[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 42 (Thursday, March 13, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H2411-H2417]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. POCAN. Mr. Speaker, I am glad to be here on behalf of the
Progressive Caucus today for the Progressive Caucus Special Order hour.
We want to talk about the need to extend unemployment benefits in this
country.
Since the end of December, millions of Americans have lost their
extended unemployment benefits and are struggling just to get by in
this economy.
We have had two really positive developments this week. One, the
House Democrats have an initiative, led by Representative Brad
Schneider of Illinois, to do a discharge petition, which is a
procedural motion to force the leadership of this body to let us vote
on extending unemployment benefits, which it refuses to do.
We have to get 218 signatures--a majority of the House--to sign the
discharge petition. If that happens, we can force a vote and make sure
that people who have lost their benefits since the end of December get
their benefits.
That is the first important thing that has happened.
The second important thing is, today, just this afternoon, it was
announced there is a bipartisan agreement in the Senate by several
senators to make sure that we can extend benefits through the month of
May of this year.
We need to do everything possible not only to make sure that the
Senate passes that, but to make sure that this House takes up that
action. Because if we don't, millions of people--and many more every
single week--will not get access to unemployment benefits.
So the Progressive Caucus is here today to highlight this issue and
to raise awareness and explain why it is so important that we pass
these benefits--and we pass them now--on behalf of the millions of
people in this country that need those.
I am joined by several of my colleagues here today. I would like to
make sure that they have a chance to talk about the unique situations
in their area and why this is so important.
I would first like to yield to my colleague from the great State of
Oregon, Representative Suzanne Bonamici.
Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Congressman Pocan. Thank you for
leading this discussion. The discussion about extending the emergency
unemployment compensation program is such an important topic.
Last week, the country marked a troubling milestone. The number of
Americans who lost their emergency unemployment insurance hit 2
million. Thousands more will lose this lifeline every week if we do not
extend this critical benefit.
The impact of losing unemployment benefits is immediate and
devastating to our constituents. I recently spoke to a constituent in
Oregon who was laid off from a large employer in my district. His
unemployment benefits ended early this year when the program was cut
off. Since then, unfortunately, things have gone from bad to worse. He
has been in his home for about 10 years, and now he is in default
because he cannot pay his mortgage.
I want to thank our colleague, Congressman Matt Cartwright, for
leading the effort to provide my constituents and yours the opportunity
to get a bit of relief. He is sponsoring the Stop Foreclosures Due to
Congressional Dysfunction Act. That would put a 6-month moratorium on
foreclosures of Federally-backed mortgages for individuals who have
exhausted their unemployment benefits.
I have to say this is the least that we can do for our constituents
who are still suffering because this House refuses to allow an ``up-or-
down'' vote on extending unemployment compensation.
My constituent is actively looking for work. He continues to look for
work. But he keeps getting passed over for jobs. They are being filled
by employers who seem to be looking for younger, maybe less expensive
workers.
He is one of many constituents across the country. What he and other
constituents like him tell me is that it is particularly difficult for
the more mature job seekers to find work, even though they have decades
of productive experience.
His efforts to find work haven't stopped. And I have to emphasize
this: the unemployment benefits that he was getting weren't making him
lazy. They were allowing him to survive. But instead of giving him the
resources he needs to help lift him up and out of this situation, we
are abandoning him and constituents across the country when they really
need that lifeline.
We need to extend this lifeline while we are tackling the problems of
long-term unemployment in this country. The long-term unemployed need
better access to job training; workforce development programs;
resources; programs to engage employers and help connect the long-term
unemployed, particularly older workers, with suitable employment.
All Americans must realize that being among the long-term unemployed
does not diminish one's abilities, value, or potential contribution to
the workforce and the economy. I want to emphasize that point, because
when I had a roundtable discussion in my district, there were several
constituents there who were unemployed. They get down and concerned
that they aren't worthy. We wanted to emphasize to them, You are
worthy. Keep looking. You can find work.
We should be extending this lifeline.
My home State of Oregon has been a bright spot in the midst of the
recovery. In January, Oregon recorded its lowest unemployment rate
since 2008. There is a recent report that shows that Oregon added more
than 43,000 jobs last year--that is great news--adding to the
unemployment base by 2.6 percent.
Unfortunately, the economic improvement provides little relief for
the still about 30,000 long-term unemployed Oregonians who have lost
these benefits over the last 2 months and are still struggling to
reenter the workforce.
They need these resources to have a car to get to job interviews, to
have a cell phone.
As the economy continues to recover, we must stimulate it, not stifle
it. The Emergency Unemployment Compensation program doesn't just help
the millions of Americans who are struggling to get by every day, it
provides an economic boost.
When people get these benefits, they aren't saving this money. They
put the benefits right back into the economy. While they look for work
they use the unemployment benefits to pay their mortgages, to buy
groceries, to keep the lights on.
We shouldn't be arguing over extending this lifeline to millions of
hardworking Americans. I was glad to hear the news that the Senate has
a bipartisan proposal. I hope they pass that and get it over to us
right away.
Yesterday, I joined many other of our colleagues in signing the
discharge petition calling for a vote to extend emergency unemployment.
