[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 20111-20112]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            PAYROLL TAX CUT

  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise to speak about the urgent need to 
prevent a tax increase in the year 2012 if the Congress does not act to 
extend the payroll tax cut from last year. This is fundamental when it 
comes to working families across the country. Some 160 million working 
Americans are depending upon the Congress to do its work, to do its 
duty, and conclude this year on a couple of matters.
  The principal focus of most people's attention right now, in addition 
to making sure we have a budget in place for the next couple of weeks 
and months but also, most urgently, is to make sure we are doing 
everything possible to bring about a cut in the payroll tax again as we 
did last year. So we should be voting today. We should not be waiting. 
We know the House has acted. I would guess that what they passed in the 
House will not pass in the Senate, but we should vote. Vote today. Get 
that done. Then both sides can sit down and work out a compromise on 
the payroll tax cut so we can give those 160 million American workers 
some measure of certainty as they begin to celebrate the holidays and 
prepare for our new year.
  When I talk to people in Pennsylvania, they say to me basically two 
things: Do something to create jobs or to create the environment or the 
condition that job creation will flow from and, they say, do it in a 
bipartisan way. Work together as we, meaning Americans back home, have 
to work together. They have to work together at home to meet a budget. 
They have to work together at their worksite to be able to move a 
company or their agenda forward for an employer.
  What we need is a very simple agreement on a very basic bill, and it 
should be a bill that would extend and, I would argue, expand. I wish 
to go beyond the payroll tax cut of last year. What we should be doing 
is cutting it in half. I know there might be others who do not want to 
go that far. But what we have now from the House is a 350-page bill 
loaded with all kinds of provisions that have nothing to do with the 
payroll tax cut and nothing to do with moving the economy forward. It 
is kind of a political game they are playing.
  For example, the Keystone pipeline will be the subject of a lot of 
debate and discussion. But that has nothing to do with providing 160 
million working Americans with a payroll tax cut, so we should set that 
aside and focus on cutting the payroll tax. Some of the provisions in 
the Republican bill will do substantial harm to families individually 
but also to the larger economy. Cutting 40 weeks--let me say that 
again--cutting 40 weeks from unemployment insurance is one provision. 
That is the wrong thing to do when you have between 13 and 14 million 
Americans out of work, in Pennsylvania over half a million people out 
of work, at last count 513,000 people out of work. They are telling us 
that we should cut unemployment insurance by 40 weeks.
  Does that make any sense at all? Oh, by the way, what they leave out 
in that debate is what unemployment insurance does to the wider 
economy. You spend a buck on that, you get a lot more than a buck in 
return in terms of the economic impact. So unemployment insurance, when 
it is provided to people who lost their jobs through no fault of their 
own, helps the larger economy in addition to helping an individual 
worker or his or her family.
  When it comes to the issue of the payroll tax cut itself, what we are 
talking about here is not something complicated and theoretical. We are 
talking about take-home pay, what goes in your pocket from your 
paycheck. We have got a choice here. If we go the right way and we 
extend the payroll tax cuts from last year, there is as much as $1,000 
in take-home pay as a result of that.
  I had a bill which we worked to try to compromise and change--we 
changed our bill in order to compromise, I should say. I thought it 
would be better if we cut the payroll tax for workers in half. That 
would be as much as $1,500 in your pocket for 2012. The other side 
objected to that. They wanted no payroll tax cut, apparently, for 
businesses, which I thought was a good idea. Then they also wanted to 
scale back what we could do for employees. But we are where we are. We 
will see what they are willing to do now. But let's not lose sight of 
what this is all about. If we do the right thing, we will have $1,000 
extra in take-home pay for 160 million American workers, but if we go 
the way of some people here in Washington and play political games, it 
will be zero extra dollars of take-home pay. Very simple. It is a very 
simple choice.
  I would hope our friends on the Republican side would allow us to 
vote today on the Republican House bill.
  It is not going to pass, but it does provide clarity so that both 
sides can then sit down. They have rejected my compromise. Now the 
House version will come over here. But we will have some clarity about 
where both sides stand.
  We can sit down and negotiate and get a payroll tax cut done, but we 
cannot do that until they let us vote on what the House did. We need to 
have that vote today. I don't know why the Republican side would want 
to hold it up in the Senate. We should vote on that. It is about take-
home pay and also about peace of mind. I think a lot of Americans would 
like to know now that they can celebrate the holidays and move into 
2012 with some peace of mind, knowing they are going to have some money 
in their pockets they might not have otherwise. It will have a 
tremendous impact on the economy.

[[Page 20112]]

We know that from the data and from what happened in the first few 
months of 2011.
  If the Congress fails to act, here is what it means for a State such 
as Pennsylvania. You can replicate this, I am sure, in other States as 
well. Mark Zandi, a respected economist on both sides of the aisle in 
Washington, looked at Pennsylvania and the impact of not extending the 
payroll tax cut for 2012. He said it would cost our State a little shy 
of 20,000 jobs in calendar year 2012--in a State, by the way, where in 
2011 we created--or I should say the increase in jobs in Pennsylvania 
was more than 50,000 in 2011. That is not enough, and we need to do 
more, but certainly when you are creating jobs at that rate--and 
possibly in 2012 it could go above 50,000 jobs created in Pennsylvania. 
But not to act on the payroll tax and reduce that 50,000 or more by 
20,000 jobs--and that is just one State--if you don't pass the payroll 
tax cut, that is the adverse impact on 1 State--20,000 jobs, according 
to Mark Zandi. That is a big mistake. We cannot afford to make those 
kinds of mistakes at this moment, which is very precarious in our 
economy, just when we are getting some--although not enough--good news 
about the economy.
  We need to kick-start, jump-start job creation across the country. We 
can do that in large measure--although not completely--by a payroll tax 
cut.
  It is time to move forward and time to move on. We should get this 
vote done on the House version, and then we can go to the negotiating 
table. While we are doing that, we can get some other things done. To 
hold up a vote on the House bill doesn't make any sense at all. We only 
have 17 days until the end of the year. We have other work to do as 
well. But the main thing we have to do right now is come together to 
protect 160 million American workers so that they can conclude the year 
and go into the holiday season and begin a new year with peace of mind 
to know they are going to have that payroll tax cut in their take-home 
pay and also to give those who are out of work and their families, 
their communities, and the country some assurance on unemployment 
insurance.
  It is not time to play politics in Washington. This is the holiday 
season. If there is anytime in the year when people expect us to work 
together, it is at this time when we celebrate the holidays. We need to 
come together and compromise. I have compromised a couple of times in 
my legislation. I will not review that now, but I did that on my 
version of the payroll tax cut. We can all compromise more. We need to 
come together and stop putting up roadblocks to voting on measures that 
will lead us to a compromise.
  The simple message for today is this: Let's vote on the House bill. 
If that doesn't pass, then we can go to the negotiating table and come 
up with a compromise to cut the payroll tax and put more take-home pay 
in the pockets of 160 million American workers.
  With that, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________