H.R. 3244House108th Congress (2003-2005)In Committee

Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

2 earlier actions

HouseCommittee Latest Action

Referred to the Subcommittee on Human Resources.

Work and Welfare Subcommittee

October 8, 2003

View full timeline

HouseIntro Referral

Introduced in House

October 2, 2003

HouseIntro Referral

Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Ways and Means Committee

October 2, 2003

HouseCommittee

Referred to the Subcommittee on Human Resources.

Work and Welfare Subcommittee

October 8, 2003

Floor Debate

18 members

What members said about H.R. 3244 on the floor

+13

2 Republicans16 Democrats

Rep. Louise McIntosh SlaughterD-NY-28 · Dec 8, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.) Mr. Speaker, Christmas has come early for President Bush and…

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, Christmas has come early for President Bush and his high-dollar friends, but for millions of American families, it looks like the Grinch will be stealing Christmas. The media has widely reported that the President won victory after victory in negotiations over the details of this omnibus appropriations bill. But any Presidential victory comes at a very high cost.

America's working families and those struggling to stay afloat in the swift currents of unemployment will be stuck with the tab. The unemployment rate was essentially unchanged from October to November and almost 9 million Americans still cannot find work, including 6.2 percent of the New Yorkers who were unemployed.

Across the Nation, the number of Americans filing for the first time for unemployment benefits is up. New claims for unemployment have risen in 47 States and territories. One economist described last Friday's unemployment report as ``getting just the Christmas present you want but two sizes too small.'' The President assured the country that his massive tax cuts would create 300,000 jobs a month. But unfortunately for the millions of men and women looking for work, only 57,000 new jobs were created in November. That is the ``two sizes too small.'' The real effects of the administration's tax giveaways were more money to the wealthiest and a staggering Federal deficit.

Only a few days before the Christmas holiday and the beginning of a new year, unemployment benefits for thousands and thousands of Americans will run out. After December 20, thousands more will no longer be eligible for an extension of benefits. Today is our last opportunity before that happens to extend the unemployment benefits, to throw a small life preserver to those still caught in the swift currents of steady unemployment flowing through our murky economy.

Just this morning in the Committee on Rules hearing, the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations agreed that unemployment benefits should be extended. We are spending $87 billion on Iraq, $150 billion this year, and we should be able to extend the unemployment benefits, especially considering that there is a surplus of unemployment funds.

We need to fight with all our might to protect American jobs, particularly the manufacturing jobs. Since January 2001, the United States has lost 2.4 million manufacturing jobs. We should be exporting American products, not our jobs. The Manufacturing Extension Partnership, MEP, is a nationwide network of centers devoted to providing small and medium size manufacturers with assistance, information, and access to business experts. We should be promoting this program, but instead this bill slashes the budget by 63 percent. It is absurd that we are considering cutting this valuable program while thousands of manufacturing jobs are lost every day. MEP has proven its value in boosting productivity in sales and employment. Slashing this program will cost small manufacturers almost $2 billion in sales and cost 28,000 workers their employment.

Despite the strong opposition of both elected bodies of Congress, President Bush was successful in killing legislative protections against limitations on overtime pay. Relaxing the overtime pay rules makes it easier for companies to force workers to put in more than 40 hours a week without additional pay. And under the broad rules proposed by this administration, many nurses will be ineligible for overtime pay, and even manual laborers would be classified as executives, which would end their eligibility for overtime pay.

These new regulations could make at least 8 million workers ineligible for the overtime, the money with which many pay their bills and take care of their families. Millions of them rely on that just to scrape by each month. And protecting the worker's right to overtime pay is such an important issue that people from across my district are asking me to oppose this entire bill because it does not include overtime pay protection.

I need to add that the overtime pay protection passed handsomely both Houses of Congress, and we instructed our conferees to keep it in the bill; but mysteriously it disappeared. A man from Tonawanda said last week to us no worker should lose his overtime pay since it is essential to their lives.

This massive bill is yet another example of the disturbing disregard for

women's health. The President's authority to enforce his global gag rule remains unchallenged. Under the Mexico City Policy, the United States Government uses family-planning dollars to impose itself between women and their doctors. The U.S. muzzles health care workers. Clinics are prohibited from mentioning or counseling women about abortion. Doctors and nurses are forced to forfeit the right to provide complete, accurate medical information and advice to their patients.

Mr. Speaker, for the first time in half a century, the Republican Party controls both Houses of Congress and the executive, despite an authoritarian leadership style, inefficiency, and squabbling have produced a job that is less than half complete. The current fiscal year began over 2 months ago, and only three of the 13 measures that pay for functioning of the Federal Government were law by October 1 of fiscal year 2004. And right now only 6 of the 13 bills are law.

With this special rule, we will end the first session of the 108th Congress in a single day of hurried legislative activity.

Rather than wisely investing the body's time in deliberating the details of each of the seven remaining bills, we will spend 1 hour debating the merits of this massive conglomerate report. When substantive debate among Members is silenced, the millions of Americans that we represent are silenced and disenfranchised. Particularly, that is what happens, when one party of the House is excluded from all deliberations. This is not an attribute of a deliberative democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I hope that during the coming second session that comity and genuine bipartisan collaboration will replace arm-twisting and exclusion. I hope that character, decency, virtue, and respect are more than words on a page. I hope that we all will embrace the right of all Members elected here to fully participate in a truly deliberative process and of all the people to be fully represented in their national legislature. A natural result of the decline of deliberative democracy is the decline in the quality of our laws and the decline of public support for them and the decline of the standard of living in the United States. I urge my colleagues to vote against the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).

(Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).

(Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

(Ms. WOOLSEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Washington State (Mr. McDermott).

(Mr. McDermott asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

We are about to adjourn sine die and close the first session of the 108th Congress with no more legislative business until January 20th of next year. And just like last year at this time, we are again callously turning our backs on millions of unemployed Americans whose Federal unemployment benefits are set to expire shortly after Christmas.

It is very interesting how the Republican leadership can find billions of dollars to make their rich friends even richer, but cannot find it in their hearts to help jobless workers through this rough time with money that is already there for them. They can find $87 billion to fund the war in Iraq, but nothing for those here without jobs.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to call for a ``no'' vote to defeat the previous question on this rule so we can try to do something to help the unemployed American workers. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment so we can immediately take up legislation to extend the expiring Federal unemployment benefits. And I want to state again: the money is there. It does not have to be borrowed. It has been paid in. It simply requires Federal action to allow the States to expend it.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation will continue the extended unemployment benefits program for the first 6 months of next year. The bill would also increase to 26 weeks the amount of benefits provided under that program, which is up from 13 weeks. This would provide new help to the 1.4 million workers who have already exhausted

their extended benefits and have yet to find work.

This measure is identical to the text of H.R. 3244, the Rangel-Cardin unemployment extension, and also contains the text of H.R. 3554, authored by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), which would fix a flaw in the current law that prevents those States with exceptionally high long-term unemployment rates from continuing to receive extra benefits.

There is so much talk today about our economy and claims that things are looking good. However, new jobs are not forthcoming at this time and do not appear to be coming anytime soon. Americans continue to be unemployed at alarmingly high rates. The percentage of Americans exhausting their unemployment benefits without finding a job has reached the highest level on record. More than 2 million workers have been unemployed for more than 6 months. Jobs are disappearing every day with no relief in sight. These Americans need relief, and they need it immediately.

If we do not fix this today, over 400,000 jobless Americans will not be eligible for unemployment compensation after the first of the year. More than 2 million more will lose the benefits in the first 6 months of next year. And, Mr. Speaker, the House will probably adjourn sine die today or later this week, so this is the only opportunity we have to help unemployed Americans this year. Let us not abandon them today.

I want to emphasize that voting against the previous question will not stop the omnibus appropriations conference report from coming to the floor today.

Voting ``no'' on the previous question will still allow that bill to be considered. But a ``no'' vote will allow the House to vote on legislation that will help our Nation's unemployed workers.

However, a ``yes'' vote on the previous question you will stop any opportunity for this House to extend desperately needed unemployment assistance to hundreds of thousands of our constituents and their families. Do you really want to go home and tell these people that you failed to do your job and failed to help them in their time of need?

Make no mistake, this vote will give the House the opportunity to vote today to extend Federal unemployment benefits and to give relief to those hardest hit by our Nation's grim employment situation. I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment be printed in the Record immediately before the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Rep. Martin FrostD-TX-24 · Dec 8, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. Speaker, for months the Republicans who control the Federal…

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, for months the Republicans who control the Federal Government have held hostage some of the foremost priorities of the American people. Key national needs like education, veterans' health care, law enforcement have all been relegated to the back burner while Republican leaders fought amongst themselves over how best to privatize Medicare and reward big drug companies.

But today, my Republican friends undoubtedly will come down to the floor and proclaim that this giant $820 billion spending bill finishes their work for the year. In response, millions of Americans still struggling through the aftermath of the last Republican recession will respond ``What about us?''

It is a fair question, Mr. Speaker. What about the 2.4 million American jobs that have been lost since the Republican Party first took over the government 3 years ago? What about the 90,000 Americans who will lose their unemployment insurance eligibility just 3 days after Christmas or the 2.1 million unemployed workers who will lose access to extended insurance over the first 6 months of next year?

In my home State of Texas, over 130,000 people will lose unemployment insurance if this Republican Congress does not act to help them, according to the Joint Economic Committee's analysis of the data from the Labor Department. Republican leaders often try to spin away statistics like this, but the truth is the Bush Presidency has seen this Nation suffer through the longest job slump since the Great Depression, and the picture is still grim for millions of Americans trying to find good jobs to support their families.

While the number of jobs in America has shrunk by 2.4 million, the working-age population in America has grown by 4.5 million. As a result, America's ``jobs deficit'' has shot up to 6.9 million on the Republican watch. That has put American workers in a huge hole and left three unemployed workers for every one job that becomes available.

Despite these facts, Mr. Speaker, Republican leaders are, once again, planning to adjourn for the holidays without extending unemployment insurance, just like they did last year. Mr. Speaker, there is no reason to treat the American people with such callousness. It would be only fair to provide them with the help that they need before Congress goes home for the holidays. Even the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, supports doing it, as he said this morning in the Committee on Rules. After all, the Republican Congress has already done huge favors for their biggest supporters. Over the last 3 years, they have squandered trillions of dollars on tax breaks for the wealthiest few, driving the national deficit above $500 billion on an annual basis and raising the debt tax on all Americans. And today, President Bush will sign the Republican ``wither-on-the-vine'' Medicare bill. This monstrosity spends billions to subsidize HMOs and drug companies, but it actually reduces seniors' choices and it makes it illegal for them to reduce the huge out-of- pocket cost that the Republican bill does not cover. It will not let retirees cover these drug costs with the employer-provided drug coverage that they already have, even though the Republican bill may only cover selected medicines, regardless of what their doctor says they need. And it will not let seniors buy Medigap policies to cover their $3,600 in out-of-pocket expenses either.

