[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 151 (Thursday, November 18, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H7569-H7575]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EMERGENCY UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CONTINUATION ACT
Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 6419) to amend the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 to
provide for the further extension of emergency unemployment benefits,
and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 6419
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Emergency Unemployment
Compensation Continuation Act''.
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE PROVISIONS.
(a) In General.--(1) Section 4007 of the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-252; 26 U.S.C. 3304
note) is amended--
(A) by striking ``November 30, 2010'' each place it appears
and inserting ``February 28, 2011'';
(B) in the heading for paragraph (2) of subsection (b), by
striking ``november 30, 2010'' and inserting ``february 28,
2011''; and
(C) in subsection (b)(3), by striking ``April 30, 2011''
and inserting ``July 31, 2011''.
(2) Section 2005 of the Assistance for Unemployed Workers
and Struggling Families Act, as contained in Public Law 111-5
(26 U.S.C. 3304 note), is amended--
(A) by striking ``December 1, 2010'' each place it appears
and inserting ``March 1, 2011'' ; and
(B) in subsection (c), by striking ``May 1, 2011'' and
inserting ``August 1, 2011''.
(3) Section 5 of the Unemployment Compensation Extension
Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-449; 26 U.S.C. 3304 note) is
amended by striking ``April 30, 2011'' and inserting ``July
31, 2011''.
(b) Funding.--Section 4004(e)(1) of the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-252; 26 U.S.C. 3304
note) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``and'' at the end;
and
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (F) the following:
``(G) the amendments made by section 2(a)(1) of the
Emergency Unemployment Compensation Continuation Act; and''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect as if included in the enactment of the
Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2010 (Public Law
111-205; 124 Stat. 2236).
SEC. 3. OPTION FOR STATES TO TEMPORARILY MODIFY CERTAIN
``ON'' AND ``OFF'' INDICATORS RELATING TO
EXTENDED BENEFITS.
(a) Indicators Based on Rate of Insured Unemployment.--
Section 203(d) of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment
Compensation Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) is amended by
inserting before the last sentence the following: ``Effective
with respect to compensation for weeks of unemployment
beginning after the date of enactment of the Emergency
Unemployment Compensation Continuation Act (or, if later, the
date established pursuant to State law), and ending on or
before March 1, 2011, the State may by law provide that the
determination of whether there has been a State `on' or `off'
indicator beginning or ending any extended benefit period
shall be made under this subsection as if paragraph (1)(A)
had been amended by striking `the preceding two calendar
years' and inserting `the preceding three calendar years';
except that, notwithstanding any such provision of State law,
any week for which there would otherwise be a State `on'
indicator shall continue to be such a week and shall not be
determined to be a week for which there is a State `off'
indicator.''.
(b) Indicators Based on Rate of Total Unemployment.--
Section 203(f) of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment
Compensation Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and
[[Page H7570]]
(2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
``(2) Effective with respect to compensation for weeks of
unemployment beginning after the date of enactment of the
Emergency Unemployment Compensation Continuation Act (or, if
later, the date established pursuant to State law), and
ending on or before March 1, 2011, the State may by law
provide that the determination of whether there has been a
State `on' or `off' indicator beginning or ending any
extended benefit period shall be made under this subsection
as if paragraph (1)(A)(ii) had been amended--
``(A) by striking `either (or both)' and inserting `any (or
all)'; and
``(B) by striking `the preceding 2 calendar years' and
inserting `the preceding 3 calendar years'.
Notwithstanding any provision of a State law described in
this paragraph, any week for which there would otherwise be a
State `on' indicator shall continue to be such a week and
shall not be determined to be a week for which there is a
State `off' indicator.''.
SEC. 4. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.
The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of
complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go-Act of 2010, shall
be determined by reference to the latest statement titled
``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation'' for this Act,
submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the
Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that such
statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.
SEC. 5. EMERGENCY DESIGNATIONS.
This Act--
(1) is designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to
section 4(g) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010
(Public Law 111-139; 2 U.S.C. 933(g));
(2) in the House of Representatives, is designated as an
emergency for purposes of pay-as-you-go principles; and
(3) in the Senate, is designated as an emergency
requirement and necessary to meet emergency needs pursuant to
section 403(a) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Levin) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, this is called an emergency bill because it is an
emergency. For millions of people, this is an emergency. Unemployment
benefits are going to run out in a few days. Therefore, it is an
emergency for the United States of America. And let me just indicate
what is at stake here.
