[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 13344-13348]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, this afternoon is a historic moment in 
the history of this great Chamber. Our beloved and now departed Senator 
from West Virginia, Robert C. Byrd, will be succeeded in office with a 
temporary appointment from West Virginia, and we will swear in his 
successor at 2:15 this afternoon. A few minutes later, the Senate will 
take up a historic measure. It is a question of whether we should 
provide unemployment benefits to the millions of Americans who have 
lost their job, through no fault of their own, and are victims of this 
recession.
  In my home State, 115,000 people have fallen off the unemployment 
rolls while we have debated whether to extend unemployment benefits. 
Across America, 1.2 million Americans have lost basic unemployment 
benefits.
  What do these benefits mean to these families out of work? Literally, 
bread on the table; literally, whether the lights go on when you flick 
the switch; literally, whether they have a roof over their heads.
  This did not use to be a political issue. We did not get involved in 
a partisan debate about unemployment benefits when it came to other 
Presidents. But under this President, Barack Obama, the Republicans 
have decided to take a stand and the stand says this: When it comes to 
people who are victims of this recession, we will not help them unless 
we find some way to add a new tax or cut some spending in other areas.
  That was never the standard before. We viewed this as an economic 
emergency, which we responded to, to get America back on its feet.
  Those who are involved in watching our budget and our deficit and our 
economy, such as Bob Bixby, the president of the Concord Coalition, 
puts it very clearly. Mr. Bixby says:

       As a deficit hawk, I wouldn't worry about extending 
     unemployment benefits. It is not going to add to the long-
     term structural deficit, and it does address a serious need. 
     I just feel like unemployment benefits wandered onto the 
     wrong street corner at the wrong time, and now they are 
     getting mugged.

  That is Bob Bixby of the Concord Coalition.
  What about David Brooks? I respect David Brooks, a conservative 
Republican writer but a thinker. Here is what he says, in writing in 
the New York Times last week about unemployment benefits:

       Well, there's a few short-term things you can do [about 
     this economy]. First, extend unemployment insurance; that's a 
     foolish place to begin budget-balancing.

  David Brooks knows what we all know: a dollar handed to an unemployed 
person is spent almost immediately, recirculates through the economy, 
and creates $1.60 in economic activity. It is the best way to create 
more consumer demand--more demand for goods and services and greater 
opportunities for jobs, while it provides the basic necessities of life 
for those who are out of work.

[[Page 13345]]

