[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 14328-14329]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      ON OPTIMISM AND THE ECONOMY

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, we hear a lot these days about how 
essential optimism is to economic growth and progress. These 
discussions remind me of that old saying that ``an optimist is someone 
who believes we're living in the best of all possible worlds, and a 
pessimist is someone who fears this may be true.'' By those 
definitions, there are probably very few optimists or pessimists in 
America because we all know that America's economy today is not the 
best possible.
  This morning, I want to say a few words about how we can strengthen 
our economy and create new jobs and a brighter future for hard-working 
middle-class families in America.
  We are all relieved that the economy has finally started adding more 
jobs each month than it is shedding. After 2\1/2\ years in which our 
economy lost jobs every month, these new jobs are good news--especially 
for the millions of Americans who are looking for work. But there are 
still over a million fewer jobs in America today than there were 4 
years ago. In addition, the latest job-growth figures, released last 
Friday, were considerably weaker than most analysts had predicted. That 
disappointing news reminds us that optimism alone is not a national 
economic policy. What we need is realism.
  Many proposals have been introduced in this Senate to create jobs and 
to help people who have lost jobs find new ones. We owe it to the 
American people to consider a variety of ideas. And in weighing our 
economic options, the question we ought to ask ourselves is not whether 
an idea is optimistic or pessimistic. The question we should ask about 
every proposal is: Does it do right by America? Will it lead to the 
kind of economic growth that benefits all Americans, not just the 
fortunate few? Does it provide incentives to encourage companies to 
create jobs in America--rather than encouraging companies to ship 
American jobs overseas? Does it help the people and communities that 
have lost jobs these last 4 years? Does it give them the tools and the 
opportunities to replace those lost jobs with better jobs? Or does it 
just write them off? Does it do right by the millions of middle-class 
families who are working harder every year but are still losing ground 
economically? Optimism alone can't stretch a paycheck, or pay a 
mortgage, or put your children through college.
  Some people point to the fact that the economy has finally started to 
create jobs as proof that we have solved the jobs problem. They say 
that all we have to do now is stay the course and be patient. I wish 
the people who say that would come to North Sioux City, SD, and some of 
the communities that surround it. Until very recently, North Sioux City 
was the headquarters for Gateway computers, one of the largest private 
employers in South Dakota. Four years ago, Gateway employed 6,000 
people in the Siouxland area around North Sioux City. But the recession 
and the shakeout in the technology sector hit Gateway hard, as it did 
many tech companies. Today, only 1,700 people work for Gateway in the 
North Sioux City area.
  I am not sure if it is a blessing or a curse, but the job losses at 
Gateway didn't come in one crushing blow. They came instead as a steady 
stream of layoffs. While none was large enough to grab national media 
attention, the cumulative impact of these layoffs on the families and 
communities in the Siouxland area around North Sioux City has been 
devastating. Some of the laid-off workers received severance packages. 
Some have found new jobs that pay less. Many are still looking for 
work. There are many more good workers today in the Siouxland area than 
there are good jobs.
  These times are tough even for many people who are working. Over the 
past year, real weekly earnings actually fell for the average worker, 
according to the Department of Labor. In South Dakota and across 
America, workers are earning less than they did a year ago, but they 
are paying more--for gas, health care, tuition, and other basic 
necessities.
  Even with the recent easing of prices, gas still costs 30 cents a 
gallon more in South Dakota today than it did a year ago.
  Health care costs continue to rise by double digits every year. More 
employers are being forced to scale back the health care benefits they 
offer their workers; others are dropping health care coverage 
altogether. According to a new report by Families USA, 27 percent of 
South Dakotans today have no health insurance. Across America, 44 
million people are in that category. And most of the people who are 
uninsured get up and go to work every day. They work hard. Some of them 
work two and three jobs to support their families. But they can't 
afford health insurance. You don't have to be an optimist to believe 
that we can do better than that.
  Last week, the Federal Reserve raised interest rates for the first 
time in 4 years as protection against inflation. Most analysts predict 
that we will see additional rate hikes in the future. And the enormous 
budget deficits built up these last 4 years will put even more pressure 
on interest rates, making it harder and more expensive for families to 
borrow money and to pay off mortgages, loans and credit card balances.
  The Gateway workers who have lost their jobs, and middle-class 
families across South Dakota and across America, don't lack for 
optimism. But it is not easy to be patient when you have lost your job 
and your unemployment benefits, and your savings are getting low. It is 
not easy when you are working harder every year and getting deeper in 
debt.