There is no better cause than helping the hardworking members of our
country who desperately want to go back to work.
Thank you again, Representative Pocan, for organizing this hour. I
hope that we can draw the attention of the Nation, but especially of
our colleagues, about the effects of ending the benefit.
I urge our colleagues on the other side of the aisle and in
leadership to reconsider this and put it up for a vote so we can help
our constituents who are looking for work, trying to get back to work,
and need that lifeline.
Thank you again, Representative Pocan, for leading this important
discussion
Mr. POCAN. Thank you, Representative Bonamici. I am sorry to hear
about your constituent losing housing.
For the State of the Union in this very Chamber, I brought a
constituent of mine who had lost their benefits. Rather than be
foreclosed on, they put their home up for sale. They are still looking
for work.
It is a situation happening all too often. There is an article in
today's Huffington Post talking about the
[[Page H2412]]
number of people who are being evicted because they can no longer pay
their rent or mortgage simply because of the loss of benefits.
Thank you for sharing that story, and thank you for your work on
behalf of Oregon.
I would also like to yield to my colleague from California,
Representative Jared Huffman, who would like to talk a little bit about
the problem of extending unemployment benefits.
Representative Huffman.
Mr. HUFFMAN. I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for your
leadership in organizing this hour of debate on such an important
subject. I certainly want to lend my voice to the voices of my
colleagues on this important matter.
What we are asking for is very simple. We simply want an immediate
``up-or-down'' vote on whether to extend these Federal long-term
unemployment insurance benefits. We are asking that because I think in
all of our districts we see that too many of our constituents are
unnecessarily suffering from Congress' failure to act. We owe it to our
neighbors and their families--people who lost their jobs through no
fault of their own, people who want to work, who continually are
searching for work--we owe it to them to provide the support they need
to get back on their feet.
In my own home State of California, we have got over 339,000
Californians who have lost unemployment benefits. The number continues
to grow the longer Congress waits, the longer we fail to act.
California's currently got an unemployment rate of about 8.3 percent,
but in many parts of my district--I include some rural areas--that rate
is much higher. In fact, in Trinity County we have an unemployment rate
that is over 11 percent.
It is very important to remember that this is not an abstract issue.
This is an immediate and deeply personal issue about real people and
real struggles. Since the Federal benefits expired in December of last
year, I have received thousands of emails and phone calls from my
constituents asking for Congress to wake up and take action.
One of them very recently is a great example. It is from Lisa in
Eureka. She wrote to me:
I have been on unemployment for just over 6 months now and
I am not able to make my mortgage payment. I am a worker, not
a lazy bum. I want to work, and I am still looking and
hopeful. But in the meantime, I can't live without a little
help from unemployment.
That is very typical of the kind of feedback and pleas that I am
hearing and that I know you, Mr. Pocan, and many of us are hearing from
hardworking folks in our district every single day.
So, again, I think it is important to emphasize this is not a
handout. This is about offering a hand up to real people during a
difficult time. Without the extension of this crucial lifeline, 181,000
children in California--let's remember the impact on families and
children--will be hurt.
No one should be forced to make the unbearable choice between paying
their rent and feeding their family simply because they lost their job
due to no fault of their own. Extending these benefits should not
remain a casualty to congressional gridlock.
Just today, we got some great news. I think we are all encouraged
that Democrats and Republicans in the Senate are working together on a
tentative agreement to extend unemployment insurance benefits for 5
months--an agreement that, as I understand it, would provide
retroactive payments to people like Lisa in my district.
So, Mr. Speaker, let's help the economy. Let's help our constituents
who are looking for work. This House should follow the Senate's lead
and work together to find a solution.
Again, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin.
{time} 1830
Mr. POCAN. Thank you, Representative Huffman, for all the work on
behalf of your constituents in northern California. I appreciate your
words and sharing the story of your constituent.
Again, 72,000 people every single week will lose benefits until this
Congress acts, real people in California, Oregon, and real people in
the State of Illinois.
Next it is my privilege to yield time to the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Schneider), the person who led the initiative on behalf of the
House Democrats, led the initiative to discharge the bill so that we
could force a vote in this House to ensure that everyone across the
country and in the State of Illinois can get the benefits they need so
they can continue to get by to find work.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you again, Congressman Pocan, not just for your
friendship, but tonight for organizing and bringing us here to have
this conversation.
For us in Illinois and Wisconsin, throughout the country it has been
a harsh winter. Everyone has talked about the weather and the snow and
the storms, but for some it has been a harsher winter than for others.
In January, I hosted a roundtable on unemployment, long-term
unemployment. At that roundtable I met a young mother, 29 years old,
with two young children, and she told me how, at the end of the day,
she comes home, she makes dinner for her kids, and they crawl into bed
under the covers to eat dinner and watch TV because she had to make the
choice between paying her rent and paying her heat.
I met another woman who has been looking for work now for over a
year. Her story was a little different. She was in an industry, travel
agency, that is shrinking. She has two kids, high school age, who are
looking forward to going to college, and she is now in the position of
having to deplete the kids' college accounts so that they can simply
make ends meet as she looks for work.