  But when it comes to this issue, the Republicans have said: No, we 
are going to take a stand on the deficit and we are going to take a 
stand when it comes to unemployed people because the deficit is a 
serious issue.
  I agree with them; it is a serious issue. But last week, the 
Republican minority whip, Jon Kyl of Arizona, was asked: Well, let me 
ask you about tax cuts for the wealthiest people in America. If you cut 
taxes, doesn't that add to the deficit? It is hard to argue that it 
doesn't.
  They said to Jon Kyl of Arizona: So you don't want to add to the 
deficit; you don't want to make it worse, so we would have to pay for 
or find some new revenue or some cut for tax cuts; correct? Senator Kyl 
said: No; tax cuts don't count when it comes to the deficit.
  So here is the double standard. The double standard says when we are 
helping unemployed people in America, it is a deficit problem, but if 
we are giving tax breaks to the wealthiest people in America, it is not 
a deficit problem. That kind of double standard is fundamentally 
unfair. When it comes to unemployed Americans who lost their jobs 
through no fault of their own, Americans literally faced with living in 
their cars, the Republicans tell us: Sorry, we can't help; the deficit 
just requires us to say no to unemployed Americans. But when it comes 
to wealthy Americans who are living comfortably, Americans who can take 
a tax cut and buy a new car, the Republicans say that is all right; we 
can give those tax cuts to the wealthy; it doesn't hurt the deficit. It 
makes no sense.
  Why are we in this situation today? We are here because of the worst 
economic recession since the Great Depression. This President inherited 
it from Republican Bush economic policies that failed America, and in 
that failure the victims can be found in every community across our 
great Nation. I met with three of them in Chicago on Sunday. We sat 
down and talked about what life is like when you are out of work for 
more than a year--more than a year.
  One was a veteran, a man who had served in our Coast Guard and worked 
for years and years in the advertising business in Chicago. He has MS 
and now he has no paycheck and now he has no health insurance. If the 
VA will not cover some of his needs, he is on his own.
  Another was a young woman. She was a woman who worked hard and had a 
good job and lost it a year ago but has been looking ever since. Every 
day, she is on the Internet, answering the ads, doing everything she 
can.
  She said: I am almost afraid to come to this press conference. I 
don't want my landlord to see me and realize my unemployment is over. I 
am 2 months away from living in my car.
  The third was a man who had been out of work for over a year; a 
productive, good man who was clearly broken by this experience but 
determined to keep trying. He was cut off from unemployment benefits by 
a Republican Party which will not join us in what has been a bipartisan 
effort under Presidents, both Republican and Democrat.
  This afternoon we have a chance to stand for those people in 
Illinois, in New Hampshire, in Maryland, and in Kentucky. We have a 
chance to say we as an American family stand together, we care for our 
own, we help our own. We are going to help them get back to a life of 
productive activity, paying taxes, and retiring our deficit.
  We remember on the Republican side not that long ago under President 
Bush when the national debt of America doubled under President Bush, 
from $5 trillion worth of accumulated debt in the history of the United 
States of America to the day when President Bush left office and the 
national debt was $12 trillion. It more than doubled with the budgets 
offered by President Bush under his administration. In those days, Vice 
President Cheney used to say: Deficits don't count.
  Well, they count.
  We are going to bring ourselves out of this deficit crisis, but first 
we are going to get this economy moving, create the jobs and put people 
back to work. Until we do that, the deficit just gets worse.
  This afternoon we have a chance to give a helping hand to people who 
have lost their jobs through no fault of their own and need just a 
little assistance from us as a nation so they can move forward and help 
this Nation move forward again.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Maryland.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Thank you, Madam President.
  I wish to thank the Senator from Illinois for his remarks and his 
leadership on this topic because I feel the same way.
  Finally, finally, finally, we are going to vote and have enough votes 
to pass the extension of unemployment insurance--unemployment 
insurance. It is insurance against being unemployed. That is what it 
is. It is not some grant. It is not some giveaway. It is not an 
earmark. It is insurance. It is social insurance, created by the United 
States of America in partnership with the private sector and the people 
who work every day so that when they hit a speed bump and have to be 
laid off through no fault of their own, there will be a safety net so 
they do not fall. It is insurance. It is social insurance. It is a 
social contract, and it is a social compact.
  In my mind, it is like having a treaty with the American people. We 
don't violate treaties, and we shouldn't violate this social contract. 
But oh, no, not our Senate. We had to dilly-dally around for month 
after month with the obstructionist tactics of the other side, using 
out-of-date procedures of this institution that belong in another 
century and another economy.
  My constituents are frustrated. They are frustrated about their 
lives, they are frustrated about the direction of the country, and they 
are sure frustrated with the Senate--and put me in that corner. It is 
time we not only get the country moving, it is time we get the Senate 
moving. We have to first look at reform for ourselves, and I want 
everyone here to know I am on the side and definitely part of the 
reform movement in this institution to get rid of out-of-date 
procedures that belong to another century whose only job is not to slow 
us down so that we do due diligence but that we don't do anything at 
all.
  Right now, we have a compelling need in our country. People who have 
been laid off through no fault of their own do need that safety net. 
Our failure to act has brought untold harm to people. When we left for 
the Fourth of July, I couldn't believe we walked out to carry the flag 
and say: Let's hear it for the red, white, and blue, and we were going 
to leave America without income insurance that they themselves had paid 
into to be able to get. We forget that for part of the insurance, 
private sector employers pay into it and so do the workers. It is 
insurance.
  When I went around Maryland during the break, whether it was the 
workers themselves--people who had jobs--and even those who were well 
off said: Why can't you pass unemployment insurance. If you can't do 
that, you can't do anything. And they were absolutely right.
  When I talked to the workers, I saw in their eyes the loss of energy, 
the loss of hope, and the loss of hope about a way of life, such as in 
manufacturing where in some areas it is being challenged. It is 
terrible to lose a job and then to lose unemployment insurance--no job, 
no income, no hope. Wow. What a bitter pill.
  The Baltimore Sun in an editorial pointed out how unemployment 
benefits are helping the U.S. economy. This isn't Barb Mikulski, a 
moderate liberal talking about it. This is hard-nosed analysis saying, 
in Maryland, why it is good for the Maryland economy. Unemployment 
compensation would help put $819 million into our economy for the 
fiscal year ending June 30.
  Over 17,000 Marylanders have lost their unemployment insurance. In 
our State, unemployment insurance certainly isn't lavish. The average 
is $312 a week. The maximum is $410 a week. In our State, it is only 
enough to pay electricity or rent or for food, but it is

