BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?
Ms. STABENOW. I will be happy to yield.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, first, I thank the Senator from Michigan. Her State more than any State in the Nation has been hit harder by this recession and high employment. I am sure, as I have found and the Presiding Officer has found back in Illinois, that many of these people who are out of work are desperate; that in the Senator's State of Michigan, it has been rough for a long time.
I wish to ask the Senator from the State of Michigan, for those who may not follow where we are at this moment in the Senate, if she could help refresh my recollection. Is it not true that we tried three or four times to get the Republicans to go along in a bipartisan way to extend unemployment benefits to those who lost their jobs through no fault of their own so they could keep their families together while they are searching for work?
Isn't it also true that this historically has been something where we put the party labels aside and say: This is an American emergency, just like a tornado hitting Chicago or Springfield, IL, or flooding hitting some part of Michigan; that we will stand behind the people of our country, the 8 million unemployed people who are struggling to get back on their feet? Isn't it true that historically we have done this without this kind of political rancor and argument?
Finally, yesterday, when we got the breakthrough--we have our new Senator from West Virginia, Carte Goodwin, who came in to succeed the legendary Robert C. Byrd. He cast the deciding vote, with two Republican Senators, I might add, who richly deserve credit for it. At that point, we could have moved forward to send these unemployment benefits, give these people in Detroit and Chicago peace of mind, and instead the other side of the aisle is insisting that we burn 30 hours off the calendar and even consider amendments on such issues as the immigration law in Arizona, the future of the estate tax--all these unrelated issues. Is it true that is where we are in this moment of time, where there are no votes taking place on the floor of the Senate?
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I say to our distinguished leader in the Senate--and I thank him for his advocacy--he is exactly right. We have waited--I am not sure now if it is 10 or 11 weeks--trying to extend unemployment benefits. We have had multiple votes. We finally get the votes through all kinds of different means. We finally get the votes yesterday, and it is unheard of that we would be in this spot, after getting a supermajority of 60 people and after having this go on as long as it has. It is unheard of. Never before with a Democratic or Republican President have we ever seen this, but now we are stuck again, and I don't understand why. I cannot fathom the motivation of why the folks on the other side of the aisle, the leadership on the other side of the aisle, would say: Let's wait another 30 hours, which for most people means it is on into next week, and most people have already been without that little bit of $250 or $300 a week. We are not talking about a lot of money.
Mr. DURBIN. That is right.
Ms. STABENOW. But it is a difference between having a roof over your family's head, food on the table, and not. So now we are pushing into next week.
Mr. DURBIN. If the Senator would yield for a question, through the Chair.
I have a chart given me by my staff that says in my home State of Illinois--and the State of the Presiding Officer--137,600 people in Illinois have had their unemployment benefits cut off because of the filibusters on the Republican side, and our numbers show 104,000 people in Senator Stabenow's State of Michigan.
Ms. STABENOW. That is right.
Mr. DURBIN. Not to mention the State of the Republican minority leader, Kentucky, with 32,200 people who have had their unemployment benefits cut off.
I would say to the Senator from Michigan that I am contacted by these families, and they describe to me what life is like when they lose that $250-a-week check and they are out of work. First, they exhaust their savings, then they start putting off paying bills, and then they pray to God they don't get sick because they have lost their health insurance. Then comes the day of reckoning. One lady called and said: They are cutting off my gas to my home, and the electricity is next. Another said: I am 1 month away from moving out of my little efficiency into my car. That is where I am going to have to live.
That is the reality of life, and that is while these people are looking for work. Imagine those burdens--and anyone facing them would be preoccupied by them--at the same time trying to dress up nicely, put on a happy face, and fill out the forms to find a job.
I ask the Senator from Michigan what she is finding with these people who have been cut off from basic unemployment benefits because of the Republican filibuster.
Ms. STABENOW. Well, you are exactly right. I also hear, on top of that, about people who have done what we have told them they should do--they should go back to school and get retraining. So they go back, and the only reason they can actually afford to go back to school to go through one of the job training programs is that small check that has allowed them to have a little income for their family while they do what we have told them to do, which is to get a different skill to go into a different career and then hope there will be a job there.
I have had so many e-mails from people not only about losing their homes and what is happening to their families but that they have had to drop out of school. Well, how does it make any sense, when we are trying to make sure people are productive in the workforce and are able to find a job that people are dropping out of school because of this as well?
Mr. DURBIN. Let me ask this question of the Senator, through the Chair.
I have had heard an argument from the other side of the aisle that says these checks make people lazy; that they don't go out and look for work. With $250 a week, they take it easy.
These aren't the people I am talking to in Illinois. I would ask the Senator from Michigan, who sees thousands of people who have been out of work for long periods of time, what she thinks about this Republican argument that unemployment checks make people lazy.
