[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 56 (Thursday, March 30, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2148-S2149]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW ACT RESOLUTIONS
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I wish to express my
disappointment in today's vote on H.J. Res. 67 and my strong opposition
to H.J. Res. 66. These resolutions overturn rules issued by the
Department of Labor that are essential to providing increased access to
retirement savings programs at the city and State levels.
Among all working families in America ages 32 to 61, the median
family in America had only $5,000 saved in 2013. This indicates to me
that we are clearly facing a retirement savings crisis.
In California, 7.5 million workers don't have access to a retirement
savings plan through their jobs, including 3.4 million women. Of those
without a workplace retirement savings plan, almost 5 million are
individuals of Color, and over 3.5 million are Latino.
The good news is that, when a person has access to a retirement
savings program through their workplace, they are 15 times more likely
to save for retirement.
In California, legislators have been working for more than 4 years to
create the Secure Choice program as a way of addressing the retirement
crisis we face. This program allows workers to easily save for
retirement through a deduction made directly from their paycheck.
Those who need access to a workplace retirement program the most,
individuals with lower incomes, are far less likely to have that
access. These are the people who stand to gain the most from the Secure
Choice program and lose the most by Congress halting its progress.
Let me share some examples of the people who would be impacted. Most
eligible employees work for small businesses that might not be able to
offer retirement savings plans on their own, and nearly half of
eligible workers work in the retail, hospitality, healthcare, and
manufacturing industries.
This program supports lower- and middle-class workers by providing
access to the tools they need to control their financial future. The
average wage of workers eligible for this program is $35,000, and 80
percent of eligible workers earn less than $50,000.
We are facing a time of deep income inequality and must stand up for
programs that support the middle class, like Secure Choice. Nationwide,
the bottom 90 percent of households have seen their income drop
compared to what it was in 1970. Meanwhile, the top 1 percent has seen
their household income triple.
As workers struggle to make ends meet, it is appalling to me that
Congress would actively take away a key resource for financial
planning.
Californians want to ensure that all employees have access to a
retirement savings program. The Department of Labor's State rule clears
the way for California to set up programs like Secure Choice by
clarifying employers' obligations to the accounts.
This rule would also help small businesses compete for qualified
workers who expect and deserve access to a workplace retirement savings
program. Small Business California supports the Department of Labor's
rule paving the way for these programs and opposes this resolution.
Finally, in California, our State chapter of the Chamber of Commerce
specifically asked for an opinion from
[[Page S2149]]
the Department of Labor on employer obligations. Once the Department of
Labor's rule was issued, CalChamber no longer opposed the California
bill.
In fact, the legislation that passed in California requires the State
board to report a finalized rule from the Department of Labor.
Overturning the Department of Labor's rule completely ignores the
effort and care taken in California to craft a program that works for
both employees and employers.
Nationally, almost half of working-age households do not have
retirement savings accounts, and 55 million people don't have access to
a workplace retirement plan. This is shocking.
According to the Economic Policy Institute, the median retirement
account savings for families ages 56 to 61 was only $17,000 in 2013.
This is only slightly higher than the 2016 poverty threshold for a
household of two people aged 65 and older. It is inconceivable that a
family could afford to finance their retirement with only $17,000 in
savings.
Supporting retirement savings is not a partisan issue. In fact a
bipartisan group of State treasurers oppose this resolution, as does
the National Conference of State Legislatures.
We are facing a retirement savings crisis in our country, and the
Department of Labor's rule is a simple, commonsense guideline that make
it easier for individuals to save for retirement.
While today's vote is a disappointing development for city programs,
I will keep fighting to support California's Secure Choice program. I
strongly urge my colleagues to stand up for American workers and
support their access to retirement savings programs by opposing H.J.
Res. 66, should it come up for a vote on the Senate floor.
Thank you.
____________________