[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 4 (Wednesday, January 8, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S87-S88]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION
Mr. REID. Yesterday's vote to advance a measure which is so vitally
important to our country--to extend the lifeline to Americans who lost
their jobs during this great recession--was a very positive
development, but we are a long way from restoring benefits to 1.3
million people who have been looking for work for months, some of them
for years.
The few Republicans willing to even debate this measure have already
threatened to vote against even a short-term extension unless it is
fully paid for.
Let me start by saying I am opposed to offsetting the cost of
emergency unemployment benefits--I repeat, emergency unemployment
benefits. I don't understand why my Republican colleagues can't read
the script from the administration of their President, our President,
President Bush. Five times during his time in office--the second
President Bush--we extended emergency unemployment insurance benefits
by declaring an emergency, as we should now. We should realize that
today there is only one job available for every three people seeking a
job. Think about it.
This legislation calls for a 3-month extension. That is all. Let's
extend this now and give those people their benefits, and then we will
work to see whether we can come up with a long-term solution to this
issue. I have heard one of the leaders in the House, one of the
Republicans, say we need to do something about opportunities for jobs.
We agree. Let's see what we can come up with, but let's extend the
benefits for 3 months now.
Through the darkest days of the recession, these unemployment
benefits kept millions of Americans from descending into poverty.
I again urge my Republican colleagues in Congress to pass this 3-
month extension. It is what the American people want by a vast majority
of all political stripes. We need to do this so we can negotiate a
long-term solution to this issue. Any lapse or delay in benefits means
1.3 million people will be wondering whether they need to go to borrow
money again or to maybe see if they can figure out a way to buy baby
formula or gas for their car to go to a job interview if they are
fortunate to have a car or a bus ticket.
If Republicans are so interested in paying for this measure, they
should propose a reasonable way to do so that doesn't attack the
Affordable Care Act or punish American children, as the two proposals
they presented yesterday do--go after American children or the
Affordable Care Act. They should propose an offset that might actually
pass. Instead, they propose a string of political amendments, each more
doomed to failure than the last one they offered.
They should also stop masking their reluctance to extend these
benefits behind complaints about how many
[[Page S88]]
amendments they have been allowed to offer on this and other
legislation. Everyone within the sound of my voice should understand
that is hollow. It has become a common refrain for the minority to
blame their own frequent obstruction on me. Two Republican Senators
held up progress on virtually everything we tried to do under the first
term of this Congress. They wouldn't let any other amendments come up
unless they got a vote on their amendment.
The fact remains that if my Republican colleagues have complaints
about my leadership style, they should also have complaints about
Senator Frist, my predecessor. He is a fine man, a Republican leader.
We still stay in touch, as I do with the other Republican leader,
Senator Lott, whom I worked with very closely. I hear no complaints
about their leadership style when they were leading the Senate. During
my time as leader, Republicans have offered 7 out of 10 amendments on
which the Senate has voted. Seventy percent of the amendments we have
voted on in the Senate have been Republican amendments. This has been a
greater share than either Senator Frist or Senator Lott offered. During
my leadership in the 111th Congress, minority amendments represented a
greater share of amendment votes than during any single Congress. Think
about it.
So Republicans should stop trying to justify their opposition to
helping Americans in need with false claims about what is going on in
this institution. Let's start talking about facts rather than fiction--
and there is a lot of fiction going around. Republicans should, I
repeat, stop trying to justify their opposition to helping Americans in
need with false claims about my leadership.
It is quite interesting to note that House Republican leaders--and I
am sure they sent a copy of it to the Senate--have instructed
colleagues in a written memo. It says: Show compassion for the
unemployed.
I say to everyone that we don't need a memo for us to show compassion
to the unemployed.
They also say: Treat them as individuals.
Oh yeah? That is not a bad idea, but it will be very difficult for
Senate Republicans to seem sympathetic to the plight of the unemployed
while still opposing a helping hand for 1.3 million job seekers. It
shouldn't take a memo to realize that unemployed Americans--and
particularly those who have been out of work for months--deserve our
compassion. We don't need a memo for that, a memo saying: Show
compassion. No wonder Republicans in Congress are out of touch with
Republicans around the country. Republicans around the country support
extending unemployment benefits because they have compassion for those
Americans who are in trouble.
Being out of work is not only financially devastating, it is
heartbreaking. I recently received a letter from a single mother of two
who has lived in Nevada all of her life. She is afraid she will soon be
homeless--a single mother. She wrote: ``I have no desire to live off
the system.'' She is speaking for virtually everyone we are trying to
help. This woman is the rule, not the exception.
To qualify for unemployment is not easy. Someone has to be laid off
through no fault of their own, and they have to actively seek work.
These unemployed aren't gaming the system; there simply aren't enough
jobs to go around. For every job there are three people trying to get
that job. The longer a person is unemployed, the more difficult it
becomes to find work. This is not being made up; this is a fact. The
long-term unemployed are half as likely as their recently let-go
competitors to be hired. But that doesn't stop them from trying. Rather
than encouraging these people who are desperate for help to keep
looking, cutting off unemployment benefits actually encourages the
long-term unemployed to actually drop out of the job market altogether.
That doesn't help them, our communities, our States, and our country.
It hurts families, it hurts communities, and it certainly hurts the
economy.
____________________