Through January 1 of next year, close to 2 million people will not
any longer be eligible for benefits. And then, a month later, the
amount almost doubles. This is an emergency.
Last night, I was in my office at 9:30 and a person called from
Atlanta, Georgia, to thank me and to thank Mr. McDermott and to thank
our party for bringing up this extension.
I don't know what more any of us want. I don't see how we can go home
for Thanksgiving when, as a result of failure of benefits, hundreds of
thousands of people may not have a turkey on their table because they
can't afford it and the next week may not have the moneys they need to
meet their daily needs.
This should be a bipartisan effort. This is a totally human effort.
This is totally an urgent effort. These are people laid off, people who
have been looking for work, people who cannot find work. For every job,
at least five people are looking for employment for that job. I don't
know what other evidence needs to be brought here. It can be stated
very briefly and directly.
If the 2 million people who are going to lose their benefits looking
for work were brought here so we could see them, would anyone vote
``no''? Would anyone vote ``no''? Do we need the 2 million here? Can we
put ourselves in their homes, in their shoes, in their places with
their families, with their children.
This is an emergency. This House must act.
I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1250
Mr. BOUSTANY. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, well, as Yogi Berra said, This bill is like deja vu
all over again--and not in a good way.
The bill before us today is the ninth extension of unemployment
benefits since mid-2008. Benefits recently stretched up to 99 weeks, or
almost 2 years, in most States. With the exception of just one bill
last November, every one of those extensions was not paid for. That's a
total of $135 billion added to our $14 trillion debt.
Meanwhile, our Democrat colleagues swore their policies would create
jobs--but they haven't. Instead of paychecks, millions of Americans
were left with only an unemployment check. In February 2009, the
President signed the Democrats' trillion dollar stimulus plan. At that
time, Democrats promised that the plan would create 3.7 million jobs
and lower the unemployment rate to 7 percent by now. None of that
happened.
Instead, over 2 million more private sector jobs were lost, and
unemployment spiked to 10 percent while the debt has grown by almost $3
trillion. A total of 48 out of 50 States have lost jobs since the
Democrats' stimulus bill passed. Yet here we are again--extending
unemployment benefits because the Democrats' trillion dollar stimulus
failed to create the millions of jobs they promised it would. Even more
sadly, instead of doing this responsibly, this bill will simply add
another $12 billion to our current mountain of debt.
We can do better than this. We certainly can do better than this.
Both Republicans and Democrats support helping the long-term
unemployed. The chairman of the committee expressed a great deal of
empathy in his opening statement. We share that empathy. Every one of
our congressional offices has dealt with families dealing with this
tragedy of unemployment, but Republicans and even some Democrats want
to responsibly pay for these benefits. In fact, there are sufficient
unspent stimulus funds to do just that, to cover the $12 billion cost
of the bill before us. This is not a new Republican idea or a new idea.
This is something we have discussed before, but the other side insists
on bringing this forward, unpaid for.
The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee has proposed cutting
stimulus to pay for certain measures. Last June, the Democrat leader
himself, Mr. Hoyer, admitted there was spending fatigue across the
country, and ``if we have dollars not yet expended in the Recovery
Act,'' they should be ``applied to'' new spending like this. That would
be far better than adding to the unchecked growth in spending and debt
that has already cost us an estimated 1 million jobs.
The fact is we can both provide this help and pay for it by cutting
less effective stimulus spending. That's what we should be debating
today, not a bill called up under special rules that permit no
amendments and no chance to offer ways to pay for this. Even if this
were to pass, the sad thing is that there are no plans in the Senate
for a vote on this bill any time soon. So the fact of the matter is
this bill is going nowhere.
The American people know it isn't right to add these costs to our
already overdrawn national credit card. We all want to help those in
need, but the American people also know that someone has to pay when
government spends money, and it shouldn't be our children and our
grandchildren. The American people sent us here to do a job. We should
pay for this spending today. We can pay for this spending today, and
there is no reason why we couldn't bring a bill forward with a way to
do this, with a way to pay for it.
So I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject this bill
today. Instead, let's work together to quickly pass a bill to extend
Federal unemployment benefits while finding a responsible way to pay
for it.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
I say to the gentleman from Louisiana that the people of this country
who are looking for work don't want empathy; they want the unemployment
insurance that they worked for, and you're standing in the way. Don't
send them empathy. Send them what they worked for.
