[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 358-359]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss amendment No. 2622 
I have filed, the Solutions to Long-Term Unemployment Act, that will be 
before the Senate today.
  The bill before the Senate today would extend emergency unemployment 
benefits for the 13th time since 2008. Let me repeat that. Congress has 
enacted or extended emergency unemployment benefits 13 times over the 
past 5 years. At some point you have to start asking yourself: At what 
point does this no longer become an emergency but it becomes permanent? 
We have been doing this now for 5 years. This will be the 13th time.
  Obviously, there are lots of people in a tough economy who are still 
hurting. But what this should say to us is that it is time we started 
not just treating the symptom but fixing the problem we have in America 
today. And the problem we have is a sluggish economy that continues to 
sort of stumble along. We have a chronically high unemployment rate 
with lots of people who have been unemployed for a very long period of 
time. Over that same period, Congress has pushed through ObamaCare, 
raised taxes on job creators, while the administration has pursued 
aggressive regulations that have done little more than drive up costs 
for many of our small businesses.
  So after 13 extensions of unemployment benefits, expensive new 
regulations, and higher taxes, what is the result? Well, today over 37 
percent of unemployed Americans have been out of work for 27 weeks or 
longer. That represents over 4 million men and women who have been most 
impacted by President Obama's failed economic policies.
  I applaud my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle who have 
offered up commonsense, even bipartisan, ideas to pay for the extension 
of emergency unemployment benefits. If we extend these benefits once 
again, I am hopeful we can find an appropriate way to pay for this 
extension and not pass the bill on to our children and grandchildren. 
However, I also have to come to the floor today to challenge all of my 
colleagues to look at solutions to the underlying problem rather than 
simply treating the symptoms of long-term unemployment for yet the 13th 
time.
  The underlying problem is we have 4 million Americans who have not 
been able to find jobs for more than 6 months on account of the 
stagnant Obama economy. That is almost double--double--the amount of 
long-term unemployed Americans relative to prerecession levels. So my 
amendment addresses the underlying problem of long-term unemployment by 
reducing labor costs, increasing worker mobility, and strengthening 
Federal worker training programs.
  First, my amendment would provide much-needed relief from ObamaCare 
for any employer who hires an individual who has been unemployed for 27 
weeks or longer. As we all know, ObamaCare is full of additional costs 
and mandates that are stifling economic growth. The ObamaCare employer 
mandate arguably has the greatest impact on an already weak labor 
market. The impact of this mandate is so great the administration has 
unilaterally delayed it until after the next election. Under this 
mandate, a business with 50 or more employees must provide government-
approved insurance or pay an annual penalty of $2,000 to $3,000 per 
employee. For a smaller or medium-sized business, that is a significant 
deterrent to expanding and hiring more workers.
  Under my amendment, if a business decides to hire someone who has 
been out of work for 27 weeks or longer, that person would be exempt 
from the ObamaCare mandate for as long as he or she works at that 
business.
  Second, my amendment would further reduce labor costs by providing a 
6-month payroll tax holiday for any employer who hires a long-term 
unemployed worker. Employers currently pay a payroll tax of 6.2 percent 
of an employee's wages up to a capped amount known as the Social 
Security wage base. Waiving this tax is an incentive for employers to 
hire those employees often considered to be a higher risk by virtue of 
the fact they have been out of the labor force for an extended period 
of time.
  Consider a job that is paying an annual wage of $40,000. The employer 
payroll tax holiday in my amendment represents a $1,240 incentive for 
the employer to hire a long-term unemployed individual. Or take a 
higher skilled job paying $80,000 annually. A payroll tax holiday 
represents a $2,480 incentive for the employer to hire someone who has 
been unemployed for 27 weeks or longer. When coupled with the ObamaCare 
exemption in my amendment, that is an incentive of roughly $5,000 to 
hire an individual who has been unemployed for an extended period of 
time.
  Third, my amendment addresses a fundamental problem facing the long-
term unemployed by providing relocation assistance to start a job or 
find better opportunities.
  While the national labor market remains weak, there are pockets of 
prosperity across the country. In my home State of South Dakota, we 
have an unemployment rate of 3.6 percent. That is second only to our 
neighbors in North Dakota who are fully embracing the energy 
renaissance which is occurring in the Upper Great Plains and other 
parts of the country. Because of South Dakota's low tax and regulatory 
framework, it consistently makes us one of the best places in the 
United States to start and grow a business. In fact, one of the biggest 
issues we hear from prospective business investors is a concern they 
are not going to have enough workers if they decide to move to my 
State.
  Meanwhile, we have other parts of the Nation that continue to 
struggle with persistently high unemployment rates. Virginia has an 
unemployment rate of 8\1/2\ percent, and Rhode Island has 9 percent. 
The number of job openings and hire rates varies from region to region 
as well. This past summer the rate of job openings in the South was 20 
percent greater than in the Northeast. The same trend exists for hiring 
rates between those two regions.
  Part of a dynamic 21st economy is ensuring a mobile workforce that 
can meet regional demands for good-paying jobs. However, if you have 
someone who has been living off of unemployment benefits for the past 6 
months, that person likely does not have the resources to move to a new 
State for a new job.
  My amendment would provide a low-interest loan of up to $10,000 for 
anyone willing to relocate to a new job or move to a new State with 
better employment opportunities. These loans would have to be repaid 
within 10 years, but no payments would be required for 1 year while 
that individual or family gets back on their feet. Additionally, if the 
new job is eliminated within that first year, through no fault of the 
employee, the loan could be forgiven.
  Finally, my amendment would strengthen and streamline Federal worker 
training programs. We currently have over 50--50--Federal training 
programs across 9 Federal bureaucracies. It is a broken morass of 
programs that isn't helping employers or employees, and it certainly 
isn't an efficient use of taxpayer dollars. Even President Obama, in 
his 2012 State of the Union speech, said he wanted to ``cut through the 
maze of confusing [job] training programs'' and create ``one program'' 
for workers to find the help they need. Unfortunately, like many of the 
President's promises, that turned out to be more talk than action.
  While the President has failed to put forward a real plan to reform 
our worker training programs, the Republican-led House of 
Representatives has acted on a plan to accomplish just that. The House-
passed SKILLS Act includes several critical reforms that ensure workers 
receive the training they need for positions that businesses need 
filled today.
  The SKILLS Act would consolidate 35 redundant and ineffective Federal 
worker programs into a single workforce investment fund that would 
serve as a single source of support for workers, employers, and job 
seekers at the

