[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 5157-5158]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW ACT RESOLUTIONS

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I wish to express my 
disappointment in today's vote on H.J. Res. 67 and my strong opposition 
to H.J. Res. 66. These resolutions overturn rules issued by the 
Department of Labor that are essential to providing increased access to 
retirement savings programs at the city and State levels.
  Among all working families in America ages 32 to 61, the median 
family in America had only $5,000 saved in 2013. This indicates to me 
that we are clearly facing a retirement savings crisis.
  In California, 7.5 million workers don't have access to a retirement 
savings plan through their jobs, including 3.4 million women. Of those 
without a workplace retirement savings plan, almost 5 million are 
individuals of Color, and over 3.5 million are Latino.
  The good news is that, when a person has access to a retirement 
savings program through their workplace, they are 15 times more likely 
to save for retirement.
  In California, legislators have been working for more than 4 years to 
create the Secure Choice program as a way of addressing the retirement 
crisis we face. This program allows workers to easily save for 
retirement through a deduction made directly from their paycheck.
  Those who need access to a workplace retirement program the most, 
individuals with lower incomes, are far less likely to have that 
access. These are the people who stand to gain the most from the Secure 
Choice program and lose the most by Congress halting its progress.
  Let me share some examples of the people who would be impacted. Most 
eligible employees work for small businesses that might not be able to 
offer retirement savings plans on their own, and nearly half of 
eligible workers work in the retail, hospitality, healthcare, and 
manufacturing industries.
  This program supports lower- and middle-class workers by providing 
access to the tools they need to control their financial future. The 
average wage of workers eligible for this program is $35,000, and 80 
percent of eligible workers earn less than $50,000.
  We are facing a time of deep income inequality and must stand up for 
programs that support the middle class, like Secure Choice. Nationwide, 
the bottom 90 percent of households have seen their income drop 
compared to what it was in 1970. Meanwhile, the top 1 percent has seen 
their household income triple.
  As workers struggle to make ends meet, it is appalling to me that 
Congress would actively take away a key resource for financial 
planning.
  Californians want to ensure that all employees have access to a 
retirement savings program. The Department of Labor's State rule clears 
the way for California to set up programs like Secure Choice by 
clarifying employers' obligations to the accounts.
  This rule would also help small businesses compete for qualified 
workers who expect and deserve access to a workplace retirement savings 
program. Small Business California supports the Department of Labor's 
rule paving the way for these programs and opposes this resolution.
  Finally, in California, our State chapter of the Chamber of Commerce 
specifically asked for an opinion from the Department of Labor on 
employer obligations. Once the Department of Labor's rule was issued, 
CalChamber no longer opposed the California bill.
  In fact, the legislation that passed in California requires the State 
board to report a finalized rule from the Department of Labor. 
Overturning the Department of Labor's rule completely ignores the 
effort and care taken in California to craft a program that works for 
both employees and employers.

[[Page 5158]]

  Nationally, almost half of working-age households do not have 
retirement savings accounts, and 55 million people don't have access to 
a workplace retirement plan. This is shocking.
  According to the Economic Policy Institute, the median retirement 
account savings for families ages 56 to 61 was only $17,000 in 2013. 
This is only slightly higher than the 2016 poverty threshold for a 
household of two people aged 65 and older. It is inconceivable that a 
family could afford to finance their retirement with only $17,000 in 
savings.
  Supporting retirement savings is not a partisan issue. In fact a 
bipartisan group of State treasurers oppose this resolution, as does 
the National Conference of State Legislatures.
  We are facing a retirement savings crisis in our country, and the 
Department of Labor's rule is a simple, commonsense guideline that make 
it easier for individuals to save for retirement.
  While today's vote is a disappointing development for city programs, 
I will keep fighting to support California's Secure Choice program. I 
strongly urge my colleagues to stand up for American workers and 
support their access to retirement savings programs by opposing H.J. 
Res. 66, should it come up for a vote on the Senate floor.
  Thank you.

                          ____________________