I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of my time be controlled
by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), the author of this
bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
[[Page H7571]]
Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, may I ask what the division of minutes
is at the moment?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 16\1/2\
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Louisiana has 15\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise in support of H.R. 6419, which will extend current
unemployment insurance benefits through February of next year and will
provide much needed help to unemployed Americans during the holiday
season.
From the beginning of the unemployment insurance program 75 years
ago, we have never cut off benefits for out-of-work Americans when the
unemployment rates have been this high. Without this extension,
temporary Federal extended benefits will shut down shortly after
Thanksgiving, the 27th, denying benefits to 2 million of our fellow
citizens over the holiday season. It is unthinkable to me that we can
allow these benefits to lapse during the holiday season and before the
economic recovery is on solid ground.
Despite the severity of the Republican economic collapse, which
started under Mr. Bush, there have been 10 straight months of private
sector growth under this Democratically controlled Congress and
administration. Despite the huge accomplishment of digging the American
economy out of the Republican economic ditch, too many Americans remain
unemployed. There is still only one available job for every five
unemployed Americans. To make matters worse, the press is now carrying
reports that employers around the country are refusing to hire the
unemployed.
They're saying to the unemployed, We want to hire somebody who has a
job to come over and fill our job because we know you were laid off
because you weren't a good employee, and that's why they let you go. We
don't want to hire people who aren't worth anything.
That's the message that's going out in this country now to the
unemployed. Many of those people are middle class people who have
worked very hard, and through no fault of their own, their industries
have collapsed--banking, housing--as a direct result of what the Bush
administration did--or didn't do, really, which is to have regulated
Wall Street.
Unfortunately, the Republicans have already made it clear that,
instead of helping the middle class, one of their top priorities is to
give millionaires and billionaires a huge $700 billion break. Now, the
same people who are saying this should be paid for will be out on this
floor sometime in the next couple of weeks, saying, We don't have to
pay for a tax break. Why, that'll pump jobs into the world. All we have
to do is cut taxes everywhere and give $700 billion to people who make
more than $500,000 a year--that's okay--but an unemployment check for
somebody to keep bread on the table and keep a mortgage paid is not
okay.
We can't not fund that. This is an emergency.
People who talk like that on the floor of this House have never been
unemployed or have never known anybody who has been unemployed. You
would not talk that way about unemployed people if you knew them.
Now, this should give every middle class American a lot to think
about with the results of this last election. This is your first chance
to observe what you can expect in the next 2 years. The minority leader
in the other body said, My number one priority is to prevent Barack
Obama from having a second term. Not public policy. Not jobs for
people. Not health care for people--but political gain.
{time} 1300
And that's what this is all about. The experts agree--two out of
every three people who get unemployment benefits are in the middle
class. We're not talking about people who weren't trying or weren't
working or weren't doing their part as Americans.
While the Republicans were bankrupting the country to help the rich
with one hand, giving tax breaks all over the place, the Republicans
were using the other hand to push the unemployed middle class of
America out of their homes and never dealt with the foreclosure issue
to prevent them from having food on their tables and to keep their
children from being properly clothed.
On the campaign trail Republicans called the unemployed ``lazy.''
Boy, you haven't met an unemployed person or you would never say that a
second time to them. And they said that unemployment benefits ``spoil''
out of work Americans. They get lazy and they just sit around the house
and wait for their unemployment check. Those checks aren't that big in
the first place, and secondly, people don't like to be unemployed in
this country. People look for work, and they are looking for work and
they are now being told you've been unemployed for 2 years, we're not
interested in hiring you. We want somebody who's got a job over here.
That was on NPR just yesterday. So it isn't made up. That's what's
going on.
Some Republicans even question the constitutionality of the
Unemployment Insurance Program. The health and welfare of the American
people is unconstitutional, according to some people.
Fortunately, the American people don't feel the same way. A recent
poll showed that 86 percent of Americans believe the unemployed really
want to work. That's what the people think. That's not the political
rhetoric of people running for election. That's what the people really
think.
The election is over now, and Americans have said we want both
parties to work together to get things done and do it by listening to
the American people. Americans don't want to push American families
whose breadwinners lost their jobs through no fault of their own into
poverty during the holidays.