Mr. Speaker, that is an outrage, and it comes on top of a $12 billion slush fund for HMOs and $139 billion in windfall profits for big drug companies. So why, Mr. Speaker, will Republicans not spend just a tiny fraction of that to help Americans still suffering from the latest Republican recession? Why will they not use their legislation on the floor today, an $820 billion collection of several different spending bills, to provide desperately-needed relief over the holidays to Americans who still cannot find a job?

After all, the omnibus spending bill provides plenty of assistance to others. For the big drug companies, Republican leaders have dropped drug reimportation language passed by the House and Senate, meaning that drug prices will still be astronomically higher for America's seniors than for people in other countries.

For some of the Bush administration's biggest corporate backers, Republicans have dropped overtime protection for workers, meaning that millions of Americans will get paid less, even as they are forced to work more. And they are spending $13 million on vouchers to subsidize private schools for a few, taking desperately needed resources from the public schools that serve all American children.

Despite all this, Mr. Speaker, there are still many worthwhile parts to this massive spending bill. For instance, Democrats and veterans groups have finally forced Republicans to increase funding for veterans medical care that would still fall short of what they need. And to help communities protect children against abduction, this bill includes $24 million for the national Amber Alert Program that I first introduced earlier this year. It also includes vital resources to address important transportation issues in north Texas.

So why can this Republican Congress not do just one more good deed before the holidays? Mr. Speaker, why not help the 1.4 million workers who cannot find work, who have already exhausted their extended benefits and have yet to find work?

Republican leaders may not care about helping them, but that does not have to stop this Congress from doing the right thing. If Republican Members will join Democrats in opposing the important parliamentary vote known as the previous question, then we can amend the rule and pass commonsense assistance for Americans still unable to find work in this jobless recovery. Otherwise, while Republicans are enjoying their vacations, hundreds of thousands of jobless Americans will spend the holidays preparing to lose the unemployment insurance they need to support their families.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).

(Mr. INSLEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, this is probably the House's final work day this year, but Republican leaders are, once again, callously turning their backs on the millions of unemployed Americans whose Federal unemployment insurance will expire just days after Christmas. The Republican leadership has found billions of dollars to extend tax breaks for corporations, but they keep refusing to help the jobless Americans who are still suffering from the last Republican recession.

To give Republicans one last chance to do the right thing, I will oppose the previous question on this rule so that we can immediately take up legislation to extend the expiring Federal unemployment benefits.

This commonsense legislation would continue the extended unemployment benefits program through the first 6 months of next year. It would increase to 26 weeks the amounts of benefits provided under the program, up from 13 weeks. It would provide new help to the 1.4 million workers who have already exhausted their extended benefits and have yet to find work.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation is identical to the text of H.R. 3244, the Rangel-Cardin unemployment extension, and it also contains the text of H.R. 3554 by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott) which would fix a flaw in the current law that prevents those States with exceptionally high, long-term unemployment rates from continuing to receive the help their citizens need.

Mr. Speaker, Americans still face a difficult jobs market. Since President Bush took office, the economy has lost 2.4 million jobs. That is the worst jobs record for a President since Herbert Hoover and the Great Depression. The percentage of Americans exhausting their unemployment benefits without finding a job has reached its highest level on record. These Americans need relief and they need it immediately. If we do not extend unemployment benefits, then more than 2 million workers will lose benefits in the first 6 months of next year, including over 130,000 in my State of Texas alone.

I want to stress that this vote is not intended to stop the omnibus conference report from consideration in the House. Voting ``no'' on the previous question will still allow that bill to move forward today. But a ``no'' vote will allow the House to vote on legislation to help provide some much-needed relief to our Nation's unemployed workers, particularly during this holiday season. However, if Members vote ``yes'' on the previous question, they will kill any chance for extending unemployment assistance that is so desperately needed by millions of our constituents and their families.

Let us be clear. This vote will give the House the opportunity to vote today on extended Federal unemployment benefits and on giving relief to those hardest hit to the President's dismal economic record. I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment be printed in the Record immediately before the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Rep. Martin FrostD-TX-24 · Nov 21, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. Speaker, marshal law rules like this one are symptomatic of…

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, marshal law rules like this one are symptomatic of the failure of this Republican government. Republicans are doing such harm to America, from Medicare and the economy to foreign policy and homeland security, that keeping the public in the dark has become their chief priority.

So today, Republican leaders are yet again waiving the rules of the House. Later today they plan to do it in order to force through their plan to end Medicare as we know it, which is how the chief author of the Republican Medicare bill describes their goal.

But first, Republican leaders want to pass this marshal law rule so that they can rush through a spending bill before Members, the press, and the public have had the chance to find out what is really in it.

Mr. Speaker, they will not even tell us which spending bill they plan to hide from us today. All we know is that it will either spend tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer money, or that it will spend hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money. Either way, it will become law before it has even been read by anyone except for a handful of Republicans at the White House and in the Congress. But since these are the same Republicans who have exploded the budget deficit to nearly $500 billion, raising the debt tax on all Americans, no one has much faith in them anymore.

