[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 1636-1643]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS: OPPOSITION TO THE TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. POCAN. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to be here on behalf of the 
Progressive Caucus and lead this Special Order hour.
  Last week, we were here as a Progressive Caucus with a number of our 
members talking about the need to extend unemployment benefits for the 
1.3 million Americans that lost them at the end of December. We filled 
the entire hour with people talking about the need to extend the 
benefits and real personal stories of people who have been affected by 
us in this House not extending those benefits.
  It looked for a while last week like the Senate might do the right 
thing in a bipartisan way and extend those benefits. Unfortunately, 
this week, we saw the Republicans in the Senate refuse to go along and 
extend benefits to needy Americans, people who are without work, simply 
trying to pay their rent, pay for their groceries, and pay for things 
like gas so they can go and get a job. It has been a very unfortunate 
week.
  Yet in this House, we have tried time after time this week to get a 
vote so that we could get unemployment benefits extended for those 1.3 
million

[[Page 1637]]

Americans and the 72,000 Americans each and every week who are going to 
lose those benefits. Unfortunately, we have had no success. The 
leadership in this House has not allowed us to have that vote.
  So we are here again today to talk about not only the need to extend 
unemployment benefits but also to talk about a fast track deal that is 
going through this House, a fast track deal on trade that many of us 
see as a fast track to losing even more jobs and having an even more 
detrimental effect on the very same people we are talking about right 
now who are becoming more and more long-term unemployed.
  I am joined by a number of my colleagues today. I would like to right 
off the bat yield to a colleague of mine who has served in the 
California Legislature and now proudly serves the Long Beach area here 
in Congress, my good friend and colleague from California, 
Representative Alan Lowenthal.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for yielding to 
me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise too in support of the 1.3 million Americans who 
have lost or will be losing their benefits by the callous efforts of 
this Congress not to extend unemployment benefits, especially for the 
long-term unemployed.
  As you pointed out, Congressman Pocan, as of December 28, over 1.3 
million Americans have been kicked off unemployment insurance. We are 
talking about--and I am going to speak in a few minutes about the 
personal impacts of this--we are talking about family members, we are 
talking about friends, we are talking about people in each and every 
community of every Member, regardless of political affiliation in this 
Congress.

                              {time}  1745

  In my own community in the State of California, if we continue this 
callous effort not to extend unemployment benefits, we are looking at 
over 325,000 Californians losing their benefits in the next 6 months. 
Let's talk about jobs. People say that people should be working. If we 
do not extend unemployment insurance in my State, we are talking about 
the impact of the loss of over 240,000 jobs. This is a tragedy for our 
country.
  We are just coming out of the holiday season. It is really 
interesting, in the holiday season, at Christmastime, that there was a 
lack of compassion by the majority party in the House, which did not 
put up a bill to extend unemployment insurance. Congressman Pocan and I 
have looked at this.
  Coming up, the President of the United States is going to be talking 
about the state of the Union. There is nothing more important in the 
Union than having people be able to buy their food, to be able to feed 
their children, to be able to hold their heads up with dignity. So, 
last year, the House Democrats invited as their one guest people who 
were victims of gun violence.
  This year, Congressman, I applaud you for taking the lead, and I am 
so pleased to have joined you in a letter to ask Republicans and 
Democrats to use their one additional seat in order to bring them to 
Congress to let the President and the rest of the Nation hear about the 
stories and then put faces to those people who have lost their 
unemployment insurance, to see that these are people like our 
neighbors. That is who we are talking about. I urge all Members of 
Congress to bring a person who doesn't normally have a chance to impact 
our government, a person who has lost his unemployment insurance.
  I want to talk a little bit about some of the people in my 
community--letters, people I have met, people I have gone and talked 
to. I will just give two examples:
  I have a constituent who recently spoke to me about being 76 years of 
age and widowed. Her daughter is 52 and is a civil engineer, who has 
worked for many years at good jobs in the construction industry, 
building water treatment plants around the State of California. She was 
laid off 3 years ago and has not been able to find work since, even for 
jobs that pay much less; and she would be willing to take jobs that pay 
up to less than a third of her previous salary. After her unemployment 
checks ran out, she moved in with her mother, who wrote to me and spoke 
to me.
  She says:

       Luckily, when she and I were both employed, we bought this 
     small house, and we worked diligently to pay it off. She--her 
     daughter--has pretty much given up hope for another job, and 
     I am somewhat crippled now. Between my Social Security and my 
     savings, we survive. My point is that I am writing to you not 
     to help us.

  She did not ask for any help. She said they are doing okay, but she 
knows that so many people in her community are not doing well, who are 
going through the same thing that she and her daughter have gone 
through, but they now don't have insurance to do that. She asked me--
she pleaded with me--to extend the benefits and to extend their 
unemployment checks;
  Another constituent wrote to me recently and said:

       I am 58 years of age. I am a telecommunication analyst. I 
     was laid off in January of 2013. I have worked for over 30 
     years in this field. Now I need the government to help me 
     through this rough time, and you and your peers are letting 
     me down. I am running out of savings. I am soon to be 
     homeless by the end of March if you don't do something. I am 
     at a point that I would take any job available, but all I 
     hear is either I am overqualified or I don't fit well into 
     the job.

  I think we have to really hear this. This person pleaded:

       I am not a lazy person. I am out there, trying every single 
     day to find a job. I would give up one of my fingers for a 
     job just to take care of my family. Please keep fighting to 
     help us out.

