Small Business Program Extension and Reform Act of 2011
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SCHUMER. First, Mr. President, let me thank my colleague from Florida. He knew I was waiting, and I know he cut short his remarks, so I appreciate that. But more importantly than that, I appreciate his insight, his articulation of our situation, and his desire to help the people of Florida. Nobody works harder for the people of Florida than the Senator from Florida. They know disaster just about better than anybody else, given their geographic situation. So his fight for FEMA dollars is a fight for every citizen of that great State of Florida, where I must say many of my former constituents now reside, so I have a special care about Florida as well. I thank him for both his courtesy and his insightfulness.
FEMA runs out of money very soon. Already, recovery projects in more than 40 States have been halted so FEMA can focus their last dollars on responding to the latest disasters. To have FEMA not working in Joplin, MO, where we all saw the pictures, and because of the dangers that Hurricanes Irene and Lee created, is unheard of in this country. It is unheard of.
The Senate has already passed the bipartisan bill to replenish FEMA's coffers, providing $7 billion in immediate relief, not just for FEMA but the Army Corps. I can tell you that in my State we need Army Corps relief as well as FEMA relief because so many of our rivers have changed course. They have flooded. I think I mentioned earlier the Erie Canal--the locks--are no longer by the river because the storm's force changed the course of the Mohawk, so the river is here and the locks are here--the great historic Erie Canal. So we provided this $7 billion.
A reasonable person might say--all our constituents are saying--to get government to work, the most logical thing to do would be quick passage by the House so we could begin to get those dollars out the door. Instead, House Republicans decided to take emergency disaster aid and leverage it to force cuts to a jobs program they themselves used to support. If there has ever been a case of playing politics, that is it. If they don't like this jobs program, fine, fight it out in the regular course of business, but don't hold FEMA dollars hostage to cut jobs. The American people don't want that choice. Help those who are in the middle of a disaster. Is the only way we can help them to cut jobs in Michigan or Louisiana or other States, at a time when our country is hurting for jobs? That is not America, and that is not what our constituents have asked us to do. The jobs program they want to end, before they are willing to provide more disaster aid, is not some radical program. It was started under the Bush administration. It was passed with a bipartisan majority.
I understand their anguish. We have to cut funding. But we don't have to do it like this. We don't have to do it on the backs of the people of Schoharie County, whose homes have been blown away, or the people of Binghamton, who are in shelters because there is no rental housing for them. We don't have to do it on their backs. That is not fair. If our Republican colleagues want to have a fight over a program they used to support but now say the circumstances have changed, fine, we should have that. That is what we are here for. But don't hold disaster aid hostage.
I want to say this, lest people think the Democratic stand is some way-out-there, leftwing stand. Guess who supports us. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers. Because they know what we are doing is right. Those are groups that are almost always supporting Republican initiatives. So when they say we are right, doesn't that send a shot across the bow to my colleagues to back off this ideological, narrow, my-way-or-the-highway position?
Most importantly, the House Republican approach would require that we kill 40,000 jobs in order to help our fellow Americans put their lives and businesses back together after this year's record disasters. That is not right, it is unprecedented, and I would say it is not the way we have done things in this country in the past.
The CR we will vote on this afternoon is a fail-safe measure. It is a bill that will keep the government running at funding levels agreed to by Democrats and Republicans in the debt ceiling negotiations. It is a good-faith effort to compromise and contains the same amount of disaster relief funding House Republicans supported.
It falls short of fully funding FEMA, as we did in the bipartisan bill passed 2 weeks ago, with 10 Republican votes, but we are working to meet our colleagues on the other side of the aisle in the middle in order to break the impasse. Will they move a little to the middle to meet us, or will they insist the only way to go is a bill that failed in this Chamber with a bipartisan vote against it of 59 to 36? Is Speaker Boehner saying to us a bill that fails in the Senate 59 to 36 is the only way to go, when it is so wrong and not supported by the Chamber of Commerce; when it
is pitting jobholders, and the future of this country in terms of energy independence, against each other versus disaster assistance? That is not fair. The only difference between our bill and the House bill is it doesn't require the job-killing cuts the Chamber of Commerce opposes and that our fragile economy can't afford right now.
We know there has been a lot of pressure on the 10 Senate Republicans who joined us 2 weeks ago to fight full disaster funding. I hope they do not cave in to the pressure exerted by the extreme minority in the House that demands job cuts as a precondition for disaster relief. I would urge them not do it. If they can't resist that pressure, what is their solution? They know the House bill is a dead letter here.
The path forward is clear. The Senate has already spoken on the political bill sent to us by the House. We must pass this commonsense, middle-of-the-road compromise measure that is now before the Senate. It will provide disaster aid to hard-hit communities across the country immediately and prevent an unnecessary government shutdown.
We shouldn't even be talking about shutdown. Why are we? Because the other body decided to attach disaster relief to government funding. We are not just holding jobs hostage, we are holding government funding hostage in a my-way-or-the-highway presentation take it or leave it or your government shuts down, take it or leave it or 40,000 people lose their jobs. That is not fair and that is not right.
Every aspect of our plan has already received major bipartisan support. Voting for it is the right thing to do. We must put politics aside at a time when the economy of this country is so fragile. We must avoid even coming close to a government shutdown. We must do what is right for our country. And what is right for our country is to pass the compromise measure that has had bipartisan support in the past and vote for it on the floor of the Senate in the next half hour.
One other comment. My great colleague from Louisiana has done an incredible job. She has been showing this, but in case people missed it over the last hour, it is a great little cartoon. There is a nice lady with a gray bun and little glasses talking on the telephone. There is her TV on the roof of her house, which has, obviously, been flooded. This cartoon is humorous, but I have seen flood levels up to this level on house after house after house across large parts of the eastern part of New York. She is on the phone, saying: ``Welcome to the Republican disaster relief hot line. At the tone, please tell us the emergency and how you plan to offset the cost of your rescue.''
When the next disaster comes and people are struggling, are we going to have to debate how much to cut education funds? In the next disaster, when people have experienced an earthquake, are we going to have to debate how to help those people while we talk about how much to cut Border Patrol funds? In the next disaster, when fires are ravaging across Texas or New Mexico or California, are we going to debate how much we have to cut food safety inspectors? That is not our way, and that is why we need to support this bill which has bipartisan elements and has been supported by Members of both parties. That bill is a compromise bill. It is the middle-of-the-road bill that is on the floor of the Senate.
Mr. President, I yield my time, and I thank my great colleague from Louisiana for the great job she has done.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source