Mr. Speaker, after nearly a decade of controlling the Congress, the Republican Party's fundamental goal is simply protecting its own power by hiding from the public the damage they are doing to America. Of course, if you look at the Republican record, you can understand why they are so desperate to keep it hidden. In the nearly 3 years since George Bush became President, Republicans have created a whole host of problems for the American people.

On national security, the Bush administration has plunged this Nation into its worst foreign policy crisis since the end of the cold war because they would not trust the American people with the truth about Iraq and because they could not work with our allies around the world. And while U.S. taxpayers are spending hundreds of billions of dollars on Iraq, our homeland defense needs here in the United States remain dangerously unmet.

On domestic policy, of course, Republicans are going for the right wing gold. Later today they will try to finalize Newt Gingrich's dream of forcing Medicare to wither on the vine, shattering Medicare's nearly 40-year-old promise to American citizens. That debate, Mr. Speaker, will be a case study in the public dishonesty that is fundamental to the Republican government.

Over and over again, Republicans will repeat their poll-tested sound bytes. They will save Medicare reform and hope that millions of seniors do not notice the Republicans are forcing them out of traditional Medicare and into HMOs and insurance companies. They will talk about choice and ignore the fact that millions of seniors will lose the ability to choose their own doctors. And they will decry skyrocketing prescription prices and hope no one notices that they are actually protecting drug company profits by making it illegal for Medicare to negotiate lower prices for senior citizens.

Mr. Speaker, Republicans will wax poetic about the generosity of their drug benefit, hiding the fact that premiums and benefits will actually be set by HMOs and insurance companies; and that even under the Republicans rosiest scenario, seniors with average drug bills will still have to pay about $2,500 per year out of their own pockets. Of course, Republicans will not say a thing about the $12 billion slush funds they are setting up for HMOs or insurance companies or the $139 billion in windfall profits they are giving to the big drug companies.

Mr. Speaker, no wonder the Republican Medicare bill does not take effect until after the election. Republican political strategists are desperately hoping that seniors do not discover this truth about this assault on Medicare before they go to the polls in 2004. But

make no mistake, when seniors sit down at their kitchen tables to pay their bills, they are going to do the math, and they are going to see that Republicans have sold them a very expensive and very harmful bill of goods.

Mr. Speaker, the false promise of the Republican Medicare plan will remind a lot of Americans of the false promise of the Republican economic plan. In less than 3 years, the Republicans have taken a historic budget surplus and turned it into a monumental deficit. They have done it through reckless fiscal irresponsibility and through an obsession with spending billions of taxpayer dollars for a small elite of the wealthiest few, people like the Bush campaign fund-raising Pioneers.

As a result, instead of using the budget surplus to help address priorities like skyrocketing prescription prices and strengthening Social Security and Medicare, Republicans have created a fiscal crisis and raised the debt tax on all Americans.

Along the way, nearly 3 million jobs have been lost, giving George W. Bush the worst job performance of any President since The Great Depression. Millions of families no longer share in the prosperity of the nineties. Of course, you would never know the facts if you just listened to Republican rhetoric. But talking points cannot cancel out the truth. And the truth is, Mr. Speaker, that Americans continue to be unemployed at alarmingly high rates. More than 2 million workers have been unable to find a job in this economy for more than 6 months, and many of them will lose their unemployment insurance over the holidays if this Republican Congress does not act this year before we adjourn.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, I intend to oppose the important parliamentary vote known as the previous question. That is the only way to ensure Republicans do not leave town for their own holiday vacations without providing unemployed Americans with the help they so desperately need.

Mr. Speaker, Americans are smarter than Republican leaders give them credit for. They know the difference between rhetoric and reality. So I urge my Republican friends to look past their leader's rhetoric and join me in providing real help to Americans suffering through this economy.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).

(Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).

(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark).

(Mr. Stark asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).

Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, if the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule. My amendment will provide that immediately after the House passes this resolution, it will take up legislation to extend the Federal unemployment insurance that is set to expire for new enrollees just 2 days after Christmas.

This legislation would continue the extended unemployment insurance program through the first 6 months of next year. The bill would also increase to 26 weeks the amount of benefits provided under that program, up from 13 weeks. This would provide new help to the 1.4 million workers who have already exhausted their extended benefits and have yet to find work.

This measure is identical to the text of H.R. 3244, the Rangel-Cardin unemployment extension; and it also contains the text of H.R. 3554, sponsored by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), which would fix a flaw in current law that penalizes people in States with exceptionally high long-term unemployment rates by preventing them from receiving the unemployment benefits they need.

Here is why it is needed, Mr. Speaker. Americans continue to be unemployed at alarmingly high rates. The percentage of Americans exhausting their unemployment benefits without finding a job has reached its highest level on record. More than 2 million workers have been unemployed for more than 6 months. These Americans need relief, and they need it immediately. If we do not fix this today, over 400,000 jobless Americans will not be eligible for unemployment compensation after the first of the year.

Mr. Speaker, it appears likely that Congress will adjourn sine die within the next few days. This will very likely be the only opportunity we have to help unemployed Americans this year. Let us not abandon them today.