  Both of these stories tell us how we have a responsibility to help 
the women and the men and the families in our communities who are the 
foundations of our society and who are raising the next generation, who 
really are saying, I have worked hard. Please, at this tough time, 
don't abandon me. If we cannot provide adequate support for our 
families to make it through difficult times, they are asking us, if you 
are not here to help us, why are you in Congress?
  When we extend unemployment insurance, UI, the U.S. economy goes up, 
poverty goes down, and working families are protected. Now is not the 
time to turn our backs on the most vulnerable in our society.
  Mr. POCAN. Thank you, Representative Lowenthal, not only for helping 
share those stories but for putting personal faces on the people who 
are affected when we don't extend these benefits and do our jobs.
  I am glad to be joining you and others who will bring someone to the 
state of the Union, someone who will be that personal face here in 
Washington, D.C., in order to tell his story. When the President talks 
about things like income inequality and the need to pass a minimum wage 
increase and the need to extend unemployment benefits, I will be glad 
to have someone from Wisconsin as you will have someone from 
California, and, hopefully, we will have a lot of other people who can 
share their stories. So thank you so much for that.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. Thank you for that leadership.
  Mr. POCAN. I now would like to yield to a colleague of mine who has 
done an outstanding job in representing people across not just her 
State of California but this country. She is the chair of our 
Democratic whip's Task Force on Poverty and Opportunity and has done a 
tremendous job in speaking out about what we need to do to make sure 
that those who are living in poverty have equal access to opportunity 
like every American should.
  It is my honor to yield some time to Representative Barbara Lee from 
California.
  Ms. LEE of California. Let me thank the gentleman for yielding and 
for his kind remarks.
  Let me thank you for your tremendous leadership on so many issues 
which address and affect the American people across the board. I also 
thank you for being here every week during these Special Orders. It is 
really raising the level of awareness on the critical issues of our 
day. It takes a lot to do this, but thank you for giving us a voice and 
an opportunity to be with you.
  I join you and our colleagues tonight in the Congressional 
Progressive Caucus, really, in strong opposition to the

[[Page 1638]]

Trans-Pacific Partnership. We are talking about trying to ensure that 
people do not fall into the ranks of the poor but also that people have 
pathways out of poverty and into prosperity.
  Now here we are, looking at another bill, H.R. 3830, which is called 
the Bipartisan Trade Priorities Act of 2014, which would provide the 
administration with Fast Track authority for the TPP. Once again, this 
is not a progressive trade policy. It will not allow for people to be 
employed and get good-paying jobs but, rather, just the opposite. So, 
unfortunately, looking at this really worries many of us that we will 
fall backwards in terms of more people becoming unemployed.
  Let me just be clear up front, though, in that I do not oppose all 
trade agreements. I support fair and free trade. However, the notion 
that Congress should provide a rubber stamp for a complex free trade 
agreement is simply irresponsible and dangerous to our economy and to 
our constituents. They elected us to provide a voice in all of these 
policies, so to shut the Congress out of having that seat at the table, 
to me, is downright undemocratic.
  The TPP will have a devastating effect on the working class families 
and communities of color that I represent and that many of us 
represent. It would sacrifice the well-being of working Americans for 
the wealth of multinational corporations, not to mention that, in its 
current form, the TPP would lock in higher prices for popular drugs, 
threatening access to life-saving medicines, including HIV/AIDS drugs, 
for millions of poor and low-income individuals and families around the 
world.
  By exporting American jobs to countries where the minimum wage is 
just 28 cents an hour, CEOs will continue to get richer while working 
Americans will lose their only sources of income. We have seen this 
happen before. Past trade agreements have already cost us 3.4 million 
service sector jobs. Many of those jobs were in California. We simply 
cannot afford to lose more. NAFTA alone resulted in the net loss of 1 
million U.S. jobs. It led to a trade deficit of $181 billion, and it 
devastated the manufacturing sector.
  These agreements have allowed corporations to ship good American jobs 
overseas while wages, benefits and workplace protections and 
environmental protections are really declining and are denied. Rather 
than focusing on trade agreements that will hurt the middle class, we 
really should be focusing on job creation, eradicating poverty, income 
inequality, and improving economic mobility.
  In 1980, CEOs were paid an average of 42 times the salary of a blue 
collar worker. In 2012, that number exploded to 354 times more than the 
average worker. This is unacceptable. It is really unconscionable that, 
rather than building pathways to prosperity, we are debating measures 
to make, yes, the 1 percent richer while holding working families down. 
So I stand in firm opposition to Fast Track authority and to any final 
deal that sacrifices American jobs and environmental protections in the 
name of international corporate profits. This must be defeated.
  Finally, as many of us are talking about tonight, we have 1.4 million 
people who did not receive their unemployment compensation checks this 
week. The Republican Tea Party House has totally abandoned these people 
who are living on the edge. They want to work, so it is incumbent upon 
us to do the right thing on behalf of these people and immediately 
extend unemployment compensation.
  First of all, it is the correct thing to do. It is the American thing 
to do. It is the moral thing to do, but it is also economically wise to 
do this. So we hope, during the district work period next week, that 
Republicans hear from their constituents because it is not only 
Democrats who have people who have lost their unemployment compensation 
but Republican constituents. All Americans who are seeking to work and 
who want to work and who need that bridge over troubled waters have 
lost their unemployment checks also.
  I hope, for those who are people of faith, they really draw from 
their faith and understand that this is the moment, that now is the 
time to think about the least of these and to remember that we are our 
brothers' and that we are our sisters' keepers and that we need to pass 
unemployment compensation right away and then move forward and increase 
the minimum wage and, hopefully, one day, increase the minimum wage to 
really a living wage because that is what the American people deserve.
  Thank you again for your leadership, and thank you for giving me the 
chance to be with you tonight.
  Mr. POCAN. Absolutely, Representative Lee. Thank you so much, not 
only for talking about the Fast Track and the wage erosion that is 
going to come out of that for the American people, but for all of the 
words as we talk about Fast Track and the need to stop it because, if 
that goes forward, we are going to lose our voice, which means the 
people lose their voice in trade agreements that are going to have such 
widespread ramifications. So thank you so much.
  I would now love to yield some time to my colleague, someone who has 
been an outstanding Member of this body on so many issues. This is my 1 
year here; and every time there has been a major issue, there has been 
someone at the forefront of it, and so often it has been Representative 
Rosa DeLauro. She is leading our efforts to make sure that we expose 
what Fast Track is really about. I would love to yield some time to 
Representative Rosa DeLauro from the State of Connecticut.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I want to thank my colleague and just say that we really 
owe you a debt of gratitude. I know what it means as this is my 24th 
year that I have served in this body. Years ago, I would spend my days 
in 1-minute speeches and my evenings in Special Orders, and I know what 
it means and the kind of time and effort it takes. It is about your 
values and who you are, and a number of people that you attract come 
down and talk about these very critical issues, so we owe you a debt of 
gratitude for spearheading this effort.
  Every generation of leaders in this institution has faced its own 
time of testing. Whether it is an economic panic, the Great Depression, 
slavery, Jim Crow, the Civil War, world war, the Cold War, there are 
times when our country is confronted with a crisis that poses an 
existential threat to our Nation and to our way of life, and Congress 
needs to stand up and act. The test of our time is inequality. It is 
not too much to say that inequality threatens the continued existence 
of the middle class in America and even the American Dream, itself.
  The question before us now is: Are we going to continue to be the 
land of opportunity and social mobility and the Nation that forged the 
largest middle class in human history during the 20th century, or are 
we going to become a Nation of very few haves and millions of have-
nots?