I think we should end these debates and extend benefits longer and
allow benefits to be scaled back as the economy improves. The reason
we've had all these votes out here is because the Senate is unable to
do anything. We've tried to extend this for extended periods of time,
and over in the Senate, they say, well, let's extend it for a month,
let's see if we can starve them for a month, and then we'll go in. They
let this program lapse for 3 months over there, and you're telling me
that we're going to work together. Well, I think we ought to work
together.
This is a short-term extension in an effort to see if our Republican
colleagues will support any kind of help for the unemployed. I am told
by the other side that there's no plan in the Senate to take up this
bill. Well, they're waiting to see if we can get it out of here. If you
don't help, maybe it won't get out of here, but the message to 4
million Americans will be the Republican Party doesn't care whether you
have a Christmas or a way to fund your mortgage or a way to put food on
the table for the first three months of the next year. I hope my
Republican colleagues will join the American people in supporting this
bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Madam Speaker, I just regret to say that we're hearing
oversimplifications and many generalizations from the other side.
Look, this is not one of those you either pass it or you don't types
of issues here. We could pay for this, and the sad thing is all I'm
hearing on the other side is a great deal of cynicism. But furthermore,
look, the American people have spoken about this, and they are saying
we've got to get a handle on national debt if we're going to get the
economy going again and create jobs because the American people want
paychecks. They want good-paying jobs. They want an end to this
uncertainty.
We have information from the MacArthur Foundation, a very respected
organization. They released a poll showing that over 70 percent of
voters in this month's election say it is very important to reduce the
national debt. Overwhelmingly, voters want us to reduce the debt by
cutting spending, but instead of doing this fiscally responsible thing
and actually paying for this new spending, which we could very easily
do, the bill before us today does exactly the opposite. It adds $12
billion to our Nation's debt in a program that's already added $135
billion to the national debt. The sad thing is, Madam Speaker, we could
extend these unemployment benefits, and we could pay for them.
Look, the bill reflects I think a very cynical political maneuver by
the Democratic leadership because they
[[Page H7572]]
know that the Senate has no plans to pass this unpaid-for bill. We've
been down this path before, and in fact, the liberal Huffington Post
has broken the code on really what's going on here. There was a recent
headline, Jobless Benefits About to Lapse as Senate Democrats Mull
Strategy. That was a headline on Tuesday. And, No Plans in Senate For a
Vote on Unemployment Benefits read the headline yesterday. To quote
Senator Reed from Rhode Island, a Democratic leader on this
legislation: ``At this point it's not been scheduled. I can't point to
a specific time it will come up for a vote this week.''
The American people are tired of the cynicism. They want answers. And
the sad thing is there's a simple answer on this one, unlike many of
the other problems our country is facing which are more complex. We
could extend unemployment benefits and we could pay for it, but our
friends on the other side of the aisle currently control the House,
they control the Senate, they control the White House, and they can't
even get their act together to do this, especially when there are
Republicans who would be willing to do this extension if it were paid
for. The simple answer is ``yes'' there is a way to pay for it. It's
staring us right in the face, and yet our friends across the aisle
refuse to see this.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield myself 30 additional seconds.
My friend on the other side clearly understands, I'm sure, the
legislative process. We put a bill over to the Senate. They can make a
change. If they want to pay for it, they can pay for it. They are safe,
they're comfortable, because they know you're going to stop the bill or
try to stop the bill. They know that the House Republicans are
determined that they're not going to let this bill through here. So
they say, all right, we can say we don't have any way to do anything
with it. My belief is that we put a bill over there, they will pass a
bill.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I believe that
the American people want to work. Those who are unemployed want a job.
Those who are out of work want employment benefits. I don't think that
there is any excuse that can be given. There is no reason that one can
conjure up that would say to a person who's unemployed, out of work,
has no food, can't pay their mortgage, can't enjoy the holidays, that
there is a reason, especially since they have worked, that they can't
have benefits to get them through this situation on an emergency basis.
I am amazed, I am dumbfounded, I can't believe that I'm hearing what
I'm hearing, that somehow or another the Democrats, in a technical
sense, are keeping individuals from getting unemployment benefits. I
would hope that we could change our minds, change our position, and
know that when we do this for the least of these, then we're doing the
work that we ought to be doing.
Let's pass this measure. Provide benefits to the unemployed.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will take this opportunity to
remind all Members to address their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Madam Speaker, I want to remind our friends on the
other side that in the past when they did bring the bill up on
suspension, it failed, and yet when you did on one occasion bring it up
on regular order, it did pass.