This is the reality for 2 million people around the country, and the
numbers, as you have pointed out, grow by 72,000 people every single
week. In Illinois alone, there are more than 116,000 people who have
lost their unemployment insurance and are struggling just to survive.
Yet, in this Chamber, in this House of Representatives, we have not
had a single vote to extend or address the unemployment insurance
challenge. Partisan gridlock, partisanship and gridlock have already
cost millions their emergency unemployment insurance, and the next year
it is estimated that it will cost the U.S. economy 240,000 jobs.
Failing to extend unemployment insurance is hurting families, it is
hurting businesses, it is hurting our communities, and it is hurting
our national economy. That is why yesterday I filed this discharge
petition to end the gridlock and to bring to the floor a vote on
extending unemployment insurance.
Now, look, I understand some of my colleagues may disagree, and I
respect their perspective and I respect their right to vote ``no,'' but
not allowing a vote on the floor, not allowing us to voice our vote in
this House of Representatives on unemployment insurance is simply
unacceptable.
I believe extending unemployment insurance is not just smart policy,
it is the right thing to do. That is why I celebrate the passage, or
the agreement in the Senate, bipartisan agreement, to extend
unemployment insurance by 5 months. I look forward for that to come
into this House, and I hope we will have a chance to vote to it.
I know the path ahead is not going to be easy, but our constituents
deserve better than partisan gridlock.
Thank you for sharing your time, and thank you for organizing this
evening. Thank you so much.
Mr. POCAN. Thank you, Representative Schneider. Your efforts for this
body, leading the House Democrats on that discharge position--we didn't
know today the Senate was going to come up with something that may pass
and may be able to get through this House. But your leadership made
sure that those over 110,000 people in Illinois, and each and every
week more people adding to that, can get those benefits.
So thank you for your efforts. We hope that we can force this House
to have us vote to extend unemployment benefits.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. I hope it happens soon. Thank you.
Mr. POCAN. I would now like to yield to the gentlewoman from
Massachusetts (Ms. Clark), one of the newest Members of the House.
Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts. Thank you, Mr. Pocan, for your leadership
on
[[Page H2413]]
this critical issue. I also want to thank the gentleman from Illinois
for all he has done to try and bring this vote to the floor.
A majority of Americans support renewing unemployment insurance, but
the majority here in the House continue to show that they are out of
step with American families by refusing to extend unemployment
insurance for the 2 million Americans who need it, and the families of
my home district in Massachusetts are left to suffer because of it.
This out-of-touch majority has invested billions of dollars in tax
breaks for the ultra-rich and for wealthy corporations that have often
shipped our jobs overseas. Yet, they are refusing to help those who are
looking for work, our job-seekers who are struggling to care for their
families and put food on the table.
I cringe when I hear some of the Members of the majority blame
poverty on the poor, and then vote to give tax breaks for the wealthy.
It is the same majority that looks to slash the budget and put that
burden on the backs of our children and seniors.
Some have said that Democrats want to give children a full stomach
and an empty soul, but I would say, people who would deny a hungry
child lunch, they are the ones who need to worry about the condition of
their soul.
In Massachusetts, more than $100 million has been taken out of our
economy as Congress has failed to act on this issue. I signed the
discharge petition to force a vote on unemployment insurance on behalf
of the nearly 80,000 workers in Massachusetts who have lost their
unemployment benefits. They cannot afford to wait for the majority to
catch up with the rest of the country, who know this is the right thing
to do.
Again, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for this opportunity, and
I thank you for your work.
Mr. POCAN. Thank you so much. You deserve a lot of credit for hitting
the ground running in Congress. Thank you so much for representing the
people of Massachusetts so very ably and defending the unemployment
benefits that we need to extend.
This is something that--the Progressive Caucus, earlier this week,
released our budget, and our budget is the Better Off Budget, to make
sure that people are better off, their families, they have access to
opportunity for their families.
That budget offered extending the benefits to the full 99 weeks. So
the Progressive Caucus was there from the very beginning to make sure
that we can get these benefits extended for every single American, the
2 million Americans, including 40,000 people in the State of Wisconsin,
that they can get these benefits.
We are very proud that the Progressive Caucus looked at this as a
priority, and that is why so many Members tonight were here to discuss
it.
It is interesting, I am going to read a couple of quotes from people
that you wouldn't expect to hear coming out of the Progressive Caucus.
One is a quote from someone back in 1983, someone that often gets
quoted in this Chamber, but usually by people on the other side of the
aisle, former President Ronald Reagan. His quote was: ``Unemployment
insurance is a lifeline that extends to millions of Americans.'' A
lifeline. That is Ronald Reagan saying that unemployment insurance is a
lifeline to the Americans who need it. He got it, in 1983.
Now, let me read another quote. In the year 2002, another person that
people on this side of the aisle don't quote too often, former
President George W. Bush, this is what he said: ``These Americans rely
on their unemployment benefits. They need our assistance in these
difficult times, and we cannot let them down.''
We cannot let them down. That is from President George W. Bush. These
are two Republican leaders who understood that unemployment
compensation is not a political toy.