Ms. STABENOW. Well, people in Michigan are extremely offended by this, and I am very offended on their behalf. The people we are talking about have never been out of work in their lives. They are mortified. The idea of having to go get food assistance is unbelievable to them. These are people who built America. They built the middle class. It is not their fault Wall Street had the crisis.
We had the good fortune to be with the President signing a bill that will change that, but it is not their fault what happened. It is not their fault there was recklessness on Wall Street and then the financial system collapsed so small businesses can't get loans and manufacturers can't get loans.
It is not their fault we went through a decade of policies where the previous administration was not enforcing trade laws so our jobs went overseas. It is not their fault they find themselves in this economy. So they are saying to me: I want to work. Hey, I want a job. I don't want to extend my unemployment benefits. Give me a job.
That is what we are focusing on too. I say to the distinguished Senator from Illinois, one of the things I find doubly insulting about wasting this time is that the legislation we are trying to get to is a small business bill so small businesses can get loans to hire people. So we are trying to create jobs and, instead, all this time is being wasted on an effort just to try to help people get by.
Mr. DURBIN. Let's get to the hot-button issue--the deficit. Because every Republican who comes to the floor tries to explain why we should change the rules when it comes to unemployment compensation, why we should deny to millions of Americans that basic unemployment check to get by while they are out of work, by saying it is all about the deficit.
I would ask the Senator from Michigan if she would reflect on the fact that many of the same Republican Senators making that argument were Senators who, when they had a chance under the previous President, added to our deficit by waging two wars without paying for them, who added to our deficit by giving tax cuts to the wealthiest people in America without paying for them, and in fact doubled the debt of the United States in 8 years' time with that economic policy and those decisions.
These same Republican Senators--such as Senator Kyl of Arizona--now argue that if we give more tax cuts to the wealthy people in America and take that money out of the Treasury and add it to the deficit, it doesn't count because tax cuts for wealthy people don't count when it comes to this deficit discipline they want.
I ask the Senator from Michigan: How do you reconcile this; that all of a sudden now this is all about a deficit, which the Republican Senators virtually ignored for 8 years while we reached the stage of today.
Ms. STABENOW. Well, the Senator is absolutely correct. That is the fundamental question. It goes to a question of values and priorities. We will never get out of deficit with over 15 million people out of work, and that doesn't count people working two or three or four part-time jobs or who are underemployed. If people aren't back to work, aren't able to purchase as consumers, aren't able to contribute, we will never get out of deficit, which is why we start with jobs in the beginning.
But to add insult to injury, we hear that giving another round of tax cuts to the only part of the American public that has dramatically increased its income--those who are at the very top; the top 1 and 2 percent--doesn't matter if it adds to the debt. Adding to the debt for tax cuts for wealthy people doesn't count, but changing the rules, such as we have never done before, and focusing on helping out-of-work people does count. That counts. We can't do that, if it is somebody who is out of work. But we don't worry at all about deficits when it is helping the privileged few.
I can't imagine that. That is not the America I know and the majority of Americans care about right now.
Mr. DURBIN. I would say to the Senator from Michigan, by way of a question in closing, that it would seem to me a person who is unemployed, who doesn't get the basic check they need to survive and is forced to live in their car, that is a more compelling argument to me than giving a tax break to someone who needs to buy a newer car. That is what is being argued on the other side of the aisle. It is a complete mismatch of priorities.
What I struggle with is the notion of how many times the Senator and I have been called on, as Members of the House and Senate, to stand by some part of America that is struggling--farmers who are struggling because of drought or flood, people who are victims of flood and tornadoes or our friends in the Gulf of Mexico whose lives are changed because of BP. How many times have we said, as an American family, we stand together? When it comes to something as basic as food on the table and utility bills for the poorest people in America because they are out of work--when there are five unemployed people for every available job--why in the world our Republican friends want to take it out on them at this point in time I don't understand.
If there is anything this Congress should do, it is to rally behind those who have lost their jobs and are worrying about losing their jobs--those working part time, the Senator just referenced, and who want to work full time. If we can't stand together as a Senate behind those families, I think we have lost something very basic. I know I had to put that in the form of a question, so I am going to hazard a guess: Does the Senator?
Ms. STABENOW. Well, I absolutely agree. I wish to thank the Senator for his continuing leadership and passion on this issue.
I would simply say, if over 15 million people out of work in this country isn't an emergency, I don't know what is. Those are the folks we are fighting for right now--the people who want to work, the people who have been part of this great middle class in our country and who now find that slipping through their fingers because of a global economy, where we have not understood the rules should be fair, where we have had policies put into place that affect only the privileged few, with the theory that it will trickle down to everybody else.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT