[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 21 (Thursday, February 10, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S639-S641]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUESTS--H.R. 359

  Mr. CASEY. First, I thank Senator Brown and others who have helped us 
in this battle. Just a couple of words about trade adjustment 
assistance as it relates to Pennsylvania and, more importantly, 
Pennsylvania workers.
  As many people know, the trade adjustment assistance provisions were 
enhanced by amendments made to the program in 2009. It was updated in 
two critical ways. First, it expanded coverage to more workers, 
including service workers and workers whose jobs have been offshored to 
places around the world. The change was essential because it made 
workers whose jobs were lost to China and India eligible for assistance 
which these days is an essential safeguard for those workers. The 
amendments also increased and improved training, health coverage, and 
other benefits available to trade adjustment assistance certified 
workers.
  What does that mean for Pennsylvania? The 587 certifications issued 
in Pennsylvania cover an estimated 67,000 workers. To give one example, 
General Electric announced in 2009 that they would be cutting 1,500 
jobs. We have worked with them and others to get them through this 
period. They recently got a solution in the form of trade adjustment 
assistance. As a result of their certification, the workers have been 
able to go to school, feed their families, and contribute to the local 
economy. So General Electric in Pennsylvania is hiring again with the 
help of trade adjustment assistance.
  With that by way of background, I ask unanimous consent that the 
Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 359, which was 
received from the House and is at the desk; that a Casey substitute 
amendment providing an 18-month extension of trade adjustment 
assistance and the Andean Trade Preference Act be agreed to; the bill, 
as amended, be read a third time and passed; and the motions to 
reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or 
debate.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, reserving the right to object, the 
Senator's unanimous-consent request contains components he knows are 
controversial and opposed by numerous Senators and for that reason that 
proposal cannot pass the Senate today. Specifically, the proposal would 
extend the TAA-related provisions of the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009, better known as the failed stimulus package, 
which most Members of this side of the aisle strenuously opposed for 
very sound reasons. That stimulus spent approximately $1 trillion under 
the guise that it would keep unemployment rates below 8 percent. Yet 
nearly 2 years later, we are still at a point where unemployment rates, 
which had risen to the area of 10 percent, are now still at 9 percent. 
I am reminded this is nearly double the average annual rate of the last 
administration.
  It would be one thing if there was clear evidence that differing TAA 
programs were effective in meeting these intended goals, but research 
suggests the efficacy of the TAA training funding is not as convincing. 
At the insistence of Senators Coburn and Enzi, the GAO found that in 
fiscal year 2009, nine Federal agencies spent approximately $18 billion 
to administer 47 separate employment and job training programs, 
including TAA. Despite large Federal spending, GAO could not conclude 
whether the programs have had any meaningful benefit. The GAO report 
states:

       Little is known about the effectiveness of the employment 
     and training programs we identified because only 5 reported 
     demonstrating whether outcomes can be attributed to the 
     program through an impact study.

  As a result, I object.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam President, will the Senator from Wyoming 
yield for a question?
  Mr. BARRASSO. Yes.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Is he aware that 155,000 new workers have been 
certified, that under the new TAA program since May 2009, 155,000 
Americans have been assisted under TAA?
  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I would be happy to, as a matter of 
record, submit for the record the GAO study that was reported by 
Senators Coburn and Enzi to outline the entire study and the reason I 
am objecting today.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam President, if the Senator would be willing 
to give us more specifics, it is very important to those 155,000 
workers. I know a lot of them live in Pennsylvania. I don't know how 
many of them live in Wyoming. I could find that out. I understand his 
criticism of the Recovery Act, but that is a debate for another time. I 
understand Senator Coburn's disagreement and perhaps his too with 
worker training programs. I wish to see a better consolidation. This 
President is actually beginning to do that. President Bush, I don't 
believe, ever attempted that.
  More precisely, strip away all the other discussions of the Recovery 
Act. Precisely what did we do that you object to when we expanded the 
TAA language in the Recovery Act? We have the Recovery Act in place. We 
have the TAA in place. We expanded TAA so that more workers could be 
covered, those workers who lost their jobs from trade agreements--not 
from trade agreements, lost their jobs from trade losses from trade, 
not just in countries we had free trade agreements with but other 
countries. We expanded it there. We also expanded it to service 
workers. Since you are speaking for Mr. Coburn and others, what 
precisely was the expansion in TAA that you objected to? This is not a 
debate on all the worker training programs. This is a debate on making 
them more efficient. We should have that debate. We should make it more 
efficient. This is not a debate on the Recovery Act, even though any 
fair-minded economist will say it is not a well-known failure. It 
actually worked. But that is another debate.
  But precisely the expansion of TAA to cover service workers and to 
cover those workers who lost jobs to countries with whom we did not 
have an FTA, what is your objection to those, the precise specific 
expansion of TAA that Senator Casey's unanimous consent is trying to 
expand, to continue?
  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I do look forward to having those 
additional discussions and debates on all the issues raised by my 
distinguished colleague from Ohio. That is why, after the two 
distinguished Senators on the floor today offer the three different 
proposals, I have a counterproposal that I hope they would accept, an 
alternative package that maintains the underlying bill H.R. 359. It 
extends the Andean Trade Preference Act for 18 months and extends the 
permanent staffing prohibition for 18 months. I will be offering that 
after we have finished an additional discussion by the other side.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CASEY. Madam President, I have a second unanimous-consent request 
which I will offer. I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the 
immediate consideration of H.R. 359, which was received from the House 
and is at the desk; that a Casey substitute amendment providing for a 
4\1/2\ month extension of trade adjustment assistance and the Andean 
Trade Preference Act be agreed to; the bill, as amended, be read a 
third time and passed; and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the 
table, with no intervening action or debate.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, reserving the right to object, and for