                              {time}  1800

  As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once said:

       We can either have democracy in this country or we can have 
     great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't 
     have both.

  The current trend lines on inequality should serve as a wake-up call 
to everyone in this institution. According to the nonpartisan 
Congressional Budget Office in 2011, while the top 1 percent of 
Americans have seen their income triple over the past 30 years and now 
make 23 percent of the total, middle and working class Americans have 
seen their wages stagnate and median income fall. The year after that 
report, 2012, shows the highest corporate profits, after taxes, and the 
lowest salaries and wages as a percentage of our gross domestic product 
in our history.
  The inequality we see in America today is not a crisis because some 
are rich and many are not. It is a crisis because the compact has been 
broken that allowed hard work to pay off and allowed future generations 
to do better. As a result, the middle class in America is under siege.
  It used to be that, through hard work and access to opportunity and 
education, a working class family could

[[Page 1639]]

move up the ladder in America. They could buy a home, send their kids 
to college, have money to take an occasional vacation, and know that 
when they reached retirement, they would be okay. That is the story of 
my parents--and probably yours--who worked hard all their lives so I 
could go to college and follow my aspirations. That is the American 
Dream.
  For far too many families, that dream is fading away. American 
workers are being squeezed. Their paychecks have stagnated. Their 
benefits have been cut. Their homes are debt traps. Their job security 
has been weakened. Their wage and hour protections have been violated. 
And the safety net under them to help them on their feet in case they 
slip is being willfully shredded by some Members of this body.
  So yes, inequality is the crisis of our time. History will judge this 
Congress terribly if we do not do everything in our power to restore 
the middle class in America--to create good, well-paying jobs at home; 
ensure steady, rising wages; and promote opportunity and upward social 
mobility.
  There are many things that Congress can and should do to remedy this 
crisis. We can stop trying to savage the safety net by cutting 
unemployment insurance and food stamps.
  My colleagues have talked about 1.3 million people without 
unemployment benefits. And the temerity of leaving this institution, 
going home for the holidays, having a wonderful time with your 
families--and no one denies that you should have time with your family, 
but to leave these people on the roadside by themselves with nothing to 
be able to take care of themselves or their families, that is not the 
United States of America. That is not the Congress. That is not who we 
are or what we are about.
  We can pass a budget in this place that invests in our future, in our 
fundamental priorities--education and job training--but in this Nation 
of bounty, we can't talk about cutting food stamps, $8 billion, $9 
billion, $20 billion, $40 billion. It is wrong.
  We can support initiatives that create jobs and grow the economy, 
like infrastructure, manufacturing, and biomedical research. We can 
pass a comprehensive economic agenda for women and families that 
reflects the way that Americans live today. And we can recognize, as 
Lyndon Johnson did 50 years ago with the war on poverty, that the 
Federal Government plays a hugely important role in alleviating 
hardship and inequality, and we should do everything that we can to 
support these efforts.
  And given the deep hole we are in, one of the most important things 
we can do is stop digging. Namely, we can think twice, again, about 
extending unemployment benefits. But further, we think twice before 
signing off on another free trade pact--the Trans-Pacific Partnership--
that threatens to aggressively accelerate the inequality and job 
insecurity that Americans are already experiencing. We have seen this 
movie. We know how it ends.
  This year marks the 20th anniversary of the North American Free Trade 
Agreement, or NAFTA, and we know how that affected our economy and hurt 
our workers. So many of us were here during that debate. We cried the 
night of that vote because of what we knew it was going to mean to 
workers in the United States.
  One recent study estimated that as much as 39 percent of the observed 
growth in U.S. wage inequality since NAFTA is attributable to trade 
trends. Since NAFTA went into effect two decades ago, the share of 
national income collected by the top 10 percent of Americans has risen 
by 24 percent. The top 1 percent's share has increased by 58 percent. 
Meanwhile, the manufacturing jobs that helped forge America's middle 
class have been aggressively offshored. Millions of manufacturing jobs 
have disappeared in our country. They have been replaced by low-wage 
service sector work.
  According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, two out of every three 
displaced manufacturing workers who were rehired in 2012 experienced a 
wage reduction, most of them more than 20 percent. Despite the trend, 
we are now being urged to pass fast track legislation introduced by 
Senator Baucus and Representative Camp to grease the wheels of the 
Trans-Pacific Partnership. This agreement with 11 nations in the 
Pacific is unprecedented in scope and threatens to be NAFTA on 
steroids.
  Even the agreement is being negotiated in secret. Members of Congress 
have been left out of the loop, even though the agreement will create 
binding policies on the future Congresses in countless areas. We have 
the evidence that suggests that this agreement will only accelerate 
economic inequality and job insecurity for American workers.
  We are being told that we need to rubber-stamp it, that it is vital. 
Nine out of 11 nations in this agreement have wage levels significantly 
lower than ours. If there is pressure in any direction on already 
stagnant wages, it will be down.
  And I wind up with this. Harold Meyerson wrote in a very poignant 
column in today's Washington Post:

       When the case for free trade is coupled with the case for 
     raising U.S. workers' incomes, it enters a zone where real 
     numbers, and real Americans' lives, matter.
       In that zone, the argument for the kind of free trade deal 
     embodied by NAFTA, permanent normal trade relations with 
     China and the Trans-Pacific Partnership completely blows up. 
     Such deals increase the incomes of Americans investing abroad 
     even as they diminish the income of Americans working at 
     home. They worsen the very inequality against which the 
     President rightly campaigns.

  NAFTA has had a deep and lasting impact on our community. It has 
depressed wages. It has led to offshore jobs. It has meant more 
economic insecurity and less mobility for American workers. It has fed 
a rising tide of inequality that threatens to engulf the middle class 
in America for good.
  We cannot continue down this path that pushes the American Dream into 
oblivion. And I want to say to my colleagues and others--and I 
apologize for taking so much time--that we need to understand it is not 
one program here, one program there. This is a pattern that is 
overwhelming middle class America. Unless this institution has done 
what it has done in the past to change that direction, we will have a 
Nation that no longer has the economic advantages that it has had in 
the past, and people will no longer enjoy economic security, nor will 
their families.
  I thank the gentleman for doing what he does and for inspiring us to 
come down and talk with you.
  Mr. POCAN. Thank you so much, Representative DeLauro, for your 
absolutely tireless advocacy on behalf of the middle class and people 
aspiring to be in the middle class. Thank you so much for being here 
tonight.
  I now yield to another colleague of mine who is tireless in her 
efforts. She is the seniormost woman in the House and the longest-
serving woman in the Ohio delegation in history. To me, the most 
important thing is she is a graduate of the University of Wisconsin-
Madison. Coming from Wisconsin, you can't go wrong with that. It is a 
real honor to have Representative Marcy Kaptur joining us tonight.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you.
  Congressman Mark Pocan, you are such a breath of fresh intelligence 
and fresh energy in this Congress of the United States. I am so proud 
of the people of the Badger State for sending you here and for the hard 
fight that you have exhibited from day one of your swearing in for the 
improvement in our economy, for the creation of jobs in this country, 
for the reemployment of all of those who, coast-to-coast, are looking 
for work but can't find it. Thank you very much for your service to our 
country and for bringing us together here tonight.
  I would like to say that trade policy is the major reason that 
America can't employ all of the people seeking work. Our trade policies 
are the major reason that we can't balance our budget.
  If we take a look at the additional pressure on outsourcing more U.S. 
jobs that is going to come because of the recent introduction of the 
TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership--or fast track, as it is called--it 
is employing

[[Page 1640]]

