Jumpstart our Business Strength (JOBS) Act

JUMPSTART OUR BUSINESS STRENGTH (JOBS) ACT

Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I remind my colleagues we are here talking about a JOBS bill. That is what we are talking about, how we keep jobs in America. So I think it is more than appropriate to be talking about one of the biggest problems in our country right now, the fact we have not created jobs. We have lost 2 million jobs since this administration began. It is more than appropriate to be discussing the unemployment benefits American workers need because they have lost jobs, through no fault of their own, since 9/11 and have been struggling to get recognition by this body and the other body on unemployment benefits.

We still have 1.5 million Americans who have exhausted State benefits and have not gotten assistance from this body, the Senate, which now wants to talk about a JOBS bill. Well, the most important jobs issue we are facing in America right now is that people who are trying to go back to work would love to be getting a paycheck instead of an unemployment check, and yet we are not giving them the option to have support in a program they have already paid into through their employer for unemployment benefits.

So what are people across the country saying? As the Senator from Massachusetts pointed out, we have had something like 15 different attempts to get unemployment benefits for workers who are trying to find jobs but are not finding jobs available. They are certainly people who would rather work.

The Dayton Daily News recently said:

What's troubling . . . is how some Republican leaders are hoisting another "Mission Accomplished" banner, this one to hide the struggle for more than a million unemployed workers who have exhausted state benefits without finding another job.

That is not what this Senator is saying. That is what a newspaper in one of the hardest hit States is saying about this particular problem, the fact we cannot simply say on a certain day the economy is better and Americans are back to work, when, for the first part of this year, with last month's numbers, we only created somewhere between 300,000 and 400,000 new jobs. We have lost 2 million jobs since this administration has been in power.

We had an economic report by the administration that they were going to create all sorts of jobs in 2002. That did not come about. In 2003 there was another projection. That did not happen. Now we are in 2004. And even though the administration said they thought they were going to create, I think the number was 2.6 million jobs this year, the President's own economic advisers backed off of those numbers and said: We don't know how many jobs are going to be created.

Well, I can tell them, having been in the private sector, trying to determine whether a company is growing at a rate in which you can resume hiring is a tough question. So I get that this is a complicated issue, and we do not know how fast our economy is going to grow. But we know this: We are not going to find 2 million jobs in the next 6 months. We are not going to hire 2 million Americans who basically have lost their jobs, and in many cases through no fault of their own, and put them back to work in that short a period of time.

The question is whether we want to give the American worker who is unemployed an opportunity to receive the Federal benefit this program was created for, what they paid into through their employer so there could be assistance in tough economic times.

Well, if the last year and a half does not qualify for tough economic times, I don't know what would. Newspapers across the country are saying it is time we deal with this.

The Dayton Daily News again said early last month:

Maybe there are brighter days ahead. But that's no comfort now to the unprecedented number of laid-off workers, who have scrambled without success to find a job and . . . lost the little bit of help given under state unemployment benefits programs.

It cannot be any more plain than that. The President is on a bus driving through a State that is basically saying, as crisply and clearly as they possibly can: We need additional help and support. The State program has expired. People are still unemployed, and they cannot find a job. These people would gladly go back to work, gladly go back to getting health benefits, gladly go back to getting the other benefits of being employed, but the jobs are not there. So the question is whether we are going to do the job we have said we were going to do.

In fact, you can take the economists who are also looking at this, because I think part of the other side of the aisle would like to say: Don't worry, it is all going to get better. But even if we double last month's numbers, even if in the next 2 months we created 500,000 or 600,000 jobs, it still isn't going to be enough jobs for the 2 million Americans who have lost their way. So why not put some stimulus into the economy.

That is why the Miami Herald said last month: Mixed messages, the White House gets a boost from strong job growth, but economists say unemployment will remain a problem.

That is because economists are looking at the numbers and they are saying: You are still going to have unemployment.

It is no surprise that Alan Greenspan came before a House committee and, when asked about whether we should expand Federal unemployment benefits, basically said: I think it is a good idea, largely due to the number of exhaustees that are out there in America. By that he means the number of people who have fallen off the State program and could qualify for Federal assistance.

I know some of my colleagues have said they want to cut this program off at some point in time: Why should we keep doing it; the economy is starting to pick up.

You do it because these exhaustees don't have a job. They can't pay mortgage payments, take care of health care. Their employer paid into this program for this very benefit. This is the best economic stimulus this country could get right now. Giving employees access to the assistance of the Federal program for the next 6 months would generate $11 billion in economic stimulus. That is for every dollar spent on unemployment benefits, it generates $2 of economic stimulus.

I think about the States that have been hard hit, such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Washington, Oregon, Alaska. Those are States that certainly could use the economic stimulus in their States to keep companies from not defaulting on mortgage payments, keep families in their home, and provide additional stimulus to those sagging economies.

People on the other side of the aisle say: At some point in time, the President's economic plan is going to kick in and work. But I don't think anybody can say it is going to kick in and work in the next 2 months to the degree necessary to take care of the number of unemployed. It is not going to take care of 1.5 million. It is not going to take care of 2 million people who have lost their jobs and 1.5 million who have already exhausted State benefits.

The question is whether this body is going to stand up and do the right thing and come up with a program to expand unemployment benefits for the next several months so unemployed workers in America can have some certainty they are going to have a future where they can stay in their home.

I am having a tough time convincing the other side of the aisle. Maybe they haven't heard from their constituents on this issue. I think there are one or two States that may not have lost any manufacturing jobs. Maybe their constituents don't feel the same pain that we do in the Northwest. In 2002 alone, we lost 72,000 jobs in our State, mostly as a result of the downturn after 9/11 and its impact on the aviation industry, but certainly other industries as well. So we have had a lot of people who have continued to look for jobs. We have heard from a lot of these individuals. We have a Web site anybody can access at cantwell.senate.gov that tells you the stories of these individuals in their own words.

What each person tells over and over is how much they would like to have a job, how many job interviews they have gone on, only to find people five and six times more qualified than they taking the minimal number of jobs that are actually being created. That is why one of the chief economists in the country, Alan Greenspan, has said the size of the exhaustees alone should drive us to expand unemployment benefits. It would, in and of itself, give us the stimulus that would help us return the economy.

We had a vote not that long ago. Fifty-eight Members in this body voted in support of unemployment benefits. There was a similar vote, not the exact same language, in the House of Representatives. They voted to basically give an extension of unemployment benefits through the Federal program. So basically majorities in both the House and the Senate have voted for unemployment benefits. Yet still we do not have a benefit package.

The administration was asked whether they thought we should do this. Secretary of the Treasury Snow basically said it was something the White House wasn't objecting to. We asked the White House in their communications shop. They said they thought it should get done.

Now the question remains, who wants to hold up this benefit package? The American workers have paid into this. They want the money they paid into the Federal program to give them economic support so we can give people an opportunity to go back to work when jobs are created and not penalize them for the economic situation they are in today.