[[Page 359]]

State level. This legislation creates much-needed flexibility at the 
State level and it empowers Governors and local employers to train 
workers for today's in-demand jobs.
  The SKILLS Act cuts through redtape and eliminates barriers that 
oftentimes keep workers from receiving the training they need when they 
need it. For too long we have been throwing taxpayer dollars at a maze 
of overlapping bureaucracies when we should be providing more targeted 
assistance directly to job seekers. We need to be training our workers 
for the high-tech jobs of today and the jobs that will continue to be 
in demand in the future.
  The SKILLS Act accomplishes these goals, which is why I included it 
in my amendment as a commonsense way to help the long-term unemployed 
try to find work in today's economy.
  There is no one solution to helping the unemployed. However, one 
thing is clear: We need to find ways to make it more attractive for 
employers to invest in and hire workers rather than constantly pushing 
legislation that will raise the cost of doing business in America.
  Let's think for a second about the bills the Democratic majority 
supports or supported in the past. ObamaCare raised the cost of labor, 
it drove up premiums for millions of Americans and made it more 
expensive for employers to hire new employees.
  Raising the minimum wage will raise the cost of hiring new employees 
and only worsen the job prospects for the long-term unemployed.
  The tax increases pushed by Democrats here in the Senate and the 
White House apply to millions of small business owners which 
discourages investment and job growth.
  New environmental regulations are driving up the cost of energy and, 
therefore, the cost of doing business in this country.
  I am not suggesting the provisions in my amendment are the only way 
to make it more economical for employers to hire more workers, but I am 
suggesting if we want more employment, we need to make it less costly, 
not more costly, to hire each additional employee. It seems that nearly 
every policy pursued by the Democratic majority and the White House 
would raise costs on businesses, especially those small businesses 
which create the majority of jobs in this country.
  We have tried the approach of bigger government, higher taxes, and 
more regulations for the last 5 years and it has not worked. Let's try 
something different. Let's have a real debate about how we lower cost 
and make it easier for employers to go out and hire new employees. 
Let's focus our efforts on those who need the most help, such as those 
Americans who have been out of work the longest on account of the 
lagging Obama economy.
  I hope this amendment as well as others that my colleagues will offer 
will have an opportunity to be heard here on the floor of the Senate 
and voted on. What we have going on here now in terms of a process 
doesn't resemble anything like an open process that should allow us to 
openly debate the big issues that affect the American people. This is a 
pocketbook issue. This strikes at the very heart of the quality of 
life, the standard of living, the future economic well-being of 
Americans all across this country.
  I certainly hope the majority leader will allow for an open process 
which will enable us to enter into that debate, to put forward 
proposals--mine, among many others--which could be considered and voted 
on that would actually improve the overall situation of middle-class 
Americans. It is high time we had that debate. I hope we can, and I 
hope the majority will give us that opportunity.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Booker). The Senator from Georgia.

                          ____________________