It is not something about brinksmanship. It is the demand that we
need to make sure that people who pay into the system, who have worked
hard and played by the rules all their lives, have that lifeline when
they need it because they have put in their dues. They have worked
hard, and now, through no fault of their own, they are out of work and
looking for work. We should be able to extend those benefits. So that
is exactly what we are here to talk about tonight.
Forty thousand people in my home State of Wisconsin, and more every
week, are losing their benefits because this Congress has refused to
act up to now.
Now, they still can either act through the discharge petition the
Democrats have put forth, they can sign the discharge petition to make
sure we can get a vote in this body, or we can hope that the Senate
does pass this bipartisan deal just from this afternoon, come to this
House, and see that we do the right thing here and extend the benefits
so that 72,000 people each and every week don't continue to lose their
benefits.
This costs the economy. It was mentioned earlier, but it has been
estimated, just in January and February alone, we have cost the economy
$3 billion by not extending these benefits, and that is more than $51
million in my home State of Wisconsin, just during the months of
January and February.
Folks, we need to make sure these benefits are passed, not just for
the families struggling, but for our economy that is also struggling.
We are coming back, but we can't keep putting roadblocks in front of
our economy, things like this, that stop unemployment benefits for all
too many Americans.
Now, it also is estimated that this will cost the economy 240,000
jobs this year alone by not extending the benefits, 240,000 jobs.
So here we are trying to bring the economy back, and by not doing the
right thing, by not extending the unemployment benefits, we are going
to cost 240,000 jobs in this country, on top of the people now who
don't have benefits.
Now, you heard some stories tonight from people who talked about
constituents, telling their very real stories about what this means to
them.
Well, let me tell you about a constituent I had who came in this very
body, and I quickly referenced it before: Brian Krueger of Mount Horeb,
a hardworking person, a steamfitter.
As we know, the construction industry, when the economy gets a cold,
the construction industry gets pneumonia. That is just the way it
happens. It dries up even more. So people aren't back to work yet in
this industry.
This is a hardworking person who was working as a steamfitter, trying
to find work. His benefits were cut off at the end of December, and he
is struggling to get by, looking for work each and every single day.
He even put his home up for sale so that it wouldn't be foreclosed
on, just as he is trying get by, someone who has played by the rules
and worked hard each and every single day.
Today there is an article in the Huffington Post, Mr. Speaker, and I
am going to read a little bit from that. The headline was: ``Some
Jobless Facing Eviction After Loss of Benefits.''
These are the very real stories that you were just hearing a little
bit earlier tonight. Let me tell some more of these stories, and I am
going to read directly from The Huffington Post article:
Craig Bruce, 45, told The Huffington Post that he and his
wife were evicted Tuesday from their apartment in California.
He said they're fighting the eviction in court, but they
spent Tuesday night in a motel room and bunked with family
Wednesday.
``I can't get a job. Either I'm over-qualified or somebody
else is closer and they don't have to pay them any moving
fees to take the job,'' he told the Huffington Post.
Bruce, a gulf war veteran, lost his quality assurance
analyst job at an engineering company in the fall of 2012. He
said his unemployment's been hard on him and his wife, who is
still looking for work in quality assurance.
``There's been a lot of depression on my end,'' he said.
``She's scared. She's terrified right now.''
That is a real story of a real person who has worked hard and had a
job for many years who, because of the economy, is out of work and
can't get the benefits. And the result of this body not acting, the
result has been he has been evicted from his home as of Tuesday.
That is wrong. That is not America. That is not the way we should be
acting.
Now, I want to yield some time to the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Jeffries), another colleague of mine, someone who has been a fighter
for
[[Page H2414]]
working families throughout New York and across the country.
Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank my good friend, the distinguished gentleman
from the Badger State, for yielding some time, as well as for the
leadership that you have continued to provide, week after week, in the
context of this Congressional Progressive Caucus Special Order, and on
behalf of the people that you represent, and indeed, people all across
America, in bringing issues to the forefront that we, in this House of
Representatives, should be dealing with in order to improve the quality
of life of everyone who we represent.
Now, unfortunately, I stand today on the House floor again, finding
myself in a situation where the only obstacle to progress is the House
GOP majority. Once again, we are placed in a situation where the
American people could stand to benefit from congressional action, but,
because of obstinacy and obstruction on the other side, you have got
close to 2 million long-term unemployed Americans who find themselves
in a distressed financial situation.
Now, earlier today we were informed that a bipartisan agreement was
reached in the Senate and, hopefully, that means we will see progress
in that Chamber at some point this month, which means that we have a
real opportunity here in the House of Representatives to act in a
manner that would benefit long-term unemployed Americans.
Why should we do that?
Well, because there are many individuals all across this country, in
the district that I represent in Brooklyn and in Queens, but all across
America, who find themselves unemployed, not because of their lack of
interest, not because of lack of effort, not because of an
unwillingness to work, but because of structural changes that have
occurred in our economy, particularly in the aftermath of the Great
Recession of 2008.
{time} 1845
We know that when the economy collapsed in 2008, that didn't have
anything to do with folks on Main Street America. That didn't have
anything to do with folks in urban America, in the district that I
represent. That didn't have anything to do with folks in rural America
who are struggling.
