country, and it is time for us
to turn our investments to this country, and lots of jobs will be
developed as a response to that.
I yield to my friend from Kentucky.
Mr. YARMUTH. Thank you. One of the things that I want to follow up on
what you were talking about was we were sent here to solve problems.
And I think one of the reasons that we have gotten into the predicament
we're in is because a lot of people in the White House and in this
Congress thought that you can govern by dogma. And when people say the
free market's infallible or that regulation is bad or government should
get out of the way and we hear those kinds of dogmatic philosophical
statements, a lot of people bought into those. And what we see time
after time, and I guess we are all slow learners in this country, but
what we see time after time, whether it's with the subprime mortgage,
whether it's with Katrina, or in all sorts of areas, with our health
care system, is that dogma doesn't do very well when the rubber meets
the road. There are real facts that we have to deal with.
So we come here, and I know a lot of people, when we try to suggest
that the disparity between rich and poor has gotten too great or that
corporations have too much power, think we are playing at class war or
we are trying to pit one part of society against the other. And that's
not at all what we're doing. And I hope the audience has understood
that everybody tonight has talked about fairness and, dare I say it,
balance, and we are talking about the fact that in this country over
the last couple of decades the economic pendulum has swung way too far
to one side. And the marketplace works where there is some kind of
balance in power, and now there is no balance in power because the
rules are all stacked against every working American.
So we're not trying to say that corporations are evil. I don't think
anybody would say that, or that the rich are evil and that they don't
care about the working class. But we have a situation in which that
pendulum needs to be moved back to the point where everybody shares in
the growth of this country.
So as I look at this group, all of whom are committed to solving
problems and not necessarily to advancing a dogma, I think that's what
the American people expect us to do and I think that's what we are
going to continue to work to do.
I would like to yield to my distinguished colleague and friend from
Vermont (Mr. Welch).
{time} 2000
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Thank you. I have been listening, partly
presiding, but I have been thinking about this question of why is it
there is such a sense that we need to do something called a stimulus
package, where we are talking about $100 billion going into an economy
that is $14 trillion, and it's a modest amount. Why is it that there is
such a sense that this stimulus is needed when in fact, by historical
standards, unemployment is actually relatively low. We had bad news. It
went from 4.7 to 5 percent. But the historical average is well above 5
percent.
The reason there is such anxiety is the reasons my friend from
Kentucky and all of you have mentioned, that this has not been a rising
tide that lifts all boats. Most people, even those who are employed,
have not had wages that have come close to keeping up with their bills,
and that has been intensified, of course, with energy, buying gas,
buying home heating fuel, paying for your college education for your
kids, and medical bills. The story that the Speaker told about that
young family with medical bills is painful, but it's true. So what you
have had is this economy that is simply not working for average people.
So what do we have an opportunity to do? A stimulus package is
something that is concrete. We don't offer it as something that is
going to ``solve'' the problem, but it is going to show that there's a
cop on the beat. And there is an opportunity, by following the advice
of economists across the spectrum, from conservative to liberal, that
say that in a time of declining incomes, a stimulus is a mainstream
Keynesian approach to giving a shot in the arm to the economy and a
boost in confidence.
Now, we do that and do it quickly, hopefully in the next 2 weeks, and
we do it together with our colleagues. It's a statement of confidence,
and it also, by the way, establishes that where you need to help is
with those folks who are paying their bills on the basis of their
salary or punching a clock. Then we have the longer term work to do,
and that is to right the inequities that have been so systemically
applied to have this vast spread between the middle class, low-income
folks, and everyone else. It's all these things people have been
talking about, credit card abuse, this scheme that was cooked up by
Wall Street and others on the subprime mortgage, and even the so-called
exceptional mortgages that are below subprime, the way that Wall Street
has found to package these and then sell them to, in some cases,
unsuspecting buyers, and in some cases, to knowledgeable buyers who
thought they could make money; the degradation of any kind of
regulatory oversight, when regulatory oversight done right is going to
protect average people. The chairman of Financial Services, I think,
put it right on regulation. There's only two problems; one is when you
do too much, and the other is when you do none at all. It is something
that has to be done in order to protect the pocketbooks of everyday
Americans.
Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Would the gentleman yield for a question about
the great State of Vermont?
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Yes.
Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. I have made this statement before, that my family
wound up in Iowa because of one of the greatest Federal economic
stimulus packages in history, something called the Homestead Act. One
of my great great grandfathers, George Washington Braley, walked to
Iowa from Northfield, Vermont, because of the Homestead Act. My other
great great grandparents, John and Nancy, left Ireland during the
potato famine and went there because of the Homestead Act. One of the
first things they did was found a Presbyterian Church, which they named
the Homestead Church because of the importance of that stimulus package
in creating opportunity and hope for that generation of Americans.
So my question to you, my friend, is as you look at your State now
and the people that you have the privilege of representing here in
Congress, what type of real world benefits are they going to receive
from this stimulus package we are talking about to give hope and
opportunity to the next generation of people from the Green Mountain
State?
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. The elements of the stimulus package, as we
know, are being discussed, but basically it would be a short-term tax
break or check to families; it would be food stamps for folks who are
struggling; it would be an extension of unemployment benefits from 26
weeks to 39 weeks for folks who have been laid off from their jobs. So
those are some of the things that would help.
It's not just Vermont, as you know, my friend from Iowa. By the way,
I am a great fan of the Homestead Act, but if your forebears had not
walked from Vermont to Iowa, you might be a Congressman from Vermont
right now.
I yield to my friend and class president from Minnesota.
Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. I think it's interesting, and the changes that
this
[[Page H282]]
Congress has meant to bring, this stimulus package has meant, as all my
colleagues have talked about, is of being that short-term, targeted,
temporary reform that will put money right into the economy. That is in
exact opposition to, I guess, the plan this President has espoused for
the past 6 years that has drained money from not only the Federal
coffers, but has drained jobs and siphoned them overseas.
I think it's really critical. A couple of points. I think my
colleague from Louisville was exactly right when he was talking about
the pendulum has swung. The only thing I wished on that is, and I think
people need to be very clear about is, there is no natural order to
things where that pendulum will come back on its own. The change to
make that pendulum come back was the votes that were cast last year for
Members, just like this, standing here. Sometimes you have got to reach
up and grab that pendulum and get your hands a little bit bloody,
pulling it back to where it needs to be.
That is exactly what we are trying to do. But as we are doing this
today, some of the leadership on the Republican side of the aisle held
a news conference and put forward a piece of legislation that they
would do, that they would target to help this situation, to take away
the anxiety of working class Americans, to make them feel like they can
feed their family, heat their homes, and keep their good job. And their
solution? Corporate tax breaks. The only thing in their package,
reducing the corporate tax rate.
We all understand the theory that that will allow for corporate
America to reinvest in infrastructure, to reinvest in jobs. In theory,
it sounds brilliant. In practice, it's going to mean higher CEO
salaries and more imports coming from China where they put the
factories to save the money on the labor, to save the money on the
environmental standards.
So those are the type of things that I think need to be clear, and I
hear my colleague from Colorado saying very clear that we were not sent
here to bicker, we were not sent here to espouse ideology, but we were
sent here with a very clear mandate: Force change. The status quo would
say, Continue on with President Bush's tax cuts, give corporate tax
breaks. But everyone in this room knows that your constituents, the
vast majority of Americans know that is not going to work.
So I am quite intrigued that our colleagues on the other side are
going to stick with that. And I don't know if they need to poke their
heads outside a little bit more, but that wind of change is blowing
very hard and it will sweep this place clean. It will sweep this place
clean and put people here who understand those needs, who don't need to
go and find talking points to understand how hard it is to send your
kids to college, to understand paying a gas bill becomes a major family
issue. And it needs to understand that what President Bush failed to
realize with Ms. Mornin is, this wasn't a sense of she wanted to be
away from her child, working three jobs. She had to be.
And the idea that you should be proud, and we are going to hear more
about this, this idea of productivity is a great thing, but in many
cases, Americans will work as hard as they possibly can. But the
problem with this economy is the return is not coming.
Before I yield to my colleagues, I think this is one thing that we
were sent here to reinspire, to get Americans to change their view on
this, because I think this is one of the most disturbing statistics
that I have ever heard. Now, for the first time since they have been
asking this question, since President Bush's Presidency, and during
this time period, when asked if their children will be better off than
they were, the majority of Americans respond no. They do not believe
that the leadership out of this administration or the previous years of
Republican-led Congresses have done anything to set a vision for
America.
So I don't know if we should be surprised that the solution would be
more of the same coming from the other side. The solution that the
American people want is not more of the same. It's a change that
reflects their values.