We all have to work hard to listen to the will of the American
people. Yesterday, Speaker Pelosi herself said, ``Our consensus is that
we go out there listening to the American people. It's about jobs. It's
about reducing the deficit.''
Yet today, here we are again being asked to increase the deficit by
another $12 billion. That's another $160 in debt for every family of
four in the United States, just for 3 months of benefits under one
program, all on top of the $2.8 trillion in debt we have racked up
since President Obama took office, a 44 percent increase.
{time} 1310
The question, Madam Speaker, is, Is the Speaker really listening to
the American people? Because what we heard earlier this month is that
people want us to provide help to those in need but not add to the
mountain of debt that we are currently leaving to our children and
grandchildren.
The sad thing--again, I repeat--the sad thing, we could have achieved
both goals today. The Congressional Budget Office has informed us there
is enough unspent stimulus spending that we can cut to cover the
additional spending in this bill. It's just unconscionable that the
other side has not heard the American people about the concerns about
unfettered debt passed on to our children and grandchildren.
Again, Mr. Hoyer this past summer suggested we do just that. In June
he said, ``If we have dollars not yet expended in the Recovery Act,''
that they should be ``applied to'' new spending like this. In July, 59
Democrats signed a letter saying: ``Extending critical, economic
investments is no more important than paying for them. America is
facing a debt crisis that is threatening to undermine our economic and
national security. We can no longer afford to exacerbate the problem
because the decisions about how to pay for what we spend are getting
harder.''
This one is fairly easy. We have a way to pay for it, and yet the
majority chose to bring this to the floor unpaid for, and without an
opportunity to even offer an amendment.
So I ask our colleagues on the other side, Are you listening to the
American people? Madam Speaker, are they even listening to each other?
And do they agree with the Speaker that it's about debt? All we're
hearing are mixed signals. If so, join us in voting down this unpaid-
for bill and begin working together on a new bill, which we could do
very quickly, that does right by the unemployed as well as our children
and our grandchildren. That's what the American people expect of us
today.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, could you tell us how much time we have
left?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 7 minutes
remaining. The gentleman from Louisiana has 9\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman
from New York (Mrs. Maloney).
Mrs. MALONEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Madam Speaker, the Joint Economic Committee, which I chair, released
a report today that finds that if Congress fails to extend the Federal
unemployment insurance benefits program, the unintended consequences
could be extremely serious. Serious not just for the 2 million
Americans who would see their benefits expire in December, but
extremely serious for the larger economy as well.
Prematurely ending the program would drain our economy of some $80
billion in purchasing power, just as our fragile economy is beginning
to recover. This would result in the loss of over 1 million jobs over
the next year. Even now, there are five Americans looking for work for
every job opening in the land; and more than 40 percent of those
unemployed have been out of work for 27 weeks or more, including over
159,000 in New York State, with some 95,000 in my home of New York
City. Choosing to vote against an extension, and thus add a million
Americans to the ranks of the unemployed, cannot possibly be considered
as a wise economic policy choice.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office ranks the stimulative
effects of unemployment benefits as one of the most effective policies
to increase growth and employment that they have studied, and the
President's Council of Economic Advisers estimates that every dollar
spent on unemployment insurance benefits increases the gross domestic
product by $1.60. Economists predict that without extended benefits,
the economy will suffer, consumer spending will fall by 0.5 percent,
and economic growth will be reduced by almost 0.5 percent.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield the gentlelady an additional 30 seconds.
Mrs. MALONEY. The facts and the numbers in the new JEC report make it
clear that extending this program benefits those who need our help
most, benefits the larger economy, and thus benefits us all.
[[Page H7573]]
I urge a ``yes'' vote on this bill.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Again I say, there was a way to pay for this. We have to be frank
with the American people on this. Jobless benefits have cost so far
$319 billion, and yet unemployment is still at 9.6 percent; and we've
seen really nothing coming from the other side who has controlled the
majority in the House, controlled the majority in the Senate,
controlled the White House. We've seen nothing to help small businesses
get going again to hire. We've seen nothing to promote competitiveness
in the U.S. economy. Their answer is to continue to extend unemployment
benefits unpaid for.
Now there's agreement. We're not disagreeing about extending the
unemployment benefits at this time. We're saying, let's do it in a
responsible way and pay for it.