It was because of the behavior of some reckless institutions on Wall
Street and connected to the financial services industry whose actions
collapsed the world's economy, and Americans have suffered as a result,
so those consequences are still being felt.
We are no longer technically in a recession. This is one of the
arguments that our good friends on the other side of the aisle point
out. So what is the emergency? The emergency is you still have an
unacceptably high unemployment rate, and a disproportionately high
number of those individuals happen to be long-term unemployed.
Now, the argument that is often advanced by our good friends on the
other side of the aisle, as they attempt to justify the obstruction
that has taken place in blocking unemployment insurance from being
extended, is that we are enabling these individuals--enabling these
individuals. What kind of myth is that? There is no evidence to support
that argument.
First of all, it is important to note that, in order to qualify for
unemployment insurance, as the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin
knows, you have to demonstrate conclusively that you are actively
engaged in an employment search. Otherwise, you are ineligible.
There is this caricature that has been created, as if these are these
individuals who are sitting at home like couch potatoes, channel
surfing, whose only exercise is when they run outside of the house in
order to pick up the unemployment insurance check from the mailbox, and
then run back in and continue to channel surf.
Can't we have an evidence-based discussion, Mr. Speaker, as opposed
to fictional caricatures created to justify your harshness and refusal
to move forward and provide assistance to these unemployed Americans?
We know it is a fictional caricature that you have created to justify
your indifference because the facts suggest otherwise.
We know that, for every 258 Americans who are searching for
employment, only 100 jobs exist. I am no mathematician, but it suggests
to me that, given the nature of the economy, it is impossible for every
one of those individuals who would otherwise be eligible for
unemployment insurance to secure employment because of structural
realities in the economy.
That doesn't even account for the fact that, often, there will be a
skills mismatch as our economy continues to change, a shift away from
manufacturing jobs and a shift into technology and innovation. That is
a good thing, but there is a skills mismatch that has to be dealt with.
So the choice that we have been given is to deem these individuals
and brand them as lazy Americans when the facts are to the contrary?
Why? Why would we leave these unemployed Americans on the recessionary
battlefield?
We know that there has been a very schizophrenic recovery. Corporate
profits are way up. Unemployment is still up, but the stock market is
up, and CEO compensation is up; yet middle class families and those who
aspire to be part of the middle class are increasingly struggling in
America.
Whenever I am back home in Brooklyn, I am often approached by
individuals who are in fear that they could lose their home, given the
reality that they have been harshly and callously cut off by the
obstruction of the House GOP majority.
I am just hopeful that for the good of America--because there are
unemployed in blue States, and there are unemployed in red States;
there are unemployed individuals in urban America, in suburban America,
in rural America, all across this great country. Can't we find the
compassion and the will to address this issue?
As I prepare to take my seat and yield back to the distinguished
gentleman, I would also point out that what has occurred here is
another example of us here in this Congress doing things affirmatively
to prevent jobs from being created.
We allowed sequestration to take effect on April 1 of last year,
notwithstanding the fact that independent economists suggested that we
would lose 750,000 jobs in America if we allowed it to occur; yet the
majority steadfastly stood behind sequestration. Then in October of
2013, we had a reckless, unreasonable, unnecessary government shutdown.
It cost the economy $24 billion, according to Standard and Poor's, in
lost economic productivity. Well, you complain that Americans are
supposedly sitting at home channel surfing, staying on the couch, not
looking for work while you affirmatively damage the economy.
Now, as a result of your failure to deal with the unemployment
insurance issue, if this were to continue throughout this year, you
will cost us another 200,000 jobs.
I will just say that for a wide variety of reasons--because it is in
the best interests of the American economy, the best interests of the
people that we represent, and that it represents the best values of
America--that we allow a vote to take place on the floor of the House
of Representatives because I am confident, Mr. Speaker, that if you do,
the votes exist to pass this into law, and we can put this sad chapter
in the 113th Congress behind us.
I thank the distinguished gentleman again for his continued
leadership.
Mr. POCAN. Thank you so much, Representative Jeffries, for your
always eloquent fight on behalf of the working people across the State
of New York and the need for the benefits.
I am glad you debunked some of the myths that are out there because I
remember, during the debate we had on food stamps, there was discussion
of a surfer dude from California who talked about gaming the system.
We were basically cutting $39 billion from food stamps because there
was a surfer who abused the system from the State of California. Rather
than governing by analysis, they govern by anecdote, and it is
something that we need to get done and this body needs to get done.
Let me just share one final story, if I can, of someone from the
State of California, again, from The Huffington Post article. This is
Ricki Ward of Rancho Cucamonga, California, and I will read from the
article.
Ward, who told The Huff Post Tuesday that she expects to be
evicted next month, said she has worked all her life from
paycheck to paycheck and raised two kids as a single
[[Page H2415]]
mother. For the past 5 years, Ward worked in offices, retail
stores, and fast food before being laid off from a customer
service job for a cable provider in March 2013.
Ward said she suspects she is having difficulty finding
work because of her age.