[[Page 13346]]

certainly not some big lavish program. This is what the insurance is 
meant to do. It is meant to be a safety net.
  In our country people believe if they work hard and they play by the 
rules, the rules should be on their side. Well, hello. We make the 
rules. We rule. So let's rule out this endless delay.
  Today, I want us to pass this extension, and I want us to remember 
this is social insurance. I have sat here and listened to the debate 
minimizing and trivializing workers: Oh, unemployment is a way to 
discourage people to look for work. I don't know who these people talk 
to. Maybe they are too busy fundraising to talk to people. Maybe they 
are too busy trying to extend those Bush tax credits that added very 
little to our economy but added a lot to our debt. Maybe they are too 
busy. I am not too busy. I enjoy being out there with the people, 
listening to the stories of their lives. What does it mean to public 
policy?
  What they want us to do is get off of our filibuster, pass this 
extension, and at least let people have a safety net. Then let's 
continue to concentrate on helping create jobs in the private sector in 
the United States of America by passing the Landrieu-Snowe small 
business bill and actually do something of which we can be proud.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam President, I join with Senator Mikulski from 
Maryland and her comments about extending unemployment benefits.
  We all know these numbers. In my State, 47,000 Ohioans lost their 
unemployment benefits. At the end of June, that number increased 
dramatically to more than 90,000. If we don't pass the extension today, 
or this week, at the end of July more than 80,000 additional Ohioans 
will lose their benefits. These numbers are incredible. I think it is 
important to put a human face on these numbers, in large part because 
41 Members of the Senate, overwhelmingly Republicans and one Democrat, 
have consistently voted to filibuster, to block extending unemployment 
insurance.
  I guess the reason for that is they think of these as numbers. They 
don't think of these as people because I cannot imagine, when they call 
their names out in the well and they respond and say no over and over 
and over, as has happened over the last 7 weeks--it is just an amazing 
thing to me. I think my colleagues who vote no, the 39 or 40 
Republicans who vote no, must see this unemployment insurance as 
welfare. I know some of them think that. But it is insurance. We don't 
call it unemployment welfare, we call it unemployment insurance.
  That means they pay in when they are working, and they get help when 
they are not. That is done to help individual people, of course. It 
matters to the community because the dollars they get in their pockets, 
the $300, $320, roughly, that people get a week on average in 
unemployment insurance are spending it at the local drugstore. They are 
spending it at a local grocery store. They are buying clothes for their 
kids. They are paying rent, paying utilities. They serve as an economic 
stimulus. It is not just helping those individuals, it is an economic 
stimulus, as Senator McCain's top aide and his top economic adviser in 
his Presidential campaign said. This is the best kind of stimulus for 
the economy. Put a dollar in somebody's pocket for unemployment 
insurance and they spend it, and it is spent over and over in the 
community.
  President Obama said yesterday that there has been a tradition under 
both Democratic and Republican Presidents to offer emergency relief to 
the unemployed. When the economy is bad, that is when we need to do 
this. For the Republicans to say we need to cut other programs to pay 
for this--they never said that when we were spending hundreds of 
billions of dollars on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They didn't 
say pay for that; they said charge that to our grandchildren.
  They didn't say pay for it when it was a bailout to the drug and 
insurance companies in the name of Medicare privatization; they said 
just bill that to our grandchildren.
  When it was tax cuts for the rich--and some of our Republican Senate 
colleagues said it again this last week--we don't pay for tax cuts for 
the rich; we just add it to our children's and our grandchildren's 
credit cards and their tax burden in the future. But when it comes to 
workers, they look at it differently. Tax cuts for the rich, a bailout 
for the drug and insurance companies, spending it on the war in Iraq 
and Afghanistan, it is OK. But it is not OK to spend it on unemployed 
workers.
  So I just am not sure my colleagues ever put a human face on this. 
They just see these as numbers. I don't know how many of my colleagues 
sit down and listen to unemployed workers who have lost their jobs--a 
worker who lost her job, then she lost her health insurance and had to 
explain to her children that: We are going to have to move because we 
are going to have our house foreclosed on; we cannot afford the 
mortgage. They are going to switch school districts, with all of the 
uncertainties. Can you imagine that--sitting down with your children 
and doing that? It is happening all too often that people are 
explaining to their children that they are going to have to move, they 
are not going to have their own room anymore and they will not go to 
the same school, and they will not be able to buy the tennis shoes they 
thought they would get. All those kinds of discussions are happening 
all over America, in part because people are losing their unemployment 
insurance.
  I will share four brief letters with my colleagues. This is trying to 
help people understand that real people are losing their unemployment 
benefits. It is a real hardship.
  First is Jillian from Holmes County in Millersburg, OH, one of the 
smallest, least populous counties. She wrote:

