[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 20, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12-S13]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LESSON FROM MASSACHUSETTS
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, what did we learn yesterday in
Massachusetts? I guess many things about the feeling of the American
people. When you take a look at the polls, it is interesting. It is not
as if it is a very partisan feeling among most Americans. They are not
happy with either political party, when it comes right down to it, and
if given a third-party choice, a lot of folks tend to move in that
direction. It reflects a number of feelings. The first is, we have a
weak economy and a lot of people unemployed and there is a lot of
uncertainty. I think that has created anxiety, if not anger. I think
also it is an issue about whether this Congress and this administration
can respond to the issues that count, that matter in people's lives,
and do it in a timely fashion. There is a frustration that many of the
issues we take up seem to take forever, and most of them take forever
right here in this room because the Senate was designed to slow things
down and sometimes bring them to a halt. That is even adding to the
frustration and maybe the anger across America.
When you ask people in polls about the situation in Washington, they
say two things that are not necessarily consistent. They say: No. 1, I
am concerned about the debt of this Nation. How much more debt can we
pile up on
[[Page S13]]
future generations and how much more can we mortgage our future to
foreign lenders such as China that will buy up our debt and buy a
bigger piece of control of our economy? A legitimate point. But the
second thing they will say is: Listen, I hope the President and
Congress will do something to help create jobs to get this country
moving forward--which, of course, would involve the expenditure of
Federal funds. They do not always give consistent answers, but it is
easy to look behind the results in Massachusetts and in other States
and see that the American people are upset and concerned about the
current situation. What will we take from this?
There will be a realignment in the Senate, in terms of going forward.
There will be 59 Democratic Senators and 41 Republican Senators after
the new Senator from Massachusetts, Mr. Brown, is sworn into this body.
But still we will face the issues people want us to deal with.
When I went home to Illinois, I didn't shy away from health care. I
took it on the road and went to South Suburban Chamber of Commerce in
Cook County. That is right near the city of Chicago. Yesterday, I went
to the Chicago Chamber of Commerce and invited in small businesses to
talk about health care. What I heard from them I heard in letters and
e-mails and messages from all over the State; that is, people are
genuinely concerned. They may feel at least some satisfaction with
their current health insurance, but they are worried about the future.
When small businesses stand, as they did yesterday, and say: Our
premiums went up 17 percent, 20 percent each year and it is
unsustainable, that is a reality. If we play to a draw here and do
nothing, it is understandable people will be even more frustrated and
angry.
I understand the shortcomings of our effort to reform health care. I
am humble enough to realize that even our best work may not be perfect
and may need to be changed in the future. But it is not enough to just
stop the debate and ignore the problem. I would engage and invite my
colleagues from the other side of the aisle, if they truly want to
govern, if they truly want to work with us, please step forward. Show
us you are willing to sit down and work together; we are and we have
tried and we will continue to. We should. It is not just a matter of
health care. It also goes to the question of creating jobs.
We have an opportunity now to breathe life back into this economy, to
get more people back to work. Like one of my friends, a Congressman
from Illinois, Phil Hare, said recently: I get personally ill when I
hear the term ``jobless recovery.''
I share his angst and nausea, if that is what it is, over that term.
There will be no jobless recovery. Until people get back to work, we
are still in recovery and have not reached our goal yet, which is to
end the recession with a strong economy and people back to work.
How will we reach that goal? We need to do something this year, and
we need to do it quickly so we do not miss a construction season, so we
can create new opportunities for jobs in building bridges and highways
and airports and water projects all across America--investment in our
infrastructure that pays off over the long run and creates jobs
immediately. That is something we need to do. It will take money to do
it.
Fortunately, there is a source. President Bush had his Troubled Asset
Relief Program and took hundreds of billions of dollars and loaned them
to financial institutions and companies to get through the worst of the
recession. Many of those companies are paying us back, some with
interest. We wish to take the money that is being paid back there and
invest it back into this economy to get it moving forward.
This sounds to me like something that Democrats and Republicans
should agree on. I think we both share the goal of getting out of this
recession and begin moving forward, but we need a cooperative,
bipartisan effort for that to be achieved. I hope we can find it. I
hope we can reach common ground there.
I believe most of the Senators from most of the States represented
here have heard from their Governors. My State is struggling. Others
are as well. There will be layoffs of key personnel--firefighters,
policemen, and teachers, for example. We should find a way to help
those States get through this tough patch they have run into because of
a recession and downturn in revenues. We don't want to see our children
suffer because teachers are laid off and there are more kids in the
classroom. We certainly do not want to endanger our communities by
laying off firefighters or policemen, if that means our safety is
compromised in our homes and neighborhoods. So there ought to be some
common ground we can find, both sides of the aisle.
At the same time, there is a meaningful discussion underway with
Senators Conrad and Gregg, Democrat and Republican, on long-term
deficit reduction. In the midst of a recession it is hard, I think
terribly hard, to argue we will not be adding to the national debt as
we try to bring ourselves out of the recession. But we clearly need to
have a plan--a direction and a long-term goal--of reducing our deficit.
We can reach that goal, and I think we should. We need to do this on a
bipartisan basis.
I hope in the days ahead, when the President gives the State of the
Union Address, he will speak to this and he will try to help us in
reaching that common goal.
So whatever the result in Massachusetts, it will, of course, make the
news today, will diminish in importance as other stories replace it.
But at the end of the day, we still have responsibilities. We still
need to deal with the rising cost of health care. We need to deal with
the fact that 50 million Americans do not have health insurance. We
need to confront the health insurance companies that are turning down
people when they need help the most with their health insurance plan.
We certainly need to address the job situation, making sure our
government is funding and inspiring new job growth across our country.
We need to deal with a long-term deficit with a plan that starts to
bring us out of our national debt or at least reduce our national debt.
That, to me, represents at least three immediate and attainable goals
that should be done on a bipartisan basis. Whether we have 60 votes or
59 votes, those issues still challenge us. So the lesson from
Massachusetts is the American people are expecting responsible results
in Washington. We have to deliver them. We can deliver them. But to do
it, we need a bipartisan approach. We need both Republicans and
Democrats to work together toward these goals.
Mr. President, I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a
quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Burris). The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CHAMBLISS. 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. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, is the Senate still in morning
business?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate is in morning business.
Mr. CHAMBLISS. I ask unanimous consent that all time be yielded back
and that we move to the nomination of Beverly Martin.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________