Let me make very clear that a ``no'' vote on the previous question will not stop consideration of this resolution for consideration of the appropriations items, but a ``no'' vote will allow the House to vote on legislation to help provide some much-needed relief to our Nation's unemployed workers, some relief that might be nice during the upcoming holiday season.

Again, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment be printed in the Record immediately before the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Rep. Sheila Jackson LeeD-TX-18 · Dec 8, 2003

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for yielding me time. I wish that we would donate our time and dedicate ourselves to the wishes of the American people. Hubert Humphrey said that…

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished ranking member for yielding me time.

I wish that we would donate our time and dedicate ourselves to the wishes of the American people.

Hubert Humphrey said that this Constitution was organized to create a more perfect Union, and the challenge of creating a more perfect Union is a continued agitation and criticism, not because we are disloyal to this country and to the American people, but because we care about a more perfect Union.

In the backdrop of a 4-hour vote before we left for the Thanksgiving work recess, I come to the floor of the House now. We have an omnibus appropriations bill that has barely been before the Members of Congress for any kind of review. For 4 hours a vote was left open, in complete disregard for the rules of this House and what the Madison Papers and our Founding Fathers wanted to establish, a Republic and also a democracy.

Today we come with a martial law that allows us on one day to just put on the floor of the House a huge and large and massive interpretation of the appropriations for 2004. And then we have a situation where issues that clearly the American people are against, such as eliminating overtime opportunities for working men and women are sneaked into the appropriations bill, and then where thousands of petitions from around the country were brought to this government about not allowing large media conglomerates to buy up stations to the disregard of the first amendment. And lo and behold, there is a sneak provision in here that allows that to happen.

Then, of course, there is a provision that affects many seniors who were implementing lower-cost drugs by drug reimportation. Clearly those drugs were safe, because seniors have been doing it for a very long time. That has been sneaked into the bill, meaning that we have eliminated that opportunity so that seniors can again suffer. They suffer first with a Medicare bill that is going to implode and not be in business until 2006 and cost thousands of Texans to lose their benefits, and they will suffer.

Then if we talk about international efforts, I was in Ethiopia this past summer, and one of the things they were begging for is, they appreciated the famine relief, but they wanted to be able to be taught to fish. If you teach someone to fish they may not be hungry tomorrow, but if you give them a fish today, they may be hungry tomorrow. It takes very low dollars for what we call food security, teaching them agricultural skills and new technology.

Then, of course, I have been concerned with the Columbia 7 tragedy, that NASA focus its concepts on safety. In all of the NASA budget, I do not know if there is a line item that boosts the resources for making sure that NASA pays attention to safety issues.

We could have done this, Mr. Speaker, if we had deliberated on this appropriations bill. If we did not have the martial law, if we paid attention to the rules of the House, we might be able to do this. But, unfortunately, it seems we cannot.

So I ask my colleagues to vote against this rule so we can get back to work on behalf of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the rule on H.R. 2673, the Omnibus appropriations Conference report. While the Omnibus includes a significant amount for agriculture appropriations, the omnibus fails to include the House provisions to prohibit the FDA from spending funds to prevent individuals and pharmacists from importing FDA-approved prescription drugs. In addition, this portion of the bill delays for two years the mandatory country-of-origin labeling for all produce, meat or meat products except for farm-raised fish and wild fish.

In addition, the omnibus permanently limits the ability of the FCC to grant licenses for a commercial TV broadcast station if the granting of that license would result in such party having an aggregate national audience reach exceeding 39 percent (the House and Senate bills barred the FCC from increasing the share of the national market one broadcasting company can own, which currently is 35 percent.

The omnibus also includes provisions that prohibit the implementation of a background check system that does not include a requirement to destroy gun purchase records within 24 hours.

I am rather disturbed Mr. Speaker, by the portion appropriating $139.8 billion for the Department of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and related agencies. While I am pleased that there is money for Texas Southern University, a predominantly black university in my district for their minority engineering program within the college of Science and Technology, I was rather disturbed that the Democratic members were shut out from receiving individual earmarks for their districts because they voted against the bill when it came to the House floor. This not only goes against fundamental fairness Mr. Speaker, but when you penalize individual members by not giving them much needed money for their districts, you hurt their constituents. This is bad for this institution, and bad for the country. The omnibus also falls $7.8 billion short of the No Child Left Behind Authorization levels and provides $55.7 billion for the Education Department ($12.4 billion for the Title I program.

The omnibus fails to include the House and Senate adopted provisions to block the Department of Labor from issuing rules that would take away the rights of some white-collar workers to overtime pay.

The omnibus also fails to include House provisions that would have limited the Administration's ability to outsource some federal jobs and includes only some limitations to programs funded by the Transportation-Treasury bill.

I urge members to vote against this rule.

Rep. Jim McDermottD-WA-7 · Nov 21, 2003

Mr. Speaker, several times this week the House has used emergency procedures to pass partisan legislation. Yesterday, the Congress found time to give tax credits to Wal-Mart, but the Republican…

Mr. Speaker, several times this week the House has used emergency procedures to pass partisan legislation.

Yesterday, the Congress found time to give tax credits to Wal-Mart, but the Republican majority refuses to consider what is truly an emergency to millions of families, the fact that they do not have jobs, and millions of these workers are about to run out of unemployment insurance.

Last year, the same thing happened. The Republican Congress left town about Christmastime without extending the temporary program that provides employment benefits, leaving hundreds of thousands of unemployed workers to worry over the holidays about whether they were going to get the unemployment benefits that they had been expecting.