[[Page 14329]]

  Middle-class families across America are getting squeezed between 
stagnant wages and rising costs. They are being hurt by an economy that 
is creating jobs too slowly to fill the demand, and by the fact that 
the new jobs pay, on average, 21 percent less than the jobs they 
replaced.
  The choices we make must do right by these families. Middle-class 
families need more--and deserve more--than soothing words of optimism. 
They deserve action from the Federal Government--smart, sustained, 
realistic, bipartisan action to help people who have lost jobs find new 
ones and to make sure that American companies and workers can compete 
for, and win, the jobs of the future.
  One of the fastest, easiest ways we can reduce the economic squeeze 
on middle-class families is by protecting overtime pay. The Senate 
voted overwhelmingly last year to reject the administration's 
outrageous effort to deny overtime pay to millions of workers, and we 
rejected that misguided proposal again this year when we passed the 
Senate version of the FSC bill. Overtime pay isn't extra money; it is 
essential family income and protecting it is doing right by America. We 
need to continue to stand together and make sure that the final FSC 
bill Congress sends to the President preserves overtime protections.
  When it comes to helping workers whose jobs have disappeared or been 
shipped overseas, we don't need to create a new government bureaucracy. 
We just need to invest in solutions that we know work.
  The Commerce Department's Trade Adjustment Assistance program is one 
example. It helps manufacturing workers who have lost jobs because of 
globalization get back on their feet. Among other things, it provides 
access to community college so workers can learn new job skills and it 
helps workers maintain their health coverage until they can find work.
  The Trade Adjustment Assistance program is a good program. The only 
problem is, it doesn't cover service-sector workers, who are among the 
workers hardest hit by ``outsourcing'' and ``offshoring.'' During the 
debate on the FSC bill, the Senate considered a bipartisan proposal to 
expand the Trade Adjustment Assistance program to help service-sector 
workers whose jobs are being shipped to India and other low-wage 
countries. Not only did the administration oppose our efforts to help 
these workers get back on their feet, it continues to encourage 
companies to ship more jobs overseas.
  Turning our backs on workers who are being displaced by this economic 
transition isn't optimism. And it isn't doing right by America. We can 
do better--by expanding the Trade Adjustment Assistance program to 
match the realities of today's economy and help more laid-off workers 
get back on their feet.
  We should also extend Federal unemployment benefits for those workers 
who have exhausted their State benefits and still can't find work. It 
is the sensible thing to do. It is the decent thing to do. It is right 
for America. And with the average length of unemployment at a 20-year 
high, we need to do it now.
  We can also do a better job of helping businesses create new jobs. 
Tax cuts are one tool. But they do not, by themselves, create jobs. 
Small businesses and start-ups need access to capital. They need 
technical advice. They need help developing marketing plans. In other 
words, they need the kind of help that is provided by innovative 
programs such as the Small Business Administration's lending and 
technical assistance programs, and the Treasury Department's Community 
Development Financial Institutions Fund. Both of these programs have 
achieved wonderful results with limited resources. Yet the President's 
proposed budget for next year drastically reduces or eliminates funding 
for many of their efforts. That is a mistake, and we should fix it.
  Finally, EDA, the Economic Development Administration, which is part 
of the Commerce Department, was created specifically to ``alleviate 
conditions of substantial and persistent unemployment and 
underemployment in economically distressed areas and regions.'' I have 
seen how EDA seed money can grow into real jobs in rural areas, on 
Indian reservations and in other communities in South Dakota where 
private lenders weren't as optimistic as the EDA about the community's 
future. If we are looking to reward hard work and optimism, we need to 
make sure EDA has the resources to carry out its mission wherever it is 
needed.
  Around the country there must be hundreds, if not thousands, of 
communities like North Sioux City, where well-equipped factories stand 
idle and well-trained, highly skilled workers are waiting for an 
opportunity. Even though they have had a tough time these last few 
years, these workers are not pessimistic about America. They believe in 
America. They believe the future can be better than the past and 
they're willing to work hard to make that happen.
  Let's work together to show these workers that America believes in 
them. Optimistic words are not enough. We need a comprehensive economic 
plan that does right by all Americans. We need to reduce the squeeze on 
middle-class families and make sure that every American worker is able 
to find work that allows them to care for their family and live in 
dignity. We have done it before. Working together, we can do it again.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chambliss). The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________