So with that, I would yield to my friend from Wisconsin for a few
closing words from him.
Mr. KAGEN. Thank you, Mr. Walz. I certainly appreciate it. I think
what people in Wisconsin are telling me in Green Bay and Clintonville,
everywhere I go throughout my district, is they want their country
back. I was walking in a parade and a lifetime Republican pulled me
over and said, hey, Doc, we sent you to Washington because I want my
country back. I said, Exactly what do you mean by that? He said, Heck,
I want a border I can see and defend. I want my Nation back. Without
any borders, we cease to exist. I agree with him.
Several blocks later in that same parade a retired teacher pulled me
in and said, Hey, Kagen, we sent you to Congress because we want our
country back. I said, What is this, an epidemic? I said, What do you
mean by that? He said, Well, I want my constitutional rights back. I
want my government to protect my fourth amendment rights, my rights to
habeas corpus.
People want their country back. We all feel it here in Washington. We
want our country back. We don't want to take it back; we want our
values back. We want a government again that believes in being
responsible with our hard-earned tax dollars. Everywhere I go, I ask
people in Wisconsin, Hey, I'm working for you. I'm your hired hand. I
have got your hard-earned tax money here from your family. Where do you
want me to spend it, overseas or right back here at home? And everybody
tells me they want it spent at home.
But, Mr. Walz, this United States dollar doesn't buy what it used to
buy. It has been devalued. In Milwaukee we've got Miller and Miller
Light beer. Well, we have got dollar light. The gold hasn't changed for
millions of years, but it takes a lot more money to buy an ounce of
gold. The oil that drives our economy, our fossil-based fuel economy,
our oil that we are purchasing hasn't changed in millions of years, but
it takes a lot more money today. How much? Almost $100 a barrel. To do
what? To drive our economy.
Folks, we have to get our country back, and it begins by working
together, no matter what party you're in, to give people hope and
confidence that their government can work together across party lines.
But we have to be able to see the same problem and begin to work on it
together.
This economic stimulus that we are putting together in Washington
today, that the Democrats are preparing to work with the Republicans,
is great for America. It gives me hope that we can work together across
party lines and put together a stimulus package that will help every
working family in America. Because what do we have to do? We have to
reward work just as we do wealth.
I yield back to my colleague from Louisville.
Mr. YARMUTH. I would just like to add as maybe a closing remark that
one of the things in the area of dogma we talk about, or cliches, we
want government out of our lives. Everybody hates government until they
need government. That is from the richest to the poorest. We know
there's a lot of subsidy to the wealthiest people, the wealthiest
corporations. They say they don't like government, but they are always
coming here to ask for help when it suits them.
This is one of those times when everyone needs government in this
country. Everyone needs the stimulus that we are about to try to
provide. It's the right thing, it's the smart thing, and it's the moral
thing to do. I think that if we can convince enough people on the other
side of the aisle, we will strike a great victory for this country and
for the American people. I look forward to doing that in the next
couple of weeks.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. I just would like to close. I think our friend from
Minneapolis, Mr. Ellison, used the right word; the economic stimulus is
a spark. It will help those people who really can use it just make the
ends meet that week. Once that happens, that moves an economy as
millions of people in unison do that.
So we have a chance to really change the way this economy is headed,
we have a real chance to change the focus from the wealthiest 1 percent
to the people who are working so hard every day across America. Those
people that make this country so wonderful, so great.
I am just glad that the folks from Wheat Ridge and Lakewood and
Arvada and Golden and Brighton and Commerce City and Aurora and a
number of
[[Page H283]]
other places in my District gave me the chance to come here and help
make that change. I think that they are looking for change, and they
are looking for hope, and we are going to deliver that.
With that, I will turn it back to the president of our class, the
eminent Mr. Walz.
Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. I thank the gentleman. I thank all of my
colleagues. I cannot tell you how proud I am to have each and every one
of you here, and while all of us believe in the free market, the one
thing I know for sure is I believe a lot more in my fellow citizens,
and I thank the citizens of Colorado and of Wisconsin and of Kentucky
and of Iowa for sending people here who care about those values, who
want to get that right.
So with that, I leave in an optimistic state of mind. I leave with
the American people, Mr. Speaker, knowing that these gentlemen here are
going to direct us in the right direction and truly bring back that
sense of equity.
____________________