It wasn't always this way. This is the ninth attempt to extend this
program. And when Democrats passed their only paid-for unemployment
insurance extender bill in November of 2009--the only one that was paid
for--the Obama administration hailed that ``fiscally responsible
approach to expanding unemployment benefits,'' adding that ``fiscal
responsibility is central to the medium-term recovery of the economy
and the creation of jobs.''
That was from the administration's statement of policy about the
Democrats' one paid-for UI extension bill, which was H.R. 4548. There
were 156 Republicans who supported that November 2009 bill.
By the administration's own logic, the Democrats' latest fiscally
irresponsible bill, H.R. 6419, which increases the deficit by an
estimated $12 billion, undermines the medium-term recovery of the
economy and the creation of jobs. The sad thing, Madam Speaker, is
this: we could extend unemployment benefits and pay for it. This is not
a hard one. There are harder decisions coming with the debt that our
country is facing and economic uncertainty. Republicans are ready to
move forward and get this country going again and restore American
competitiveness, but I see our friends on the other side of the aisle
are up to their old ways.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I have found that the other side is very adroit at finding some
reason not to do anything to help the middle class. Now, there is
plenty of evidence to suggest that the people in this country are not
interested in cutting off food and housing and medical coverage for
people who are unemployed in this country. And to use these arguments
about, Oh, we're going to get the money from the stimulus money, I defy
anybody on this floor at this moment to stand up and tell me where that
stimulus money is and what the impact would be if you cut it because
that money was allocated to various agencies, some to pay salaries for
schoolteachers, some to pay salaries for policemen and firemen and
local governments, some to pay the States for Medicaid.
All this money is out there. Maybe some of it hasn't yet been spent,
but it's allocated. Some of it is for construction projects. I suppose,
just like that Governor in New Jersey who thinks it's really
politically smart to stop a public works project under the Hudson River
because then he can use that money to pave potholes in New Jersey, and
he puts the construction workers out of work all over the place.
{time} 1320
Those infrastructure projects, you can't spend all the money on the
first day. It does take a little while to build it, and you pay it out
as you build it. Now, you know that. Republicans are just being
deceptive. They think because it still is there in the Treasury, it can
be used for something else. Well, it might have been committed for
something else.
But not my Republican friends. This emergency that these 4\1/2\
million people have over here who have no benefits coming by the end of
March, ``You folks understand that you shouldn't worry about this. I
mean, the Speaker will explain it to you that you just have to wait
until we can find where that money is in the budget.''
This is an emergency for people who have no check coming.
We would all like this thing to be all over. There isn't anybody on
this floor, Republican or Democrat, who wouldn't like the mess that was
created by the Bush administration to be over with. It isn't.
And the problem is, a guy in my district said, you know, Jim, I can
tell you what the problem with America is, and your Republican side has
a bad dose of this. He said, It's the belief in the microwave. If they
have a problem, they come down to the refrigerator. They open the
refrigerator, pull something out, close the refrigerator, open the
microwave, throw it in, hit two buttons and wait 30 seconds and they've
got lunch. They think everything can be solved like that.
It took a long time for Mr. Bush to create the mess that we are now
dealing with, and it isn't going to be over in 30 seconds like the
microwave dinner is.
And the fact is that you've got people who contradict you directly.
The real budget--no one's going to ever accuse me of being a big budget
warrior or a deficit warrior. I'm no deficit hawk. But Bob Bixby,
President of the Concord Coalition, that organization dedicated to
eliminating Federal budget deficits said, and I quote: ``As a deficit
hawk, I wouldn't worry about extending unemployment benefits. It is not
going to add to the long-term structural deficit, and it does address a
serious need. I just feel like unemployment benefits wandered into the
wrong street corner at the wrong time, and now they're getting
mugged.''
He's absolutely right. For us to pick on the unemployment benefits as
the problem for this deficit, wait till we have the debate on taxes on
this floor and I hear people whining and whining around here about
people making more than half a million dollars and we've got to give
them a tax cut.
I urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 6419.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this
important legislation to extend unemployment benefits through February
2011.
We must continue to help families who are struggling to make ends
meet. While we are continuing to see encouraging signs of economic
recovery, the unemployment rate remains too high. If we do not extend
emergency unemployment benefits, approximately two million Americans--
including 14,600 Marylanders--will lose those benefits by the end of
February.