the same old failed trade model. And that model is, when you have more 
imports coming in here than exports going out, you are in the negative. 
And when you are in the negative on trade policy, you lose jobs. In 
fact, we are losing jobs by the container load.
  On average, every day, because of fast track agreements that have 
already been passed, we are losing about 15 American manufacturing 
establishments that are closing every day. You can go into any town in 
Madison, Wisconsin, and Cleveland, Ohio, and Parma and Toledo, Ohio, 
and see shuttered companies.
  And what is amazing is, if you go to Newton, Iowa, and go see where 
Maytag used to be located and then go down to Monterrey, Mexico, you 
will see Maytag operating down there. But all the workers in Newton 
lost their jobs. That was a great product. And we can look in industry 
after industry and see the same thing.
  I have got Bridget helping me hold this chart up--I am going to refer 
to this in a second--and I want to thank her very much. She is a Member 
of Congressman Pocan's staff.
  The fast track model was established in the 1970s, before any of us 
ever got here, as a way for the executive branch to exclude Congress 
from trade negotiations. How about that? It is just another overreach 
by the executive branch here inside this Congress and our ability to 
exert our legislative authority under the Constitution of this country.
  Since that fast track process was adopted, this failed trade model of 
executive branch control over our country has racked up over $9 
trillion in trade deficits.
  People say, Why do we have a budget deficit? Well, a budget deficit 
is only a reflection of our economy not being able to produce enough 
income to pay the bills because we have lost so many jobs. This trade 
deficit has gotten worse every year since the mid-1970s and racked up 
$9 trillion--more imports coming in here than exports going out. 
Indeed, through this period, America has lost nearly--just in the 
manufacturing sector--7 million jobs, a third of the manufacturing jobs 
of this country, because of the fast track process.
  What fast track means is, when the executive branch sends one of 
these trade deals up to Congress, they tie our hands. We can't amend 
it. The Rules Committee shuts it down. They bring it to floor and we 
can't do anything about it because they have negotiated in secret and 
we can't know what it is.
  What kind of crazy process is that for the people of the United 
States of America?
  Fast track has changed America's way of life. This amount of trade 
deficit--$9 trillion--translates into lost jobs. It translates into 
poor-quality goods.
  I tried to buy a coat over the holiday season. Go find quality 
material. Go find it. I would be real interested if you can. I was just 
interested in how sleazy the fabric has become and how poor the 
craftsmanship and craftswomanship. And I know the people making that, 
whatever country the label says, I know they are paid almost nothing 
for the work that they do. And we see our middle class shrinking.
  And who is making the money off that transaction? Surely not the 
person making it in some other country, and surely not the person who 
is buying it here in our country.
  Free trade agreements such as NAFTA, which was passed back in the 
mid-1970s--the China PNTR, which was then passed in the late 1990s; and 
then Korea, which was just passed a couple of years ago--were passed 
under the fast track procedure. We were promised these agreements would 
create jobs and help balance our trade deficits in an effort to 
strengthen our economy.
  It is so interesting to go back and read what the proponents said. 
You would think if we hadn't passed those agreements, the entire 
Western world would collapse. Well, guess what? It is. Parts of it 
inside this country are collapsing.

                              {time}  1815

  Let me go through some of the promises that were broken. They said 
NAFTA, which was passed back in the early 1990s, was supposed to create 
200,000 jobs in our country. Find them, because what actually happened 
was, we have lost nearly a million jobs.
  If you look at this chart, the hole that just got deeper, in terms of 
trade deficit, related to our trade with Mexico and Canada. The United 
States ended up being the loser. One million Americans lost their jobs 
because of NAFTA.
  If you go to these other countries, you can actually find the plants. 
I saw Trico Manufacturing, that used to make windshield wipers in 
Buffalo, down south of the border. The workers at that company couldn't 
afford to buy cars, much less the windshield wipers that have to go on 
them, and the quality of the Trico products deteriorated.
  Interesting. It is a pattern that is repeated and repeated and 
repeated.
  Now, they said that Korea, which was passed just a couple of years 
ago, was supposed to create 70,000 new American jobs under the Korean 
Free Trade Agreement.
  Guess what?
  America has already lost 40,000 jobs to Korea, and all those cars 
they were supposed to buy from us, 50,000 cars, for the millions they 
send in here? They are not buying them. They are not buying them. There 
is a huge additional trade deficit now being racked up with Korea 
because of that agreement.
  So NAFTA had the exact opposite effect on our trade deficits than 
they were promised. Instead of helping to balance our trade deficit, 
NAFTA helped to dramatically increase it. The same was true with Korea.
  NAFTA and China, those two countries, if we look at the Mexico-Canada 
trade agreement called NAFTA, we have accumulated $1.5 trillion of red 
ink; $1.5 trillion.
  The same can be said for the Korea deal, and in the year after the 
Korean Fair Trade Agreement, America's trade deficit with Korea 
increased by $5.8 billion.
  Every billion translates into lost jobs of between 4,500 American 
workers and 10,000, depending on whether it was the industrial sector 
or the retail sector.
  Enough is enough. America doesn't need anymore so-called free trade 
fast track agreements because the model is wrong. It is destroying our 
middle class.
  What this country needs is investment in key industry such as 
manufacturing, to create jobs and grow our economy.
  I wanted to say a word about this big dip right here, which 
represents what happened after we signed the agreement with China. If 
you look at the amount of goods that are coming over our borders now, 
99.5 percent of the shoes coming into this country come from there, 
come from countries that have no ability to stand where citizens like 
us can speak freely, and have added to the angst facing our middle 
class in this country.
  We need investment in key industries, and we know that manufacturing, 
if there is investment there, at least 2.91 more jobs are created in 
other sectors, almost three jobs for every single job created in a 
manufacturing plant.
  So Congressman Pocan, thank you for bringing us together tonight. We 
need a new trade model for America, a pro-American trade policy that 
begins to result in trade surpluses like we used to have after World 
War II up until the mid 1970s, when America had a strong and growing 
middle class.
  This is the wrong trade model. We need a new trade model. Thank you 
so much for fighting for this and for the defeat of fast track on the 
TPP.
  Mr. POCAN. Thank you, Representative Kaptur, for all the work that 
you have done, and I know you are going to continue to do in the months 
ahead to make sure that we stand up for the middle class in this 
country. I really appreciate your efforts.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield some time to another colleague of 
mine whose background really is as a manager. He was a mayor of 
Providence, Rhode Island. He is an expert when it comes to budgets and 
knows how to make sure that we properly finance government. He serves 
on the Budget Committee here in Congress.
  I would love to yield some time to my colleague from the great State 
of Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).