``I took the year that I graduated from high school off of
my resume, and I started getting calls,'' Ward said. ``Yet
once they saw me, I wasn't what they wanted for their front
counter. I'm 59 years old, but I'm a very young 59 years old.
I keep myself in good shape. I'm nowhere near ready to stop
working.''
She said her landlord has been fair with her and that she
has received some help from family and friends, but she keeps
falling further behind.
``It's so humiliating to have to have everybody else try to
take care of you,'' Ward said. ``It's just not what I'm used
to. I've worked all my life.''
These are the stories that we have talked about during this past hour
from people across the country who, again, have played by the rules,
worked hard and, because of a turn in the economy a few years ago, have
lost work.
The commitment that we have to those people is that if they are
working hard. We need to do everything we can to make sure that they
have the help that they have paid into: unemployment benefits. We need
to, in a time like this, pass those emergency benefits.
I would like to yield my final time to a Representative from Ohio who
has done an absolutely amazing job for a number of years representing
her constituents and is a great University of Wisconsin alumni.
I have to say that, being from Wisconsin, but she is a great
colleague, Representative Marcy Kaptur from the great State of Ohio.
Ms. KAPTUR. I want to thank Congressman Pocan for just a phenomenal
presentation this evening and for lifting up those across our country
who worked hard for a living and have fallen on hard times.
Trying to hold their families together, they go try to get a job, and
1,000 people show up for one job. What are they supposed to do? They
have lost footing. They haven't been able to make their mortgage
payments. They can't send their kids to college. Many of them get sick.
They lose their health benefits. It is not so easy getting a job in
today's America.
You have been such a leader not just on unemployment benefit
extensions, but also on job creation. Since we are commemorating the
second anniversary of the passage of the U.S.-Korean so-called ``free-
trade agreement,'' I thought I would bring a startling chart to the
floor to show why we have unemployment in this country.
One of the aspects of the U.S.-Korean so-called ``free-trade
agreement,'' passed 2 years ago without my support, was that we were
supposed to increase exports and decrease imports.
It was supposed to actually be good for America. We were supposed to
create more jobs here at home when, in fact, we have actually lost
40,000 jobs when they told us we were going to gain 70,000 jobs as a
result of that agreement. Those people who were supposed to have those
jobs fell on unemployment benefits, large numbers of them.
Here is a chart that shows what has happened. This gives you a sense
of how big the difference is.
All right. The idea is we are supposed to export cars from here to
Korea. Well, guess what, folks? This is how much we export; and this is
how much they export to us, so we have fallen so deeply in the red.
What happens is, with every $1 billion of trade deficit, you get
another 4,000 people out of work. Factories shut down. Suppliers shut
down. The math is very simple. You just need to understand it.
Now, you know, if you look at the individuals who stand in those
unemployment lines, they were told that we were supposed to sell
thousands and thousands of vehicles to Korea.
Well, I will tell you what: we have sold 3,400 more vehicles in that
country--3,400.
Guess how much--since the trade agreement was signed with Korea, how
many more they have sold to us. 125,000. 125,000.
Now, according to my math, they have sold to us 121,600 more cars
than we have sold them. That means unemployment in Wisconsin. It means
unemployment in Ohio. It means unemployment across this country. It
means unemployment in the steel industry, unemployment in the machine
tool industry. You can tick it off.
Now, they tell us agriculture was supposed to save us. Right? We have
positive trade accounts in agriculture, and we are supposed to increase
our exports to Korea. Guess what has happened. They are off by 41
percent--not just 4 percent, but 41 percent.
Our exports of poultry have fallen since this agreement was signed by
39 percent. Pork exports are down 34 percent. Beef exports are down to
Korea 6 percent. U.S. meat producers have lost a combined total of $442
million in poultry, beef, and pork exports to Korea in the first 22
months of the agreement. That means more than $20 million lost every
month.
So, Congressman Pocan, I am sure you have seen the impacts of this in
Wisconsin. We have certainly seen it in Ohio, and we see these big
trainloads coming through on rail of all these cars that they bring in
here from the west coast that come from points over the Pacific or the
Atlantic coming in to our country.
If you go to those countries and you look around on the streets, they
not only don't buy U.S. cars; they don't buy cars from anyplace else
but themselves.
{time} 1900
So part of what we are doing with unemployment benefits is we are
trying to make up for failures in our trade policy that have turned
people away, away from the world of work and trying to struggle to make
ends meet.
I will insert into the Record tonight a special report done by Public
Citizen regarding the impacts of the U.S.-Korean so-called free trade
agreement, and if this is the same template that the administration
intends to use for bringing trade promotion authority in the Trans-
Pacific Partnership Agreement up here, don't even start. Don't even
start, because we have to reduce this and increase this, and until an
agreement does that, we are not going to create more jobs in this
country.
I will show you something. This is the big hole we are digging out
of. We hear a lot about the budget deficit. Well, why do we have a
budget deficit? We have a budget deficit because we have a trade
deficit. We have had it now for one-quarter century, and every time we
get into another one of those trade deals that are lopsided, what
happens? We go deeper, deeper, and deeper into trade deficit. More and
more companies close down; more and more people lose their work; and
then we have to subsidize the differential between imports and exports
through unemployment benefits.