Many Americans remain out of work through no fault of their own.
Ending emergency unemployment assistance will not only be devastating
for these individuals and their families, but it will also hurt the
economy as a whole by undermining consumer confidence and demand. If
individuals are unable to put food on the table and keep a roof over
their heads, the entire economy could slip back into recession. In
fact, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office recently found that
because unemployment benefits increase consumer demand and spending,
previous extensions of unemployment insurance benefits increased both
employment and job retention more than what it would have been
otherwise in 2009.
The President and Congress have been working together to bring our
economy back from the brink. However, there is much more work to do to
create jobs and help put Americans back to work.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this much-needed
legislation.
Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Madam Speaker, I strongly support the
extension of unemployment compensation. Indeed, there is no issue more
important to our Nation right now than job creation. At a time when
over 11 percent of Florida residents are desperately searching for
employment and struggling to survive, it is simply mind blowing that we
are not extending these benefits.
Never before has America turned its back on millions of American
families as they struggled to make ends meet with this high level of
unemployment. Yet the same Republicans, who want to increase our
deficit by extending massive tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans,
were willing to leave average Americans to fend for themselves and vote
against this bill.
Certainly, extending unemployment benefits is not only good for the
unemployed; it is also one of the best and fastest ways to stimulate
the economy. According to the Economic Policy Institute, unemployment
benefits were responsible for creating more than 1 million jobs since
the recession started, and adding almost 2 percent to the gross
domestic product.
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Madam Speaker, it is with strong conviction
that I urge my colleagues to support this short-term extension of
[[Page H7574]]
critical unemployment benefits for our citizens. As our Nation and my
state continue to struggle out of this recession, this bill will
provide vital assistance to almost 400,000 Illinoisans as we enter
December. Failure to extend unemployment will directly affect
approximately two million Americans, including 125,000 citizens from
Illinois. If policymakers vote to block this critical lifeline, these
125,000 Illinoisans living in a state with a 10.8 percent unemployment
rate will experience incredible hardship. Their time in unemployment
has been difficult, trying to find work when the jobs are few and far
between, trying to cover food, housing, and transportation for the
families on an average of $290 a week, which typically replaces only
half of the average family's expenses.
A government is supposed to help its people in times of need. Failure
to extend these benefits would be the first time since the unemployment
program's inception that Congress allowed such critical aid to lapse
when unemployment remained high for extended periods of time. It is not
only these families who will suffer, it is our businesses. The retail
sector has been hard hit by this recession. Cutting unemployment
benefits for two million people will take a tremendous toll on these
businesses as well.
In addition to this short-term extension, I strongly support
determining ways to help those who remain unemployed beyond the 99
weeks currently covered. Long-term unemployment is an unfortunate
reality for Chicago and for my constituents. Further, we should extend
the TANF Emergency funds as well. This program directly helped over
26,000 individuals and close to 5,000 employers in Illinois by creating
subsidized jobs program, a much-needed boost to the economy in the
midst of the worst recession in decades. This program put $9 million
dollars into the pockets of hard working Illinoisans until Congress
allowed it to lapse at the end of September.
Passing this bill today tells our citizens that we are working for
them. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote for its passage.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of
extending emergency unemployment. This legislation, of which I am a
proud cosponsor, is a common sense, non-controversial measure that will
help American families.
The unemployment situation in our country is a national emergency.
Over the past two years, millions of jobs have been lost as a result of
the worst recession in 70 years, caused by Wall Street excesses and an
unregulated housing market. Millions of Americans are unemployed
today--but through no fault of their own. Our neighbors, our friends,
and our families are the ones who agonize as the economy slowly
recovers. We cannot afford to abandon the unemployed members of the
American workforce, and I won't stand by silently and allow these
lifelines to expire.
Unemployment benefits help millions of unemployed Americans help meet
the basic needs of rent, food, and transportation while they search for
jobs. Any family receiving unemployment insurance would tell you that
these benefits do not provide for a luxurious lifestyle without
financial worries. These same families would tell you that without
these benefits, they will lose their home, lose their car, and lose the
ability to feed their children. If the Federal Government does not
assist these out-of-work Americans with emergency unemployment
compensation, then they will fall to the next level of the social
safety net, requiring public housing assistance, seeking medical care
in hospital emergency room, or turning to food shelves to put dinner on
the table.