[[Page 1641]]


  Mr. CICILLINE. I thank the gentleman for yielding and thank you for 
organizing this Special Order hour and for the power of your voice on 
this very important issue and for the work that you have done in your 
early days here in Congress.
  I thank your constituents for sending you here to fight, particularly 
to fight on behalf of the middle class and for the families who are 
really struggling in this still-recovering economy.
  I want to just spend a few moments tonight to speak about the expired 
unemployment insurance issue and the unwillingness of our friends on 
the other side of the aisle to address this issue, and the notion that 
we are going to leave tomorrow and go back home for a week, take 
another recess, without addressing this urgent issue which is impacting 
my State, the State of Rhode Island, but impacting Americans all across 
this country.
  What is so frustrating about the refusal to extend emergency 
unemployment benefits is that, first, it puts families in a very, very 
difficult position. These are folks who are looking for work, who are 
struggling to make ends meet as they navigate a difficult job market, 
who have relied on unemployment compensation, modest assistance to help 
put food on the table, to pay their bills, to keep a roof over their 
head, and have now seen their unemployment insurance cut off.
  This is impacting 1.5 million Americans, so far, and it will impact 
about 72,000 additional Americans every single week. 72,000 Americans 
will lose their unemployment insurance, according to analysis by the 
Ways and Means Committee.
  Tens of thousands of Americans living on the edge, relying on 
unemployment insurance to help get them through as they actively look 
for work, and they are being cut off.
  It is not only painful for the families, an incredible hardship and 
really devastating; it is also bad public policy. It hurts our economy 
because, as you know, Congressman Pocan, folks who are receiving 
unemployment insurance take that money and they inject it back into the 
economy. They buy goods that they need to survive--food, groceries, pay 
expenses, but they inject that back into the economy.
  In fact, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that our failure 
to extend unemployment insurance will cost the economy 200,000 jobs. 
The Economic Policy Institute predicts that the failure to extend 
unemployment benefits will cost 300,000 jobs.
  So this is not only devastating to families and really imposing 
terrible hardships, but it is also bad public policy. It is costing us 
jobs.
  It was reported today that 2 million children in America were living 
in families who were relying on long-term unemployment benefits, 
Federal unemployment benefits, in 2012--2 million children. So this has 
a real impact.
  In my home State, there are 4,900 Rhode Islanders who have lost their 
unemployment benefits, put out in the cold because Congress failed to 
act.
  To just give you some examples, I had the opportunity to speak with 
constituents who either wrote to me or called me or I met with in 
person.
  I just want to give you examples because we have heard a lot of 
conversation on the other side about who these folks are who are 
looking for work, and some of it has been unfair in describing who 
these individuals are. So I want my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle to understand who we are talking about here.
  One is a constituent of mine, Erica, from North Providence. She is a 
graphic designer. She has been looking for work, has been laid off and 
looking for work, and it has been very difficult for her to find work.
  She wrote to me, and we met afterwards, and she said: 1 month of help 
can be the difference between someone getting a job and getting back on 
their feet or falling further into debt and hopelessness.
  So she talked about how unemployment has helped her continue her job 
search, and whether or not it was going to be that and, hopefully, 
landing a job, or whether it was going to be falling further behind 
into greater debt and a greater sense of hopelessness.
  I met with a constituent of mine, Rhonda, from Rumford, Rhode Island. 
She is 54 years old. She worked her whole life, sometimes two or three 
jobs at the same time, just to make ends meet and to take care of 
herself and her family. She has two children. She has lost her 
unemployment benefits and is worried about how she is going to take 
care of her family.
  I spoke just the day before yesterday with Margaret, mother of four, 
suffering from Parkinson's Disease, who has worked her whole life. She 
said: I have never asked for help from anybody, but this is the time I 
need it--and she lost her unemployment.
  So these are examples of individuals, and I know, Congressman, you 
have examples in your own district. All of our colleagues do.
  We saw today repeated efforts--we tried everything, unanimous consent 
consideration, previous question, we tried every tactical move we could 
to force our friends on the other side of the aisle to bring an 
extension of unemployment benefits to the House floor for a vote, and 
they blocked us every single time.
  They are not hurting the Democrats. They are hurting the American 
people.
  I am very proud, on the Senate side, my senior Senator, Senator Jack 
Reed, has led the fight in the Senate, relentlessly making the case of 
what this impact is for individuals, for families and for our economy.
  It is difficult to understand how, seeing the hardship that this 
expiration of unemployment benefits causes to families, and what it 
will mean to people who literally are wondering, Am I going to get to 
stay in my apartment? Am I going to be able to pay my mortgage? Am I 
going to be able to put food on the table?
  These are people who have exhausted their State benefits, and as a 
condition of these benefits, they have to continue to actively look for 
work. So this notion that they would rather get this modest check than 
have a job is absurd.
  Every single person I have met with says, I want a job. I want the 
dignity that comes from having work and being able to support myself 
and my family.
  For every job that exists, there are two or three people for that 
job, so we have got to do more to create jobs.
  When I hear my friends on the other side of the aisle say we need 
jobs bills, we have jobs bills. Bring them to the floor for a vote.
  Invest in science and research. Invest in rebuilding our country. 
Invest in the Make It In America agenda to help support the rebirth of 
American manufacturing.
  There are jobs that we can bring to the floor. We ought to do that. 
At the same time, we ought to protect people who are particularly hard 
hit.
  This is part of the American tradition. You know, on the one hand, we 
have this self-determination and this strong American individualism. We 
also have a collective sense of taking care of each other and looking 
after each other. That is what the extension of unemployment benefits 
means.
  I thank you for continuing to raise this issue, for giving us an 
opportunity to make the case to the American people and, hopefully, to 
our colleagues on the other side of the aisle who will hear from their 
constituents and will really demand that, before we leave tomorrow, 
that we take action to extend unemployment benefits.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding some time, and again, thank you 
for you leadership.
  Mr. POCAN. Thank you, Representative Cicilline. You talked about the 
72,000 people every single week. If you think about it, as we tried to 
talk to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle trying to get 
this vote this week, when you think, in Speaker Boehner's district, the 
largest two communities in his district, Hamilton, Ohio, and 
Springfield, Ohio, 60,000 and 62,000 people, that is like that entire 
town losing their unemployment benefits in a single week.
  In my State, that is like Lambeau Field, almost the entire Lambeau 
Field, every week losing unemployment benefits. That is why we need to 
act. Thank you so much for your efforts in that behalf.