We have heard it has been reported that the majority leader said, ``I see no reason to be extending unemployment compensation since every economic indicator is better than in 1993 when the Democrats ended the Federal unemployment program.'' Mr. Speaker, the esteemed majority leader does not know what he is talking about.

Washington State's unemployment is still among the highest in the Nation. It has grown for two solid years as we felt the brunt of the Bush recession. If the Congress does not extend the Federal program that provides unemployment compensation and fix a technical flaw in the Federal-State extended benefits program, over 83,000 workers in my State will stop, at Christmastime, receiving unemployment benefits.

I know the economy created 100,000 jobs last month, but 150,000 jobs must be created each month to maintain the employment rate because our population continues to grow.

Two days after Christmas, the temporary Federal unemployment benefits program is scheduled to expire, denying benefits to nearly 90,000 workers every single week. The unemployment picture today simply is not much better than it was last year, Mr. Speaker.

According to the Department of Labor, there is still only one job opening for every three unemployed workers. In other words, of the 9 million unemployed American workers, 6 million of them have no chance of finding a job in the current economic climate.

I urge my colleagues to vote against the previous question so that Congress can consider an emergency that faces millions of families, the Nation's unemployment problem.

It is Thanksgiving for heaven's sakes, and we are not even going to provide them a turkey at Thanksgiving or at Christmastime. That is really Scrooge, and it is really hard-hearted.

I urge my colleagues to vote against the previous question.

State of Washington,

Employment Security Department,

Olympia, WA, November 13, 2003.

Hon. Jim McDermott,

House of Representatives, Longworth Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Congressman McDermott: This letter is in response to

your request (dated November 7, 2003) for unemployment

projections and data.

Washington State's Seasonally Adjusted Total Unemployment

Rate (SATUR) remained at 7.5 percent for the month of

September, and this percentage is 116 percent of the same

rate two years ago, keeping the State of Washington in a

period of Extended Benefits (EB). The next issuance of the

SATUR numbers is scheduled for November 21, 2003. Our

forecast for October still shows that the State of Washington

will again be above the required 110 percent of the same

period for either of the past two years, and will remain in

EB status for that period as well. Statistics due out on

December 19, 2003 are indicating that the 110 percent

criteria will not be met, and we would thus be out of EB for

weeks after January 10, 2004.

Tables 1 and 2, enclosed, provide SATUR forecasts through

calendar year 2005. As shown, the State of Washington

Forecast Council estimates that the State of Washington's

SATUR will remain above 6.5 percent through 2005.

Table 3 provides a count of claimants exhausting all

benefits, by entitlement, for the first six months of 2003.

Unemployment statistics are very cyclical and we believe the

exhaustion rates for the first six months of 2004 will be

very similar to those of 2003. Claimants exhausting Regular

UI benefits become eligible for the TEUC program and

claimants exhausting TEUC become eligible for the EB program.

If the TEUC program were not continued, we estimate that

close to 54,000 claimants would be without benefits in the

first six months of 2004. Additionally, if the EB program

were to end in January of 2004 due to the ``look-back''

provision, an additional 28,508 claimants exhausting the TEUC

program would be without benefits.

Table 4 provides a summary of total dollars paid out to

claimants by month ad entitlement, for the first six months

of 2003. Similar to exhaustion rates, we believe that payment

totals will be very similar in 2004. We estimate that we

would pay $282 million out under the TEUC program and close

to $83 million under the EB program.

Also enclosed for your information is an additional fact

sheet on current unemployment insurance data.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions, or

if we can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,

Annette M. Copeland,

Assistant Commissioner.

Show 8 more

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode

Raw Text PDF

Introduced in HouseIssued October 2, 2003

        [Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3244 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 3244

To provide extended unemployment benefits to displaced workers, and to
make other improvements in the unemployment insurance system.

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

October 2, 2003

Mr. Rangel (for himself, Mr. Cardin, Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Hoyer, Mr. George
Miller of California, Mr. Stark, Mr. Levin, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Kleczka,
Mr. Lewis of Georgia, and Mr. Neal of Massachusetts) introduced the
following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL

To provide extended unemployment benefits to displaced workers, and to
make other improvements in the unemployment insurance system.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Emergency
Unemployment Compensation Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as
follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--TEMPORARY EXTENDED UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

Sec. 101. References.
Sec. 102. Extension of the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation
Act of 2002.
Sec. 103. Entitlement to additional weeks of temporary extended
unemployment compensation.
Sec. 104. Extended benefit periods.
TITLE II--UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS FOR INDIVIDUALS QUALIFYING BASED ON
PART-TIME WORK OR AN ALTERNATIVE BASE PERIOD

Sec. 201. Federal-state agreements.
Sec. 202. Payments to States having agreements under this title.
Sec. 203. Financing provisions.
Sec. 204. Definitions.
Sec. 205. Applicability.

TITLE I--TEMPORARY EXTENDED UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

SEC. 101. REFERENCES.

Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this title an
amendment is expressed in terms of an amendment to a section or other
provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a section or
other provision of the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act
of 2002 (Public Law 107-147; 26 U.S.C. 3304 note).

SEC. 102. EXTENSION OF THE TEMPORARY EXTENDED UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION
ACT OF 2002.