We have seen the proof that these benefits significantly stimulate
economic growth while making the difference in the lives of struggling
Americans. Economists from both sides of the aisle agree that
unemployment benefits go directly into the economy, stimulating the
kind of activity that creates jobs. And we have never before let
federal emergency unemployment expire while the unemployment rate is
anywhere close to this high.
I challenge my Republican colleagues who say this legislation is
unaffordable to come to the floor right now and tell me how they can
pay to give the richest 2 percent of Americans $700 billion while
holding this lifeline hostage. Every single vote against this extension
is a vote to impoverish more American families. Every single vote
against this legislation is a vote against economic growth. Every
single vote against this bill is a vote against the middle class.
Our economy will recover. But until our economic growth is fully
restored, I simply refuse to abandon America's families during their
time of greatest need.
Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6419,
the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Continuation Act.
Madam Speaker, 14.8 million Americans are unemployed. A majority of
them are workers that endure historic long-term unemployment. Economist
Heidi Shierholz of the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) estimated that
at the current pace of job growth, it would take twenty years for the
country to return to its pre-recession rate of unemployment. The
American people cannot afford to wait another 20 years for the country
to fully recover from the longest recession it has experienced in
seventy years.
Some argue that passing unemployment benefits will add to the deficit
and therefore should be opposed. Research tells us otherwise. EPI
estimates that the effect of the $65 billion spent on extending
benefits through 2011 is actually ``one of the most efficient things
that can be done to create new jobs'' and will increase the Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) by ``an estimated $104.7 billion.'' This
increase in the GDP will translate into approximately a half-million
jobs.
Madam Speaker, it would be a disgrace for Congress to adjourn for the
Thanksgiving break without giving those who need our assistance the
help they deserve. This is not a hand out. This is our responsibility.
Mr. STARK. Madam Speaker, I rise to support the extension of
emergency Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits for the millions of
American workers who are unable to find work. If the incoming majority
is committed to extending tax cuts to increase the wealth of
millionaires, I certainly hope they are equally committed to helping
Americans who have lost their jobs to stay in their homes and put food
on their tables over the holidays.
UI benefits are a lifeline for millions of Americans. Allowing these
benefits to expire at the end of the month would mean that two million
people will lose their income, including over 450,000 in my State of
California. These are people who want to work, but when there are five
applicants for every new job, the odds are against them. For these
individuals, the recession has most definitely not ended.
People call my office every day worried about what will happen to
them when they lose their unemployment benefits. As we approach the
holiday season, we should not tell these individuals that their country
will no longer support them in the midst of the worst economy since the
Great Depression. We have never cut off support when the unemployment
rate was this high. We must not begin now. Unemployment benefits kept
3.3 million Americans out of poverty in 2009, including almost 1
million children. UI benefits created two dollars of economic activity
for every dollar spent in 2009. Extending benefits protects families
and stimulates the growth of our economy.
Congress has a responsibility to protect families struggling to find
work. H.R. 6419 is a chance for us to fulfill that responsibility. I
urge all of my colleagues to side with American workers and support
this bill.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Emergency
Unemployment Compensation Continuation Act which would extend emergency
unemployment compensation and other benefits through February 2011. Our
government has always provided federal unemployment benefits during
economic downturns until the job market has rebounded. If Congress does
not act, over two million unemployed workers will lose their benefits
this holiday season.
Today, unemployment levels are unacceptably high. In my home State of
Michigan it is over 12 percent. In the past election, voters
overwhelmingly cited the economy and job market as their highest
concerns. It is highly ironic then that Republicans made electoral
gains even though they have blocked multiple attempts to extend the
unemployment benefits and many other job creating bills. Furthermore,
Republicans oppose today's measure while providing unwavering support
for permanent extension of Bush tax cuts for millionaires and
billionaires. Republicans are willing to give a helping hand to the
rich while ignoring the taxpaying American worker. It should be clear
to everyone where the Republican Party stands and who they will be
willing to fight for.
Madam Speaker, with power comes responsibility. The Republicans won
the election and now they have a responsibility to govern, instead of
simply saying ``no'' over and over again. We simply cannot adjourn for
Thanksgiving, a holiday that symbolizes gratitude and appreciation,
while turning our back to our neighbors in need. I urge my colleagues
on both sides of the aisle to come together in a show of compassion for
our fellow citizens during this season of giving and support today's
legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Levin) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 6419, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. BOUSTANY. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
[[Page H7575]]
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________