We are trying to keep the hold, but we are not addressing this
problem. This is after China PNTR. They told us: Oh, that will be so
great; we are going to sell all this stuff to China. We fell deeper
into deficit.
CAFTA--then they told us: Oh, Latin America, that will make it
better. This is after Korea. It went down again.
What are we doing to America? We are ceding away our sovereignty in
industry after industry. They have always said that electronics are
going to save us. Those big, bad auto States? We are going to do
better. Well, guess what? We have now fallen into deficit in advanced
electronics. We are not even succeeding in exporting those. The people
of this country have to pay attention because the heart and soul is
being chipped away piece by piece. Try to find something made in this
country--coats? shoes? cars? Some.
What we have is state economies like China competing against merchant
economies like our own. And the auto industry got in such shape that it
took the Government of the United States to prop it up and save it. We
were faced with: Will the United States have an automobile industry or
not? That is going to happen in other sectors. That is going to happen
in steel, and that is going to happen in shoes. They didn't even fight.
But if you look at every sector, unemployment, unemployment,
unemployment--appliances, unemployment.
You can see it by census statistics. No matter what community you go
to, we have had these lost jobs; and you look over 10 years, 2000 to
2010, poverty quadruples. Don't tell me those people don't want to
work. They had jobs. The jobs disappeared.
[[Page H2416]]
You can go to these sweatshop countries and you can go find the
production. Guess what? You can find TRICO now in Mexico. They used to
make windshield wipers in Buffalo, New York. It was a major employer.
The man who founded the company had a decent soul. He had a huge
foundation that helped that community. It still does to this day. But
all those jobs have moved down south of the border. No decent wage, no
benefits, nothing. No corporate conscience at all.
That is happening from one end of this country to the other. America
has a rude awakening ahead of her. It goes through Democratic and
Republican administrations, and the American people know it. They know
that it doesn't change here. Unemployment benefits are the least we can
do for the American people--the people who went to work, they believed
in making a good product, and now they have fallen onto hard times.
Don't tell me it is all their fault.
I have done job fairs in my district. Thousands of people show up.
There aren't enough jobs for everyone that wants to work. I would
invite any President, any former President.
I would like to invite George Bush II to travel with me, because he
came to my district. I would like to take him and show him where in
Mexico these jobs have gone. Come with me to Guangdong province in
China. I will show you where our jobs have gone. I will take you to
Honduras. Then, do you know what? I am going to make everybody who
comes with me work like those women work, and then you tell me why we
face an unemployment benefit crisis in this country and what kind of a
society we have here.
Those are earned benefits. Those belong to the people who have
devoted their lives to going to work, earning a living, and trying to
get ahead in an honorable way and in an honest way, and they deserve
them.
So I want to thank you, Congressman Pocan, for giving me time this
evening.
Mr. Speaker, I place this article from Public Citizen in the Record
that summarizes everything that has gone haywire with the U.S.-Korean
so-called free trade agreement.
On Second Anniversary of U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, U.S. Exports
Down 11 Percent, Imports From Korea Up and Deficit With Korea Balloons
47 Percent--Fueling Congressional Skepticism About Obama TPP Export
Promises
Export Decline Hits U.S. Farmers and Auto Workers Particularly Hard,
Dismal Outcomes of Pact-Used as TPP Template Will Bolster Opposition to
Obama Bid for Fast Track Authority
Washington, DC.--Two years after the implementation of the
U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (FTA), government data reveal
that the Obama administration's promises that the pact would
expand U.S. exports and create U.S. jobs are exactly opposite
of the actual outcomes: a downfall in U.S. exports to Korea,
rising imports and a surge in the U.S. trade deficit with
Korea. Using the administration's export-to-job ratio, the
estimated drop in net U.S. exports to Korea in the FTA's
first two years represents the loss of more than 46,600 U.S.
jobs.
The damaging Korea FTA record, detailed in a new Public
Citizen report, undermines the administration's attempt to
use the same failed export growth promises to sell an already
skeptical Congress on Fast Track authority for the Trans-
Pacific Partnership (TPP), a sweeping deal for which the
Korea FTA was the template.
Contrary to the administration's promise that the Korea FTA
would mean ``more exports, more jobs'':
U.S. goods exports to Korea have fallen below the pre-FTA
average monthly level for 21 out of 22 months since the deal
took effect.
The United States has lost an average of $385 million each
month in exports to Korea, given an 11 percent decline in the
average monthly export level in comparison to the year before
the deal.
The United States lost an estimated, cumulative $9.2
billion in exports to Korea under the FTA's first two years,
compared with the exports that would have been achieved at
the pre-FTA level.
Average monthly exports of U.S. agricultural products to
Korea have fallen 41 percent.
The average monthly U.S. automotive trade deficit with
Korea has grown 19 percent.
The U.S. exports downfall is particularly concerning given
that Korea's overall imports from all countries increased by
2 percent over the past two years (from 2011 to 2013).