(a) Six-Month Extension of Program.--Section 208 is amended to read
as follows:

``SEC. 208. APPLICABILITY.

``(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), an agreement entered
into under this title shall apply to weeks of unemployment--
``(1) beginning after the date on which such agreement is
entered into; and
``(2) ending before July 1, 2004.
``(b) Transition.--In the case of an individual who is receiving
temporary extended unemployment compensation for the week which
immediately precedes the first day of the week that includes July 1,
2004, temporary extended unemployment compensation shall continue to be
payable to such individual for any week thereafter from the account
from which such individual received compensation for the week
immediately preceding that termination date. No compensation shall be
payable by reason of the preceding sentence for any week beginning
after December 31, 2004.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall take
effect as if included in the enactment of the Temporary Extended
Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-147; 26 U.S.C.
3304 note).

SEC. 103. ENTITLEMENT TO ADDITIONAL WEEKS OF TEMPORARY EXTENDED
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION.

(a) Weeks of TEUC Amounts.--Paragraph (1) of section 203(b) is
amended to read as follows:
``(1) In general.--The amount established in an account
under subsection (a) shall be equal to 26 times the
individual's weekly benefit amount for the benefit year.''.
(b) Weeks of TEUC-X Amounts.--Section 203(c)(1) is amended by
striking ``an amount equal to the amount originally established in such
account (as determined under subsection (b)(1))'' and inserting ``7
times the individual's weekly benefit amount for the benefit year''.
(c) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this section--
(A) shall take effect as if included in the
enactment of the Temporary Extended Unemployment
Compensation Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-147; 26 U.S.C.
3304 note); but
(B) shall apply only with respect to weeks of
unemployment beginning on or after the date of
enactment of this Act, subject to paragraph (2).
(2) Special rules.--In the case of an individual for whom a
temporary extended unemployment compensation account was
established before the date of enactment of this Act, the
Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002 (as
amended by this title) shall be applied subject to the
following:
(A) Any amounts deposited in the individual's
temporary extended unemployment compensation account by
reason of section 203(c) of such Act (commonly known as
``TEUC-X amounts'') before the date of enactment of
this Act shall be treated as amounts deposited by
reason of section 203(b) of such Act (commonly known as
``TEUC amounts''), as amended by subsection (a).
(B) For purposes of determining whether the
individual is eligible for any TEUC-X amounts under
such Act, as amended by this title--
(i) any determination made under section
203(c) of such Act before the application of
the amendments made by this title shall be
disregarded; and
(ii) any such determination shall instead
be made by applying section 203(c) of such Act,
as amended by this title--
(I) as of the time that all amounts
established in such account in
accordance with section 203(b) of such
Act (as amended by this title, and
including any amounts described in
subparagraph (A)) are in fact
exhausted, except that
(II) if such individual's account
was both augmented by and exhausted of
all TEUC-X amounts before the date of
enactment of this Act, such
determination shall be made as if
exhaustion (as described in section
203(c)(1) of such Act) had not occurred
until such date of enactment.

SEC. 104. EXTENDED BENEFIT PERIODS.

(a) Application of Revised Rate of Insured Unemployment.--Section
207 is amended--
(1) by striking ``In'' and inserting ``(a) In General.--
In''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Insured Unemployment Rate.--For purposes of carrying out
section 203(c) with respect to weeks of unemployment beginning on or
after the date of enactment of this subsection, the term `rate of
insured unemployment', as used in section 203(d) of the Federal-State
Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note),
has the meaning given such term under section 203(e)(1) of such Act,
except that individuals exhausting their right to regular compensation
during the most recent 3 calendar months for which data are available
before the close of the period for which such rate is being determined
shall be taken into account as if they were individuals filing claims
for regular compensation for each week during the period for which such
rate is being determined, and section 203(d)(1)(A) of such Act shall be
applied by substituting `either (or both)' for `each'.''.
(b) Additional Extended Benefit Period Trigger.--
(1) In general.--Section 203(c) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(3) Additional extended benefit period trigger.--
``(A) In general.--Effective with respect to
compensation for weeks of unemployment beginning on or
after the date of enactment of this paragraph, an
agreement under this title shall provide that, in
addition to any other extended benefit period trigger,
for purposes of beginning or ending any extended
benefit period under this section--
``(i) there is a State `on' indicator for a
week if--
``(I) the average rate of total
unemployment in such State (seasonally
adjusted) for the period consisting of
the most recent 3 months for which data
for all States are published before the
close of such week equals or exceeds 6
percent; and
``(II) the average rate of total
unemployment in such State (seasonally
adjusted) for the 3-month period
referred to in subclause (I) equals or
exceeds 110 percent of such average
rate for the corresponding 3-month
period ending in either (or both) of
the preceding 2 calendar years; and
``(ii) there is a State `off' indicator for
a week if either the requirements of subclause
(I) or (II) of clause (i) are not satisfied.
``(B) No effect on other determinations.--
Notwithstanding the provisions of any agreement
described in subparagraph (A), any week for which there
would otherwise be a State `on' indicator shall
continue to be such a week and shall not be determined
to be a week for which there is a State `off'
indicator.
``(C) Determinations made by the secretary.--For
purposes of this subsection, determinations of the rate
of total unemployment in any State for any period (and
of any seasonal adjustment) shall be made by the
Secretary.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 203(c)(1) is amended by
inserting ``or (3)'' after ``paragraph (2)''.

