Personal Responsibility and Individual Development for Everyone Act

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
SENATE

March 31, 2004

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT FOR EVERYONE ACT
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I know we are here today to talk about TANF, the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program. That program is a safety net for the American public. I want to talk about another safety net program-the safety net for American workers-that will provide its last benefit today, March 31. Today is the last day any American worker will receive benefits from the Temporary Emergency Unemployment Compensation program, which has been providing the last of the Federal unemployment benefits to those who came onto the program before it expired on December 21. As of today, there are 1.1 million people who have exhausted their State benefit without any Federal program to pick them up.

This is more than a dozen times that I have been to the floor to talk about this program and the need to reinstate the Federal unemployment benefits program. I think my colleagues clearly understand why I am here. In fact, we have had a majority of my colleagues in the Senate and a majority of my colleagues in the House support a reinstatement of this Federal program for unemployment benefits. The reason they have supported this program is that our economy has not recovered from the recession and has not created enough jobs to get America back to work. That means Americans who have been unemployed through no fault of their own, who are going out, hitting the pavement, trying to find jobs, can't find work.

The Federal program for unemployment benefits was created to take care of Americans during times like this. That is why we have, in the past 2 years, supported a Federal program that provides 13 weeks of Federal unemployment benefits to all states and 13 additional weeks for other States that have unemployment rates significantly higher than the national average.

I have come to the floor today because today we are leaving that last person in America, who today is receiving his or her last bit of federal help, out in the cold. And we are going to continue to see thousands more Americans left out in the cold every week.

I met with many of my constituents who have had to cash in their pensions, or who have had to withdraw from long-term savings meant for college tuition, or who have had to take all sorts of extraordinary measures to make sure they can continue to pay their bills. They have had to take these measures because we have not owned up to our obligation, which is to help individuals and the economy in a time of recession.

Let's recap this issue and how we got to this point. Many people look at this debate and see what amounts to fairly minor job growth and conclude that the economy is going to get better. I am all for the economy getting better. I actually believe in the potential of many sectors in the American economy to lead us back to a stronger place. I believe in aviation and biotech and nanotechnology and software. Someday jobs are going to grow in America.

Right now, however, we are still feeling the aftershocks of a recession. Back in 2002, the Bush administration projected that the economy would lose about 100,000. What happened in 2002, however, was that we actually lost 1.5 million jobs in America. The Administration did not have a handle on what was going on with the economy, which resulted in job projection that were way off.

In 2003, the Bush administration tried again. They projected that the economy was actually going to pick up. A lot of us, while we might not have agreed with the President's economic policies, wanted to hope for the best and wanted to see economic growth. We wanted those Americans who were without jobs to actually find employment. But, the economy in 2003 certainly didn't perform the way we thought it was going to perform. Even though the White House projected 1.7 million new jobs, the economy actually lost 406,000 jobs.

That leads us to 2004. The President and his economic advisers have projected that the economy will grow by 2.6 million jobs this year. And by God, this Member of the Senate would sit down and not say another word about unemployment benefits if this administration would say that they actually believe in their projection. I would sit down and not say another word on unemployment benefits, even though they were wrong in 2002 and 2003. But, in fact, three Cabinet Secretaries of the administration came to my State, and when asked about the projection of 2.6 million number jobs-their own projection-they basically said: Well, we don't really believe those numbers. It is kind of a rounding error.

I can tell you that the constituents of my State and across America are not a rounding error. They are people who are counting on a Federal program to help them. Their employers paid into this program for this very circumstance, when the economy is suffering from the aftershocks of a recession and there are no jobs to be had. That is why we want to help these individuals with a bill to reinstate the unemployment benefits program.

Let's look at the rest of the country because some of my colleagues seem to think that apart from a few states with high unemployment, things aren't so bad. I know Washington State has been hit hard. In fact, the Northwest as a region has topped the unemployment rate spectrum for some time. So, there are those who say this is a Washington state problem, or a Northwest problem. Yes, we were deeply affected by 9/11. Washington is heavily dependent on aviation. Yes, there was a huge downturn in the aviation industry. There is no surprise that people don't want to fly when you have an international recession going on. No wonder people don't want to travel. That has started to recover now, after almost 2 years. But this is not only a problem for the Northwest.

Look at these numbers throughout the country: In Ohio, 168,000 manufacturing jobs lost since 2001; in Texas, 175,000; my State, 66,000 jobs; California, 350,000; Pennsylvania, 154,000.

Practically all across America, save Nevada-maybe the Senators from Nevada could tell me why-and Alaska, every state has lost manufacturing jobs since Bush took office. This is only manufacturing jobs. In the Northwest we have lost jobs in software and in a variety of other industries. But this chart proves it is a nationwide problem. Everywhere in America, everywhere, we have lost manufacturing jobs. That has been a challenge to the American workers.

Let's talk about this as an economic issue because, having been in business, I want my colleagues to understand that this is a complex problem. We ought to celebrate the high productivity growth. This high growth means the economic pie is getting bigger but all that extra money in Gross Domestic Product has actually gone to corporate profits.

Now, it is not a bad thing for companies to be profitable. They need to be. They want to give a return to investors. There is nothing wrong with that, in and of itself. But what is wrong is when we fail to recognize that investors are winning, but laid-off workers are not. Our economy is not behaving the same way it did in the past. We are seeing a growth in productivity growth, but that has not actually helped us produce jobs.