The average monthly trade deficit with Korea has ballooned
47 percent in comparison to the year before the deal. As U.S.
exports to Korea have declined under the FTA, average monthly
imports from Korea have risen four percent. The total U.S.
trade deficit with Korea under the FTA's just-completed
second year is projected to be $8.6 billion higher than in
the year before the deal, assuming that trends during the
FTA's first 22 months continue for the remaining two months
for which data is not yet available.
Meanwhile, U.S. services exports to Korea have slowed under
the FTA. While U.S. services exports to Korea increased at an
average quarterly rate of 3.0 percent in the year before the
FTA took effect, the average quarterly growth rate has fallen
to 2.3 percent since the deal's enactment--a 24 percent drop.
``Most Americans won't be surprised that another NAFTA-
style deal is causing damage, but it's stunning that the
administration thinks the public and Congress won't notice if
it recycles the promises used to sell the Korea pact--now
proven empty--to push a Trans-Pacific deal that is literally
based on the Korea FTA text,'' said Lori Wallach, director of
Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. ``The new evidence of
the Korea FTA's damaging record is certain to make it even
more difficult for the Obama administration to get Congress
to delegate its constitutional trade authority via Fast Track
for the TPP.''
The decline in U.S. exports under the Korea FTA contributed
to an overall zero percent growth in U.S. exports in 2013,
rendering virtually impossible Obama's stated goal to double
exports by the end of 2014. At the export growth rate seen
over the past two years, the export-doubling goal would not
be reached until 2054. While the Korea pact is the only U.S.
FTA that has led to an actual decline in U.S exports, the
overall growth of U.S. exports to nations that are not FTA
partners has exceeded combined U.S. export growth to U.S. FTA
partners by 30 percent over the past decade.
``The data simply do not support the Obama administration's
tired pitch that more FTAs will bring more exports,'' said
Wallach. ``Faced with falling exports and rising, job-
displacing deficits under existing FTAs, the administration
needs to find a new model, not to repackage an old one that
patently failed.''
The Korea FTA has produced very few winners; since the FTA
took effect, U.S. average monthly exports to Korea have
fallen in 11 of the 15 sectors that export the most to Korea,
relative to the year before the FTA. And while losing sectors
have faced relatively steep export declines (e.g. a 12
percent drop in computer and electronics exports, a 30
percent drop in mineral and ore exports), none of the winning
sectors has experienced an average monthly export increase of
greater than two percent. Ironically, many sectors that the
administration promised would be the biggest beneficiaries of
the Korea FTA have been some of the deal's largest losers.
AGRICULTURE: While the administration argued for passage of
the FTA in 2011 by claiming, ``The U.S.-Korea trade agreement
creates new opportunities for U.S. farmers, ranchers and food
processors seeking to export to Korea's 49 million
consumers,'' average monthly exports of U.S. agricultural
products to Korea have fallen 41 percent under the FTA.
U.S. average monthly poultry exports to Korea have fallen
39 percent.
U.S. average monthly pork exports to Korea have fallen 34
percent.
U.S. average monthly beef exports to Korea have fallen 6
percent.
Compared with the exports that would have been achieved at
the pre-FTA average monthly level, U.S. meat producers have
lost a combined $442 million in poultry, pork and beef
exports to Korea in the first 22 months of the Korea deal--a
loss of more than $20 million in meat exports every month.
AUTOS AND AUTO PARTS: The administration also promised the
Korea FTA would bring ``more job-creating export
opportunities in a more open and fair Korean market for
America's auto companies and auto workers,'' while a special
safeguard would ``ensure . . . that the American industry
does not suffer from harmful surges in Korean auto imports
due to this agreement.'' The U.S. average monthly automotive
exports to Korea under the FTA have been $12 million higher
than the pre-FTA monthly average, but the average monthly
automotive imports from Korea have soared by $263 million
under the deal--a 19 percent increase. So while U.S. auto
exports have risen very modestly under the FTA, those tiny
gains have been swamped by a surge in auto imports from Korea
that the administration promised would not occur under the
FTA.
In January 2014, monthly auto imports from Korea topped $2
billion for the first time on record.
About 125,000 more Korean-produced Hyundais and Kias were
imported and sold in the United States in 2013 (after the
FTA) than in 2011 (before the FTA).
Sales of U.S.-produced Fords, Chryslers and Cadillacs in
Korea increased by just 3,400 vehicles.
The post-FTA flood of automotive imports has provoked a 19
percent increase in the average monthly U.S. auto trade
deficit with Korea. The Obama administration has sought to
distract from this dismal result by touting the percentage
increase in U.S. auto sales to Korea. This allows the sale of
a small number of cars beyond the small pre-FTA base of sales
to appear to be a significant gain when in fact it is not.
Mr. POCAN. Thank you so much, Representative Kaptur, again for your
history of support not only for working families across Ohio. I know we
are
[[Page H2417]]
going to talk more about trade in this body. Thank you for sharing that
information.
With that, I am going to close the Special Order hour for the
Progressive Caucus. It is imperative that this body pass the extension
of the emergency unemployment benefits. The House Democrats have filed
a discharge petition. We will do everything we can to force a vote off
that; but we are hoping that the Senate, now that they have a
bipartisan agreement, can get that passed as well.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time on behalf of the
Progressive Caucus.
____________________