[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 12776-12777]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   EXTENSION OF UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS

  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I rise to speak about the extension 
of unemployment benefits, something we talked about 2 weeks ago before 
we left town. It is something we talked about the week before that and 
the week before that. There has been a lot of talk, and there has been 
continued opposition from Senate Republicans.
  I am incredulous that we have seen week after week after week--it has 
been 41 days since the Congress let unemployment insurance lapse. It 
was on June 4, 41 days ago. It is not because a lot of us didn't want 
to see it happen. It is because of an obscure--less obscure to the 
public than it was--60-vote rule. The Republicans did not just oppose 
the unemployment benefits extension--there are a couple of Republicans 
who voted for it, but of the 41 Republicans there was overwhelming 
opposition, virtually 90 percent of them--it is not just that they 
voted no. Let them vote no. They actually filibustered. They actually 
blocked us from even voting on the extension of unemployment benefits.
  It is unfair to the unemployed who face a difficult job market 
through no fault of their own, and it is bad economics. We know Senator 
McCain, Presidential candidate McCain's economic adviser, among others, 
pointed out that money going out for the extension of unemployment 
benefits actually stimulates the economy better than any other dollars 
going into the economy. The money that goes to an unemployed teacher or 
an unemployed steelworker or an unemployed clerk or an unemployed 
computer programmer is money that is spent almost immediately because 
they have bills they have to pay. That money goes right into the 
community. We see a multiplier effect.
  When the humanitarian response is to extend unemployment benefits, 
and the best economic policy response is to extend unemployment 
benefits, most of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle--39 out 
of 41 of them, I believe--have voted no.
  June unemployment was 9.5 percent. We know a year and a half ago 
700,000 Americans lost their jobs; 700,000 Americans lost their jobs 
the month that Barack Obama became President. Things are better now. We 
are seeing job increases. In April, in Ohio, we had the biggest job 
increase of any State in the country: 37,000 new jobs. But that is not 
close to dealing with the unemployment brought on by the economic 
policies of deregulating Wall Street, cutting taxes for the rich, and 
not paying for anything--the war, the tax cuts, the bailouts to the 
drug and insurance companies in the name of privatizing Medicare.
  Never before has Congress cut off benefits when unemployment was so 
high. Until recently, it has always been a bipartisan extension of 
unemployment benefits. Overwhelming numbers of Republicans and 
Democrats voted to extend unemployment benefits. I just keep trying to 
explain to my colleagues who vote no on the unemployment benefits 
extension that this is not welfare, this is insurance. People pay into 
the unemployment insurance fund and get benefits when they lose their 
jobs. At the same time, nobody gets these benefits unless they actively 
seek work; unless they are sending out resumes, doing interviews, going 
and visiting businesses, employers, whatever they can do to try to find 
jobs. Yet the Republicans continue to deny the extension for 
unemployment benefits.
  Our workers deserve more than this crass political gamesmanship that 
an overwhelming number of Republican Senators are playing. July 1 was 
one of the busiest days ever at the Summit County Department of Jobs 
and Family Services. It was the first of the month, and because of 
Republican obstructionism--because they voted not just against 
extending unemployment benefits, they voted to filibuster our even 
considering these extension of benefits--because it was the first of 
the month and because of Republican obstructionism, this body failed to 
extend unemployment benefits. Staff members at the Summit County 
Department of Jobs and Family Services typically assist 300 to 400 
clients a day. On July 1 twice that number were served by midday, and 
four times that number were seen by the close of business.
  So a typical day of 300 or 400, 300-plus clients at the Summit County 
Jobs and Family Services turned into 600 before midday, and 1,200 by 
the close of business. The staff at the Department of Jobs and Family 
Services in Akron, led by Ms. Pat Divokey and County Executive Russ 
Pry, is doing everything they can to help working middle-class Ohioans. 
But when 90,000 Ohioans across the State are in need of an extension of 
unemployment benefits--90,000 people--it is time for this body to step 
up. Ninety thousand is a lot of people. It is almost hard to imagine.
  I think what is important is to think about these 90,000 as 
individual human beings. I wish to share a handful of letters I 
received from Ohioans--just three of them--to put a human face on this 
issue. It is incredible to me to think about this many people who are 
so unsure whether they are going to have any money to feed their kids, 
to pay their mortgage and their utility bills in the weeks ahead 
because of the 60-vote rule, and this body has not been able to extend 
unemployment benefits because of a Republican filibuster.
  Let me read a letter from Judith of Franklin County. It is the county 
where Columbus is located, the State capital.