In the 1990s we had some job loss, but we also had tremendous job growth. People don't think about that. They think in the 1990s it was probably just go-go-go and everything was very nice for America.

We actually had a lot of job loss in the 1990s.

The point is we had more job growth than we had job loss. So, unlike today, the people who lost their jobs in the 1990s were actually able to go somewhere else and get a new job. Today, people don't have that same opportunity once they have lost a job to find other employment.

A Business Week article came out just a few weeks ago entitled "Where Are The Jobs?" I recommend it to all my colleagues. It goes through each of these issues and greatly amplifies the problems we are facing and why it is imperative for us to do something about jobs and unemployment benefits. We see executive salaries have gone up and corporate profits have gone up, but then number of jobs has actually gone down.

Again, I am not saying it is horrible that we have had productivity increases-not at all. I'm just saying that if we only look at Gross Domestic Product, we miss a key part of the story. Everything isn't fine if you are not creating jobs.

Let's take a look at a cartoon from one of my favorite cartoonists from the Seattle paper. I thought this cartoon depicted the problem best. While the CEO compensation is going up, middle-class wages and the number of workers with health insurance is going down. These workers are the people who are barely holding on in this difficult economy.

That is what we have to recognize-millions of Americans are barely holding on. I am not saying our colleagues are totally heartless about this. But when you know that there are 1.1 million people without a paycheck or an unemployment check, and you know that you have the power to do something about that and you don't, I start to wonder whether either there is some heartlessness, or whether it is just a fundamental misunderstanding about what is going on with the economy. You can't just simplistically say everything is great because gross domestic product and productivity are up. It doesn't work that way. We have to get serious about this.

As the Business Week article pointed out, because of technology, cost pressures, the price of health care and political and economic problems the link between strong growth and job creation appears to be broken. We don't know what is wrong.

That is a quote from Business Week. That is a business publication that talks to businesses, reports on businesses, reports on profitability. So when Business Week asked where the jobs are, they answered that the link between strong growth and job creation appears to be broken.

This article chronicles these pressures, which are quite obvious if you think about it, how technology is increasing productivity, how we have increased global competition, how we have skyrocketing health care costs, and numerous other things. So, employers aren't hiring, but then why hasn't the unemployment rate increased?

Some of my colleagues have pointed out that the unemployment rate is holding at 5.6 percent. They say that we don't have to do anything about the unemployment insurance at the Federal level. Well, we cannot hang our hat on the 5.6 number because that number hides what is really going on with jobs in America; chiefly, that people are dropping out of the labor force.

If we count the 392,000 people who gave up looking for jobs, we find the unemployment rate would be more like 7.4 percent.

But, my colleagues want to say all is fine at 5.6 percent. That is a great number. We should be happy with it. Don't worry. Let us all go home. We have jobs. We can pay our mortgage payments, but not everybody in America can. We have 1.8 percent of the labor force totally out of the picture. If we look at the unemployment rate, it would be more like 7.4 percent.

The question is whether we are going to keep hiding behind these economic indicators and claim the economy is rosy for American workers. It may be rosy for corporate America and for shareholders, but it is not so rosy for the American worker. We have to come to terms with whether we are going to do our job are reinstate the Federal program or not.

Is that such a bad idea? I don't think it is such a bad idea. I think it is pretty simple.

I am kind of amazed it isn't more clear to my colleagues how unemployment insurance fits in with a constructive economic plan. My support for this program is not because it as a social program. As a former businessperson I view it as economic stimulus. With these benefits, laid-off workers continue to put money into the local economy and pay the mortgage and everything else. That is helpful.

When Alan Greenspan testified before a committee this month, he said, "Extending unemployment insurance is not a bad idea." In fact, he said, "At times like this, I support extension of unemployment insurance."

I wasn't surprised when later I heard that Treasury Secretary Snow last week at a hearing said, "If Congress acts, the President will sign the legislation."

Well, there is one hat in the hat trick gone of those who oppose this legislation. At least we know now the President is saying he is going to support it. I wish he would call on a few Members on the other side of the aisle. We could certainly use his help.

I am also bolstered by the fact that even the White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, at a press conference after Snow's comments said, "We have always said we would work with Congress on the issue of unemployment benefits."

If that isn't an invitation to pass this legislation today, I don't know what is.

American workers who have been left out in the cold and who, with their employers, have paid into the unemployment trust fund ought to get the support they deserve.

I remind my colleagues that a majority of Members in both the House and the Senate-58 Members over here and 227 Members in the House of Representatives-have voted in support of reinstating this program.

The fundamental question for an unemployed person sitting at home-whether you are in Detroit or Pittsburgh or in Washington State-is if both the House and Senate have a majority of Members voting for this, if we have the Secretary of Treasury supporting it, if we have the President's spokespeople saying they will work with the Congress on it, why can't we get unemployment benefits for the American worker?

I am not going to continue to belabor this point on the floor.

I go back to my business experience. I trust the fact that people who understand business and how to stimulate the economy know something needs to happen.

This Business Week article didn't give a knee-jerk reaction to our problem. There are probably 40 pages in this publication about this issue-why we have the unemployment rate, what our economy's illnesses are, and what we can do to recover. It is a very thoughtful piece. They conclude that Government action will act as a bridge and will help the economy cross over the extended valley of almost nonexistent hiring.

I think they have said it best. It is time for us to act. It is time for us to do something on this issue.

UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST
I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to calendar No. 470, S. 2250, a bill to extend the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002 for displaced workers, that the bill be read three times and passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table without intervening action or debate.