[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 193 (Tuesday, November 28, 2017)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1607-E1608]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        INTRODUCTION OF THE REDUCING LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYMENT ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, November 28, 2017

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the Reducing Long-Term 
Unemployment Act to address one of the lingering workforce tragedies in 
today's economy--our long-term unemployed--and to keep the economy 
growing. Although the overall unemployment rate has fallen to 
approximately four percent, Americans who have remained unemployed for 
longer than 27 weeks have not enjoyed a similar recovery. In October 
2017, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or 
more) was 1.6 million, which accounted for 24.8 percent of the total 
unemployed population.
  To make matters even worse, the long-term unemployed now face 
employment discrimination as employers show reluctance to hire these 
job-seekers because of the length of their unemployment. Therefore, my 
bill provides a necessary incentive to hire the long-term unemployed--a 
$5,000 tax credit for employers against their payroll tax liability for 
each (net) new long-term unemployed person they hire. This tax credit 
is large enough to give employers an incentive to increase the hiring 
and wages of those who have been unjustifiably left behind, while 
ensuring that the economy benefits from their participation. The credit 
would be available to the broadest base of employers because every 
employer, including nonprofits, pays payroll taxes, and employers could 
claim the credit on a quarterly, rather than annual, basis. According 
to the independent, non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the 
proposal would ``increase both output and employment'' through four 
mechanisms: (1) with lower employment costs, employers would reduce the 
costs of their products and services, which, in turn, would first

[[Page E1608]]

boost sales and then hiring and hours worked; (2) employers would pass 
on some of the tax savings to employees in the form of higher wages or 
other compensation, which, in turn, would increase employees' 
purchasing power; (3) higher profits would lead to higher stock prices 
for public companies, increasing shareholders' wealth and therefore 
their willingness to spend; and (4) with lower employment costs, 
employers would increase hiring. The bill has safeguards to prevent 
employers from gaming the system, including denying a credit to an 
employer that fires one employee and hires a replacement in order to 
take advantage of the incentive.
  For some time, it has been clear that targeted policies are necessary 
to address today's stubborn long-term unemployment rates. Without 
significant targeting, the long-term unemployed are in danger of 
becoming permanently unemployed. This group of competent and 
experienced Americans deserves better.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

                          ____________________