[[Page S640]]

the reasons I have stated during the previous request and debate, I 
object.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam President, I am not surprised by this, but I 
am very disappointed. These are American workers who have lost their 
jobs. This body is responsible in part with a bunch of multinational 
corporations that have moved jobs out of this country, in some cases to 
get cheaper labor, to get trade advantages, to take advantage of tax 
breaks, to evade environmental laws, to evade worker safety and labor 
laws. They have moved out of this country with assistance from this 
Chamber. I don't know if it is Senator Barrasso or Coburn or who, but 
we are turning our backs on those workers who have lost jobs not 
through their own doing. I am very disappointed.
  I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate 
consideration of H.R. 359, which was received from the House and is at 
the desk; that a Brown substitute amendment providing an 18-month 
extension for the health insurance cost tax credit be agreed to; the 
bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed; the motion to 
reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or 
debate.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, reserving the right to object, this 
third proposal deals solely with the health coverage tax credit, 
including the increases contained in the stimulus that went from 65 
percent to 80 percent. It is important to note that the health coverage 
tax credit is not going away. It is merely reverting to the previous 
level which will require recipients to increase their contribution for 
health coverage. The health coverage tax credit stimulus level of 80 
percent, which represents one of the most generous health care premium 
subsidies provided by the Federal Government, is unsustainable.
  As a result, I object.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam President, I am again disappointed. This is 
a tax credit. The Senator from Wyoming knows this, as many colleagues 
do. This brings back the issue of health care generally. A bunch of us 
in this body who get our health insurance from taxpayers are not 
willing to assist people who have lost their jobs. The health care tax 
credit is available, just as COBRA is available. But tell me for most 
American workers that COBRA is not a cruel hoax. COBRA is what you get 
if you lose your job. You can keep your insurance. You have to pay the 
employer side and your own side. You are working at a job making 
$40,000 a year. You pay your insurance, and your employer pays part of 
your insurance also. If you lose your job, you keep paying your own 
insurance, but you have to pay the employer's part too. What kind of 
workers can get laid off and have the money to pay both? Is it still 
available? Sure it is. Isn't that a wonderful thing? Aren't we great in 
this body?
  The fact is, it is not available. For Senators who want to repeal 
health care, for Senators who want to strip any assistance, because in 
the end it does strip assistance that the health care tax credit gives, 
it is basically turning our backs and saying to these workers: Sorry 
about that. Sorry about NAFTA. Sorry about PNTR. I know you lost your 
job because of the trade agreements. Sorry about losing your health 
insurance. Sorry about not having any job training money. And if your 
house is foreclosed on, that is just too damn bad too.
  I don't get this. I don't understand why people in this body can't at 
least help those citizens who don't dress like this every day, who 
don't make $170,000 a year, who don't have good health insurance 
provided by taxpayers. Why are we turning our backs on them?
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CASEY. Madam President, let me add a few words to what Senator 
Brown said.
  Think of what is happening here, what happened in the last couple 
minutes. We had three unanimous-consent requests. The first one I 
offered was an 18-month extension of trade adjustment assistance. What 
are we talking about? Trade adjustment assistance is basic to people's 
lives when they lose a job. Over the years it has had a lot of support 
from both parties. It is about training, income support, reemployment 
so people can get from joblessness through no fault of their own to a 
job. It is a very basic program. It works well. The evidence is clear. 
I asked for an 18-month extension. That was objected to.
  Then we tried again. The next consent request I offered was a 4\1/2\ 
month extension. Just as we were leaving here in December, Senator 
Brown and I worked out an agreement with two Members of the Republican 
side, two Members who said: Let's extend it for a short period, a much 
shorter period than I wanted and a much shorter period than Senator 
Brown wanted, but we got an extension. That is what we are asking for 
here, helping people in the midst of what is still a very tough 
economy, almost 14 million people out of work, 13.9 according to the 
last number. That is what we are talking about, not some fuzzy 
theoretical program. This is a program we know works. It is a program 
that helps people get from here to there, from joblessness to a job, 
and provides some training and skills. Why is this objected to time 
after time by people on the other side? Then you add to that the health 
care provisions Senator Brown talked about.