       I am very disappointed that the unemployment extension has 
     not passed. I was laid off after working in my job for 20 
     years. I have a bachelor's degree and a master's degree and I 
     have worked for 35 years since I graduated. I have never been 
     without a job until now.
       I understand the growing budget deficit, but what are 
     working people supposed to do when we can't find a job?

  These are not people who don't want to work. Whether they are in 
Albuquerque or Santa Fe or whether they are in Truth or Consequences, 
these are people who want to go to work. They are people who have 
worked their whole lives and are used to showing up to work. They can't 
find jobs. I hear

[[Page 12777]]

this prattle from the other side of the aisle that this is some kind of 
welfare scheme. It is not. These people want to work. Most people who 
are filing for unemployment are people who, No. 1, have worked for 
years and, No. 2, continue to search for a job; they cannot get an 
unemployment extension unless they do.
  The second letter is from Pat from the Mahoning Valley, in the 
Youngstown area:

       I am a 25-year veteran of the accounting industry, but I 
     was recently laid off.
       My employers have paid into the federal and state 
     unemployment funds for me for those 25 years that I worked.
       And now for the first time I need to collect those benefits 
     until I secure new employment.
       While Congress plays political games, I have bills to pay 
     and work to find.

  Mr. President, he points out exactly this. He works in the accounting 
industry. He understands it. He understands that it is good economics 
to extend these unemployment benefits to people who lost their jobs, 
and he understands fundamentally that for the 25 years he worked for 
this accounting firm or for a number of accounting firms--I don't know 
whether Pat is a man or a woman, so he or she was paying--Pat's 
employer was paying into this insurance fund. So it is not welfare, in 
spite of what my Republican colleagues say.
  You know, the other thing that is absolutely amazing in what Pat said 
and what Judith said about the growing budget deficit--the Presiding 
Officer was in the House of Representatives for several years 
representing a district in northern New Mexico. He saw year after year 
when the Republicans didn't care about the budget deficit. They voted 
for hundreds of billions of dollars in spending for a war that I know 
the Presiding Officer and I both voted against that was not paid for. 
They voted for tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans that were not paid 
for. They voted for a giveaway to the drug and insurance companies--a 
bailout--in the name of Medicare privatization that was not paid for. 
Again, they voted for these huge government expenditures and charged it 
to our grandchildren and said it was OK. But now that it is the 
unemployed middle-class, working Americans who are laid off, they think 
we cannot do this because of the budget deficit.
  What are their priorities of the Republican Senators who voted 
against the unemployment extension? They were willing to charge it to 
our grandchildren to fight the war in Iraq, they are willing to bail 
out the drug and insurance companies, and they were willing to charge 
it to our grandchildren when it came to tax cuts for the richest 
Americans. When it came to workers losing their jobs, they are not 
willing to move forward and help them. It is amazing.
  The last letter comes from Jeff from Butler County, a conservative 
county north of Cincinnati in southwest Ohio, one of the most 
conservative counties in Ohio.

       I worked at my job for 36 years till my employer shut down 
     our plant recently.
       All those years I paid into unemployment.
       While I'd prefer to have a job and earn a decent wage, I 
     now need unemployment benefits until that happens.
       Think of the big picture. The people paying into the system 
     should be the first to receive benefits.

  Jeff is right. He understands that he paid into unemployment for 36 
years, and now Republican Senators won't let him draw from that fund. I 
just don't get it when I think of what this does to people.
  I guess I will close with this: I wish the Senators who voted no--and 
there are 41--on the extension of unemployment--we have had several 
votes and continue to fall 1 or 2 votes short--I wish they would sit 
down with a family and listen to them, not respond but listen to a 
family where workers lost their jobs; listen to the woman talking about 
losing health care, when she talks about telling her children that they 
are going to have their home foreclosed on and what are they going to 
do; explain to their children--they have teenage children, say--explain 
to them that Mom and Dad lost their jobs and their insurance, and now 
they have to move out of their house because they cannot afford it.
  The children may ask: Where are we going to move?
  They would say: We don't know that yet.
  What school are we going to go to?
  We don't know that yet.
  That is why I come to the floor and read letters from people in Ohio. 
I wish Senators would listen to people in their States. We get a lot of 
mail. We come across a lot of numbers and statistics. I wish they would 
pick up some of the letters they get. I know Senators all over this 
country are getting letters like this. There are very few States--maybe 
energy States or heavy agricultural States--that haven't been afflicted 
with unemployment the way California, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, New 
York, Florida, and so many States have. Maybe they don't understand. 
But those Senators from States that have high unemployment--and that is 
most of the country--I wish they would read their letters and hear what 
people are saying.
  We are going to try again this week. I ask my colleagues to vote to 
extend unemployment benefits. It is morally the right thing to do in 
terms of economic policy. It is the right policy, and we should not 
wait any longer.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________