TITLE II--UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS FOR INDIVIDUALS QUALIFYING BASED ON
PART-TIME WORK OR AN ALTERNATIVE BASE PERIOD

SEC. 201. FEDERAL-STATE AGREEMENTS.

(a) In General.--Any State which desires to do so may enter into
and participate in an agreement under this title with the Secretary of
Labor (hereinafter in this title referred to as the ``Secretary''). Any
State which is a party to an agreement under this title may, upon
providing 30 days' written notice to the Secretary, terminate such
agreement.
(b) Provisions of Agreement.--
(1) In general.--Any agreement under subsection (a) shall
provide that the State agency of the State will make payments
of regular compensation to individuals in amounts and to the
extent that they would be determined if the State law were
applied with the modifications described in paragraph (2).
(2) Modifications described.--The modifications described
in this paragraph are as follows:
(A) In the case of an individual who is not
eligible for regular compensation under the State law
because of the use of a definition of base period that
does not count wages earned in the most recently
completed calendar quarter, eligibility for
compensation under this title shall be determined by
applying a base period ending at the close of the most
recently completed calendar quarter.
(B) In the case of an individual who is not
eligible for regular compensation under the State law
because such individual does not meet requirements
relating to availability for work, active search for
work, or refusal to accept work, because such
individual is seeking, or is available for, less than
full-time work, compensation under this title shall not
be denied by such State to an otherwise eligible
individual who seeks less than full-time work or fails
to accept full-time work.
(c) Coordination Rule.--The modifications described in subsection
(b)(2) shall also apply in determining the amount of benefits payable
under any Federal law to the extent that those benefits are determined
by reference to regular compensation payable under the State law of the
State involved.

SEC. 202. PAYMENTS TO STATES HAVING AGREEMENTS UNDER THIS TITLE.

(a) General Rule.--There shall be paid to each State which has
entered into an agreement under this title an amount equal to--
(1) 100 percent of any regular compensation made payable to
individuals by such State by virtue of the modifications which
are described in section 201(b)(2) and deemed to be in effect
with respect to such State pursuant to section 201(b)(1), and
(2) 100 percent of any regular compensation--
(A) which is paid to individuals by such State by
reason of the fact that its State law contains
provisions comparable to the modifications described in
section 201(b)(2), but only
(B) to the extent that those amounts would, if such
amounts were instead payable by virtue of the State
law's being deemed to be so modified pursuant to
section 201(b)(1), have been reimbursable under
paragraph (1).
(b) Determination of Amount.--Sums under subsection (a) payable to
any State by reason of such State having an agreement under this title
shall be payable, either in advance or by way of reimbursement (as may
be determined by the Secretary), in such amounts as the Secretary
estimates the State will be entitled to receive under this title for
each calendar month, reduced or increased, as the case may be, by any
amount by which the Secretary finds that the Secretary's estimates for
any prior calendar month were greater or less than the amounts which
should have been paid to the State. Such estimates may be made on the
basis of such statistical, sampling, or other method as may be agreed
upon by the Secretary and the State agency of the State involved.
(c) Administrative and Other Expenses.--There is hereby
appropriated out of the employment security administration account of
the Unemployment Trust Fund (as established by section 901(a) of the
Social Security Act) $500,000,000 to reimburse States for the costs of
the administration of agreements under this title (including any
improvements in technology in connection therewith) and to provide
reemployment services to unemployment compensation claimants in States
having agreements under this title. Each State's share of the amount
appropriated by the preceding sentence shall be determined by the
Secretary according to the factors described in section 302(a) of the
Social Security Act and certified by the Secretary to the Secretary of
the Treasury.

SEC. 203. FINANCING PROVISIONS.

(a) In General.--Funds in the extended unemployment compensation
account (as established by section 905(a) of the Social Security Act),
and the Federal unemployment account (as established by section 904(g)
of the Social Security Act), of the Unemployment Trust Fund shall be
used, in accordance with subsection (b), for the making of payments
(described in section 202(a)) to States having agreements entered into
under this title.
(b) Certification.--The Secretary shall from time to time certify
to the Secretary of the Treasury for payment to each State the sums
described in section 202(a) which are payable to such State under this
title. The Secretary of the Treasury, prior to audit or settlement by
the General Accounting Office, shall make payments to the State in
accordance with such certification by transfers from the extended
unemployment compensation account (or, to the extent that there are
insufficient funds in that account, from the Federal unemployment
account) to the account of such State in the Unemployment Trust Fund.

SEC. 204. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this title:
(1) In general.--The terms ``compensation'', ``regular
compensation'', ``base period'', ``State'', ``State agency'',
``State law'', and ``week'' have the respective meanings given
such terms under section 205 of the Federal-State Extended
Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970, subject to paragraph
(2).
(2) State law and regular compensation.--In the case of a
State entering into an agreement under this title--
(A) ``State law'' shall be considered to refer to
the State law of such State, applied in conformance
with the modifications described in section 201(b)(2),
and
(B) ``regular compensation'' shall be considered to
refer to such compensation, determined under its State
law (applied in the manner described in subparagraph
(A)),
except as otherwise provided or where the context clearly
indicates otherwise.

SEC. 205. APPLICABILITY.

An agreement entered into under this title shall apply to weeks of
unemployment--
(1) beginning after the date on which such agreement is
entered into, and
(2) ending before January 1, 2005.
<all>