       My husband is one of the 83,000 Ohioans who lost 
     unemployment benefits in June. He was working in the same job 
     for 14 years until he was recently laid off. Our family has 
     struggled to keep the bills paid. Our mortgage has been 
     consistently one month behind. And each month, more late fees 
     are tacked on. Now that his unemployment benefits have 
     expired, our utility bills are now one month behind. Please 
     help to get this extension passed.

  This is exactly what I hear from constituent after constituent in 
Ohio. They work hard. Many have worked the same jobs for years, and 
many have been in the same line of work for 10 to 20 years. These are 
not lazy people who don't want to work. They lost their jobs through no 
doing of their own. They have nowhere to turn, and their unemployment 
benefits have run out.
  I ask my colleagues--today we have another chance to vote to join us 
in helping Jillian and others.
  Larry is from Shelby County, another rural county close to the 
Indiana border, a town called Sidney, the county seat. He wrote:

       The lack of movement on extending unemployment benefits is 
     causing major system devastation to workers unable to find 
     employment. Loss of these benefits has become devastating to 
     me and my family. The extreme added emotional and financial 
     stress has exacerbated an otherwise manageable physical 
     condition into a borderline disability. I do not want to lose 
     my capacity to search for and secure employment due to 
     physical stress brought on by economic hardship. Please fight 
     to extend these critical benefits.

  So often, what my Republican colleagues seem to think is that people 
don't have to go out and look for work, but they are out looking for 
work. These people are not staying home not trying to find a job. To 
receive unemployment benefits, you have to demonstrate to the local 
employment office that you are looking for a job.
  With all of the economic hardships and the troubles and potential 
loss of car, house, job, and potentially insurance, there is also an 
emotional toll taken on people. Larry illustrates that.
  Richard is from Summit County, the Akron area. He wrote:

       I am a 67-year-old American who has worked for more than 50 
     years of my life. I got laid off last year and had been 
     receiving unemployment benefits since then. I was thankful 
     for it because it helped me make my house payments. But when 
     I got cut off last month, I went into panic mode. My blood 
     pressure shot up and I ended up in the ER. I have never felt 
     so scared and uncertain

[[Page 13347]]

     of the future as I am now. I didn't plan to stop working. It 
     just happened. I am headed to the welfare office today.
       I just hate what this country has become where Senators 
     can't relate to us common folk. Is there any hope for us?

  The answer is yes. With the appointment of a new Senator from West 
Virginia, we will likely have the 60th vote. We have 39 Republicans and 
1 Democrat who have voted consistently to allow us to filibuster. A 
majority of us, 59, have voted--the Presiding Officer and I and 57 
others have consistently voted to extend unemployment benefits. Yet, 
because of a minority of 41, they have been able to stop the debate and 
this bill from moving forward. Look at the stress it has caused Richard 
and the anguish it has caused Larry from Shelby County. Look at what 
Jillian and her husband are facing.
  Here is the last letter. This is from Joan from Montgomery County, 
which is Dayton:

       I am an unemployment accountant with a college degree. I 
     was laid off last year when my small law firm merged with a 
     larger one. There was no position for me in the new firm. I 
     decided to go back to school, using up much of my retirement 
     and my husband's savings. I reduced my hours at school and 
     went part-time. I was able to collect unemployment benefits, 
     but since it has run out, my savings are dwindling rapidly.