[[Page 1642]]

  It is now my pleasure to yield some time to my colleague from the 
great State of Minnesota. Although those of us from Wisconsin aren't 
always Gopher fans, we certainly appreciate our neighboring State.
  Representative Rick Nolan has not only been an outstanding 
Representative in this Congress, but he also was elected, I believe, 
first in 1974, and served three terms when he was first here 
representing the State of Minnesota. He came back to serve the public 
again because he wanted to make sure that he fought for the middle 
class and the State of Minnesota.
  It is my honor to yield some time to the gentleman from Minnesota 
(Mr. Nolan).
  Mr. NOLAN. Thank you, Mr. Pocan. I want to commend you for the 
tremendous service that you have been providing, bringing to the 
attention the important issues that relate to the working men and women 
in this country.
  In particular, I want to address the failure to renew emergency 
unemployment benefits. Clearly, it is unconscionable. It is 
unforgivable.
  As you and our other colleagues have pointed out, it is bad 
economics, and the characterization of these people as somehow being 
scofflaws that don't want to work is the cruelest and most unfair part 
of all of this.
  We need to remind ourselves that, in order to be eligible for 
unemployment compensation, you have to have been a worker. You have to 
have gone to work every day, and you could not have left your job 
voluntarily. You could not have been removed from your job for fault.
  You were a good worker who, by virtue of facts that you had no 
control over, lost your job, but you were someone who was willing to go 
to work every day.
  In the 32 years in my little hiatus between when I served and when I 
came back, I engaged all that in business, and I employed anywhere from 
25 to 50 people at all times.
  We paid unemployment insurance because we know, in business, the 
cycles that flow, and from time to time, layoffs are necessary, and I 
was always happy to pay that unemployment insurance, knowing that these 
good people who showed up for work for me every day had some protection 
in the event of circumstances that were beyond my control and their 
control.
  To deny these benefits is so unconscionable. It is such bad public 
policy. It is so unforgivable.
  We are leaving 4.9 million people out there, and I remind everyone 
again, workers, that they are going to lose the benefits that they 
earned, that they insured themselves against, together with their 
fellow workers and employers.

                              {time}  1830

  Here they are. Maybe they are going to lose their home because maybe 
they can't make their mortgage payments. They may be thrown into a 
diabetic coma because they can't buy their medicine, have to watch 
their children go hungry because they can't afford to buy food. That is 
not us. That is not America. We know better than that.
  So I implore my fellow colleagues and our Speaker to bring this 
unemployment benefit extension before the House so that we can have a 
vote on it. Because I have no doubt that with the heart and the 
goodwill that is in this House, we will extend them. We will extend 
those benefits because we know for a fact that the simple truth is, 
there is only one job for every three people that are out there, and 
until we put together the pro-growth, pro-jobs economy that we need to 
put everybody back to work, we need to provide those who are in need 
and who have earned the benefits and are workers in our society the 
benefits so that they can take care of their families and their needs. 
If the Speaker will allow this to come up for a vote, I predict there 
is enough goodwill here among both Democrats and Republicans that we 
will pass this.
  So, Mr. Pocan, thank you for bringing this to the attention of the 
Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope you are watching. Let us have a vote on this. We 
will pass it. We will do the right thing.
  Mr. POCAN. Thank you so much, Representative Nolan. Again, you have 
been a tireless effort for the entire country but especially for the 
people of northern Minnesota. They should be very proud of you for what 
you are doing.
  Mr. Speaker, would the Chair tell me much how much time remains?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wisconsin has 11 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. POCAN. I thank the Chair.
  I would like to try to split that time a little bit, a little bit on 
the unemployment extension, as we have been just talking about with the 
last several speakers, and a little bit about the fast track bill as 
well because both of those go hand-in-hand in what is going to happen 
to the American economy.
  I just want to share a few stories, some from my district and some 
from across the country, again, of real people. I am not talking about 
the numbers, the 72,000 people a week, but just real people and their 
stories about what this means when we don't extend those benefits.
  I am going to bring someone to the State of the Union speech from my 
district to talk about this personally, but let me share some stories 
that I have received. One is a woman from Baraboo, Wisconsin. She is a 
surgical nurse, and she lost her job more than 6 months ago. Since that 
time, she has done everything she can to look for work and apply for 
jobs, and unfortunately, up to this point, she hasn't been successful. 
Now, due to this Congress' inaction, Mr. Speaker, she has lost her 
unemployment benefits. Without this insurance, she is unable to afford 
her rent, and she is in danger of being kicked out of her house in just 
2 weeks, meaning that she may have to move into a homeless shelter. She 
doesn't know where else to go or what else to do. That is a real person 
from south central Wisconsin who is affected by this Congress not 
acting and extending those benefits.
  Let me read another letter that we got from a woman from Mount Horeb, 
Wisconsin. She says:

       My husband has been out of work since mid-June. He is a 
     union steamfitter who makes a decent wage when working. There 
     is not enough work right now. He applies for non-union jobs 
     every day and most times doesn't even get a call back. He has 
     now lost his unemployment benefits. We are a middle class 
     family. I work for a community bank but can't support our 
     family on just my wage. We are now having to apply for free 
     and reduced lunches for our two high school students. We are 
     applying for FoodShare.
       This is going to start creating a real crisis for the 
     programs designed to help those in need. They will not be 
     able to keep up. It's not that people don't want to work. 
     It's that there aren't enough jobs. We will soon lose our 
     house, as we are not able to make our payments. Grown people 
     should be able to work together toward a common goal. My 
     husband and I have worked hard all our lives to make ends 
     meet. Now, when we need help, there is none.