  Everyone in this Chamber--every elected official in this Chamber--has 
both a steady income and health care. All we are asking for is to 
extend, for a very short period of time, a program that helps people in 
the midst of a tough economy, and the other side objects and objects 
and objects.
  It is hard to understand, as Senator Brown said. It makes no sense. 
This is not some new program we are experimenting with. This is a 
program that works. As I said before, in our State, 67,000 workers are 
positively impacted by this program. So I would like to hear more from 
the other side about why they keep objecting to a program we know works 
in every State and we know people need at this time.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Wyoming is 
recognized.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, there are those folks around the 
country--and I go home to Wyoming repeatedly; I will be there again 
tomorrow evening--who are concerned about a $14 trillion debt this 
country is trying to live with, a deficit this year of $1.5 trillion. 
The United States, in this last year, spent $3.7 trillion and brought 
in $2.2 trillion. That is not sustainable. It cannot continue. We 
simply cannot continue at this level, where 41 cents of every dollar we 
spend in this country is borrowed, much of it from people overseas.
  It should not catch anyone by surprise today that the stimulus 
provisions we are talking about--the provisions from that stimulus 
package--are set to expire. In fact, it has been well known since the 
day the stimulus passed.
  The current financial position of the United States forces us to 
examine all Federal programs and make some very tough and difficult 
decisions.
  I agree the Senate should extend the prohibition on implementation of 
the Department of Labor's merit staffing rule which I believe is 
harmful and unnecessary. For these reasons, I propose an alternative 
package that maintains the underlying bill, H.R. 359, regarding the 
elimination of the taxpayer-funded Presidential election campaigns, 
extends the ATPA, the Andean Trade Preference Act, for 18 months, and 
extends the merit staffing prohibition for 18 months.
  Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to 
the immediate consideration of H.R. 359, that all after the enacting 
clause be stricken, the amendment at the desk be agreed to, and the 
bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam President, I reserve the right to object.
  I cannot walk out of here--and I think Senator Casey feels the same--
saying yes to workers governed by the Andean trade preferences--in 
other words, yes, we are going to help workers in Colombia and Peru and 
Ecuador and Bolivia--we are going to say yes to workers there--but the 
Senator from Wyoming wants us to walk out and

[[Page S641]]

have said no to workers in Harrisburg and Columbus and Toledo and Erie 
and Sharon and Youngstown, so, Madam President, I object.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized.
  Mr. CASEY. Madam President, I think both sides understand these 
should move together as a package, both trade adjustment assistance and 
the Andean trade preference legislation as well. But let's try 
something here. We have talked about the arguments back and forth.
  I would ask my friend from Wyoming if he would agree to an extension 
through Mother's Day, which is Sunday, May 8. I would ask him to 
respond to that request.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Wyoming is 
recognized.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I object.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CASEY. What you have just heard is another objection. They object 
to another short period of time. Let me go through it again. They 
object to a 4\1/2\ month extension, they object to an 18-month 
extension, and now they object to an extension through Mother's Day. I 
do not think it is asking that much to go from here to May 8.
  I do not think we are helping the economy at a very difficult time 
when there is objection after objection. But I hope the American people 
understand what is at stake here in the midst of a still recovering and 
for some people still--for many people I should say; millions of 
people--a horrific economic circumstance.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________