  Given the high level of unemployment in Ohio, extending federal 
unemployment benefits is imperative. We can't afford further delay. Two 
weeks is a long time for someone whose only means of support is 
unemployment benefits. I hope the Senate passes an extension in the 
next few days.
  As I said to her, we hope we will do that today, and the President 
will sign it quickly and the benefits will go out. I hope more than a 
couple of Republicans will join us so we can pass this with a 
significant vote. Some of these are people who have gone back to 
college, and they work hard. They are people who have been in the 
workplace for 10, 20, 30 years. They have a good work ethic.
  Again, Joan is from Montgomery County--a county that has been hit 
especially hard, as DHL shut down there and the GM plant shut down, and 
National Cash Register up and moved to Atlanta. There have been some 
good things happening but not enough. That is why we need to extend 
these benefits today, get this done so we can focus on job creation and 
help people get back to work.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  (Mr. BROWN of Ohio assumed the chair.)
  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I am pleased, though frustrated, like my 
colleagues, to be here this morning on the floor to talk about the 
critical need to extend unemployment insurance.
  Across the Nation, there are almost 15 million Americans who are out 
of work, and although we are making progress on our unemployment rate, 
it is still too high at 9.5 percent. We need to extend unemployment 
insurance, and we need to do it now, today, before one more family is 
put on the street and before one more child goes to bed hungry.
  This legislation is every bit as important to our economy as it is to 
those who are struggling to get by. Nearly 7 million people, or half of 
all Americans collecting unemployment insurance, have been out of work 
for 6 months or longer. They have run out of the insurance that is 
provided by their State. These are the workers who will collect this 
Federal unemployment extension, which they are using, as my colleagues 
have said--the Senator from Ohio, with his letters, was eloquent as he 
reported on the people from Ohio who are talking about why they need 
this to pay their rent, to make mortgage payments, to buy groceries, 
and to put gas in their cars to go out and look for their next job.
  As the Senator said so eloquently, sometimes the real people whom 
this legislation affects are forgotten during this debate. While 
Members of this body stand and give economic lessons and talk about the 
macro situation, there are honest hard-working people out there who are 
suffering because of our failure to act.
  I recently heard from a woman in Canterbury, NH, named Jo Ellen. She 
is a professional psychiatric nurse with a graduate degree. She had a 
good job until she was laid off because of cutbacks to our mental 
health system. She is in her sixties and has been working since she was 
11 years old. Since being laid off, she has applied for dozens of jobs, 
from part time to retail positions. She has cut back on her 
professional experience on her resume so that she is not ruled out for 
being overqualified. She always mentions that she is willing to accept 
any salary, but nonetheless she has not yet been called for an 
interview--not once.
  Jo Ellen wrote to me not just because her unemployment was going to 
run out but because she is so troubled by what she keeps hearing from 
people who voted against the extension of unemployment benefits, who 
say that people who are collecting unemployment are irresponsible or 
that they are not looking for a job, they are looking for a handout. Jo 
Ellen is not looking for a handout; she is looking for a job.
  While we still face one of the most difficult job markets in history, 
with five applicants for every one job, we need to make sure people 
such as Jo Ellen stay afloat. There are millions of people across this 
country who are just like Jo Ellen, who are working hard, who want to 
find a new job, who are one step away from disaster if they don't get 
an extension of unemployment benefits.
  In New Hampshire, 20,000 people could see their unemployment 
insurance expire within the next 4 months if we don't act. By 
supporting the legislation today, we can make sure New Hampshire's 
unemployed workers receive $75 million in essential Federal assistance. 
This money, as has been pointed out, won't sit quietly in savings 
accounts; it will go to grocery stores, pharmacies, and small 
businesses in the communities where the unemployed are living. In fact, 
conservative economist Mark Zandi, a former adviser to Senator McCain, 
has cited unemployment insurance as one of the three most effective 
uses of Federal funding. According to his analysis, every dollar we 
invest today will create $1.61 in economic growth.
  When I was Governor, after the September 11 attacks, when this 
country went into a recession, one of the first things we did in New 
Hampshire was to increase unemployment benefits because we knew what 
Mark Zandi said was correct--that people would put that money back into 
the economy, help stimulate the economy, and help create economic 
growth. We did that with bipartisan support from a Republican 
legislature. I don't know what has changed in the last 9 years since 
September 11 that we have our colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
who, by and large, say we can't support unemployment benefits and 
extending those benefits but we can have tax cuts for the wealthy 
without funding those. There is something wrong with that kind of 
logic.
  These benefits that, hopefully, we are going to pass today will help 
people all across America invest in their community. At a time like 
this, with our economy poised to turn the corner, this funding is 
critical to our future. Quite simply, these are investments we can't 
afford not to make.
  I am pleased to join my colleagues, and I hope we will get those 60 
votes and extend the unemployment benefits for millions of Americans.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. KAUFMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. Udall of New Mexico). Without objection, 
it is so ordered.
  Mr. KAUFMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business for up to 10 minutes.

[[Page 13348]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________