  Those are just two of the many letters I have gotten from my 
district, from people who are directly impacted by this Congress not 
acting on extending unemployment benefits, as we have so many times in 
the past. Under President Bush, five times we extended benefits without 
strings attached when the unemployment rate was even lower than it is 
now. We have acted so many times in this Nation's history to extend 
those benefits to the people who need it most, and right now, instead, 
we are going to somehow play politics and not be able to get that vote.
  I agree with Representative Nolan that if we had that vote, it would 
pass. There are enough good people in this body, Democrat and 
Republican, who will pass it, but it has to come to the floor for a 
vote. It can't continue to be blocked by the Republicans.
  Mr. Speaker, in addition to the need for an unemployment extension, 
there is an issue that really works hand-in-hand, and that is the issue 
that we can see in this body in the coming months.
  Just introduced last week is a fast track bill to fast-track a trade 
agreement right now, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, that is being 
finalized and negotiated by this country and other countries around the 
Pacific Rim.
  This is something that we have seen such failure from in past 
efforts, like

[[Page 1643]]

NAFTA and the Korea agreement and others, that we would hate to see 
this happen. At a time this country is still bleeding jobs, we need to 
do something to help people get back to work, and while we have slowly 
seen the economy improve, we have also noticed that there are people 
being left behind. There is a dual track going on, and that is why we 
need to help every single person.
  There are a couple of charts I want to show people, and I want to 
thank the Communication Workers of America, the union that, like other 
unions in this country, do so much on behalf of the middle class, 
fighting for their workers, making sure they have a say in their 
workplace. It is one of the reasons why I have had a union specialty 
printing business for 26 years. Unions do so much for the middle class. 
We need to do everything we can to support the average family working 
in America.
  These are some charts that they put together, statistics from the 
Bureau of Labor Statistics. This shows where wages were along a 
continuum. If you look at the red, that is where the real average 
weekly earnings are. Right now, it is at about $637. Back in 1971, it 
was $731. It was more in 1971 than it is right now where we are at.
  If we had wages tied to the same percent that we have had to 
productivity in this country, the wage would be at $1,183 a week, in 
the yellow zone. That is what we are not getting. We are still 
producing that in output in this country, but it hasn't gone to the 
average worker. Unfortunately, what we have seen in this country is 
something just the opposite, which is the money going to just the top 
in businesses and not to the average worker.
  In 1980, the average CEO made 42 times what the average blue collar 
worker made, 42 times. Around the world, in countries like Japan and 
Germany, it has always been around in that 25 to 40 range. That is 
where a successful economy is at.
  In 2012, CEO pay had grown to 354 times what the median pay is in 
this country, 354 times. It is this gap where workers haven't gotten 
that money. Instead, it has gone to that top 1 percent. So we have wage 
inequality. We have wage erosion happening.
  Finally, let me show you something that ties directly to what we are 
talking about on fast track. When you look at net exports as a 
percentage of the gross domestic product, you will notice we have had a 
surplus for many years, from about 1950 to about 1974, and what 
happened in 1974 was this country's first use of fast track, and that 
is when we noticed our first dip, going into a net importing country 
rather than an exporting country.
  Then when you look at this, the graph how it goes, there is another 
big dip right here. What happened around the mid-nineties? Well, in the 
mid-nineties, we passed NAFTA. We passed the WTO, and sure enough, we 
watched our exports dwindle even more.
  Then in 2012, when we passed the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, we 
were promised 70,000 new jobs in this country. Instead, we lost 40,000 
American jobs after we passed that. So what members of the Progressive 
Caucus and what Members of this Congress are trying to get across--
Democrats and Republicans--is that when we do a fast track authority, 
as explained by Representative DeLauro and others today, we are 
essentially giving up our congressional oversight to the President, who 
has negotiated this.
  We haven't even had a chance to really see the documents yet. They 
are not even finalized, and they want us to give a rubberstamp 
authority that takes away our ability to have debate, to be able to 
amend these agreements.
  If this agreement looks anything like we think it is going to, like 
NAFTA and other agreements we have had in the past, you are going to 
see this graph go farther and farther down, and we will be a net 
importer, not a net exporter, and it will cost more American jobs.
  So, Mr. Speaker, the Progressive Caucus today was here for this 
Special Order hour to talk about two issues. One, the real need to 
extend Emergency Unemployment Compensation benefits to people who need 
it so much in this country, the 1.3 million people and 17,000 more each 
and every single day, every week that we don't act, but also to talk 
about the fast track legislation that is coming down the pike because I 
think the average American isn't aware of what is happening.
  We need to talk about this more because when this vote happens in 
this House, we could be rubber-stamping an agreement that will continue 
to not only cost us jobs but will continue to have other impacts on 
everything from food safety to the financial industry and other things 
across the board.
  So I am honored to have been joined by so many colleagues from the 
Progressive Caucus tonight. We are going to continue to fight for the 
middle class and those aspiring to be in the middle class.
  Mr. Speaker, I just want to thank you for these minutes that we have 
had tonight to talk about these issues with the American people, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________