[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 21]
[Senate]
[Pages 28866-28867]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  THE UNEMPLOYMENT PROBLEM IN AMERICA

  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, we just completed 30 hours of debate on 
judicial nominees, an obviously important debate for all Members who 
participated. But it is time for us to address the unemployment problem 
in America, and the fact that this body cannot adjourn for the year 
without passing an unemployment benefit extension.
  Many of my colleagues will remember last year we were at this same 
point, when unemployment benefits were going to expire in December. We 
had a debate about whether that was necessary to do by the time we 
adjourned. I can tell you that not a lot has changed in Washington 
State. We still have 7.6-percent unemployment and a very high level at 
the national level, at 6 percent. Americans want to know whether they 
are going to have an extension of those benefits.
  During the Bush and Clinton administrations we extended unemployment 
benefits for an extension of over 30 weeks during that time period 
because we thought it was important to make sure people were covered. 
During the economic downturn, unemployment benefits are a stimulus. For 
every dollar spent on unemployment benefits it generates $2.15 as far 
as the economy--that is mortgage payments that can be made, health care 
benefits that can be extended.
  While my colleagues think last year's solution of coming back in 
January and fixing this unemployment benefit problem was a solution, I 
guarantee it was not. Adjourning from here without expanding 
unemployment benefits is like putting a lump of coal in the stockings 
of Americans at Christmastime.
  There were individuals in my State who, because of the failure of us 
acting, really did make economic choices about their future. I had a 
constituent who took a big chunk out of her pension program at a 30-
percent penalty, basically trading her long-term economic future off 
for short-term returns because we hadn't given her a commitment on 
unemployment benefits.

[[Page 28867]]




                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 1853

  I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to legislative session and 
the Finance Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 
1853, a bill to extend unemployment benefit insurance for displaced 
workers, and that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration, 
that the bill be read a third time and passed, and the motion to 
reconsider be laid on the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Reserving the right to object, I ask unanimous consent 
that I may ask the Senator from Washington a question while reserving 
my right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, in asking this question, is the Senator 
from Washington aware, back in 1993 when the Democrats controlled the 
House, the Senate, and the White House the rate of unemployment was 
higher than it is today and that every Democrat in the House and the 
Senate and the President signed a bill to terminate the program when 
the unemployment rate was higher? Is the Senator from Washington aware 
of that fact?
  Ms. CANTWELL. I am not aware to what the Senator from Nevada is 
referring. I know during the Bush and Clinton administrations, with a 
richer package of 20 weeks after a Federal program on extension, richer 
than the 13 weeks that we have now, we extended that over a 30-month 
period of time.
  So far this administration has only done that over a 22-month period 
of time. While we all want the economy to recover, and we all want to 
put Americans back to work--I guarantee these individuals would rather 
have a paycheck than an unemployment check--we need to do a better job 
making sure that we are making a commitment to unemployment benefits 
before we adjourn for the session.
  We just spent all this time debating judicial nominees. I think it 
was a hardy debate on both sides. But let's give the American people 
and those who are suffering from unemployment the benefit of knowing 
that they will get this benefit extension before we adjourn.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, the fact is, when the Democrats were in 
control of all three bodies, the Democrats terminated the program of 
extending unemployment benefits at the Federal level. They terminated 
the program.
  More people were unemployed at that time when they terminated the 
program. It is good enough today. The economy is recovering. It is 
producing jobs. Therefore, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Pennsylvania.

                          ____________________