Emergency Unemployment Compensation Continuation Act

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, well, as Yogi Berra said, This bill is like deja vu all over again--and not in a good way.

The bill before us today is the ninth extension of unemployment benefits since mid-2008. Benefits recently stretched up to 99 weeks, or almost 2 years, in most States. With the exception of just one bill last November, every one of those extensions was not paid for. That's a total of $135 billion added to our $14 trillion debt.

Meanwhile, our Democrat colleagues swore their policies would create jobs--but they haven't. Instead of paychecks, millions of Americans were left with only an unemployment check. In February 2009, the President signed the Democrats' trillion dollar stimulus plan. At that time, Democrats promised that the plan would create 3.7 million jobs and lower the unemployment rate to 7 percent by now. None of that happened.

Instead, over 2 million more private sector jobs were lost, and unemployment spiked to 10 percent while the debt has grown by almost $3 trillion. A total of 48 out of 50 States have lost jobs since the Democrats' stimulus bill passed. Yet here we are again--extending unemployment benefits because the Democrats' trillion dollar stimulus failed to create the millions of jobs they promised it would. Even more sadly, instead of doing this responsibly, this bill will simply add another $12 billion to our current mountain of debt.

We can do better than this. We certainly can do better than this.

Both Republicans and Democrats support helping the long-term unemployed. The chairman of the committee expressed a great deal of empathy in his opening statement. We share that empathy. Every one of our congressional offices has dealt with families dealing with this tragedy of unemployment, but Republicans and even some Democrats want to responsibly pay for these benefits. In fact, there are sufficient unspent stimulus funds to do just that, to cover the $12 billion cost of the bill before us. This is not a new Republican idea or a new idea. This is something we have discussed before, but the other side insists on bringing this forward, unpaid for.

The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee has proposed cutting stimulus to pay for certain measures. Last June, the Democrat leader himself, Mr. Hoyer, admitted there was spending fatigue across the country, and ``if we have dollars not yet expended in the Recovery Act,'' they should be ``applied to'' new spending like this. That would be far better than adding to the unchecked growth in spending and debt that has already cost us an estimated 1 million jobs.

The fact is we can both provide this help and pay for it by cutting less effective stimulus spending. That's what we should be debating today, not a bill called up under special rules that permit no amendments and no chance to offer ways to pay for this. Even if this were to pass, the sad thing is that there are no plans in the Senate for a vote on this bill any time soon. So the fact of the matter is this bill is going nowhere.

The American people know it isn't right to add these costs to our already overdrawn national credit card. We all want to help those in need, but the American people also know that someone has to pay when government spends money, and it shouldn't be our children and our grandchildren. The American people sent us here to do a job. We should pay for this spending today. We can pay for this spending today, and there is no reason why we couldn't bring a bill forward with a way to do this, with a way to pay for it.

So I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject this bill today. Instead, let's work together to quickly pass a bill to extend Federal unemployment benefits while finding a responsible way to pay for it.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I just regret to say that we're hearing oversimplifications and many generalizations from the other side.

Look, this is not one of those you either pass it or you don't types of issues here. We could pay for this, and the sad thing is all I'm hearing on the other side is a great deal of cynicism. But furthermore, look, the American people have spoken about this, and they are saying we've got to get a handle on national debt if we're going to get the economy going again and create jobs because the American people want paychecks. They want good-paying jobs. They want an end to this uncertainty.

We have information from the MacArthur Foundation, a very respected organization. They released a poll showing that over 70 percent of voters in this month's election say it is very important to reduce the national debt. Overwhelmingly, voters want us to reduce the debt by cutting spending, but instead of doing this fiscally responsible thing and actually paying for this new spending, which we could very easily do, the bill before us today does exactly the opposite. It adds $12 billion to our Nation's debt in a program that's already added $135 billion to the national debt. The sad thing is, Madam Speaker, we could extend these unemployment benefits, and we could pay for them.

Look, the bill reflects I think a very cynical political maneuver by the Democratic leadership because they

know that the Senate has no plans to pass this unpaid-for bill. We've been down this path before, and in fact, the liberal Huffington Post has broken the code on really what's going on here. There was a recent headline, Jobless Benefits About to Lapse as Senate Democrats Mull Strategy. That was a headline on Tuesday. And, No Plans in Senate For a Vote on Unemployment Benefits read the headline yesterday. To quote Senator Reed from Rhode Island, a Democratic leader on this legislation: ``At this point it's not been scheduled. I can't point to a specific time it will come up for a vote this week.''

The American people are tired of the cynicism. They want answers. And the sad thing is there's a simple answer on this one, unlike many of the other problems our country is facing which are more complex. We could extend unemployment benefits and we could pay for it, but our friends on the other side of the aisle currently control the House, they control the Senate, they control the White House, and they can't even get their act together to do this, especially when there are Republicans who would be willing to do this extension if it were paid for. The simple answer is ``yes'' there is a way to pay for it. It's staring us right in the face, and yet our friends across the aisle refuse to see this.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I want to remind our friends on the other side that in the past when they did bring the bill up on suspension, it failed, and yet when you did on one occasion bring it up on regular order, it did pass.

We all have to work hard to listen to the will of the American people. Yesterday, Speaker Pelosi herself said, ``Our consensus is that we go out there listening to the American people. It's about jobs. It's about reducing the deficit.''

Yet today, here we are again being asked to increase the deficit by another $12 billion. That's another $160 in debt for every family of four in the United States, just for 3 months of benefits under one program, all on top of the $2.8 trillion in debt we have racked up since President Obama took office, a 44 percent increase.

The question, Madam Speaker, is, Is the Speaker really listening to the American people? Because what we heard earlier this month is that people want us to provide help to those in need but not add to the mountain of debt that we are currently leaving to our children and grandchildren.

The sad thing--again, I repeat--the sad thing, we could have achieved both goals today. The Congressional Budget Office has informed us there is enough unspent stimulus spending that we can cut to cover the additional spending in this bill. It's just unconscionable that the other side has not heard the American people about the concerns about unfettered debt passed on to our children and grandchildren.

Again, Mr. Hoyer this past summer suggested we do just that. In June he said, ``If we have dollars not yet expended in the Recovery Act,'' that they should be ``applied to'' new spending like this. In July, 59 Democrats signed a letter saying: ``Extending critical, economic investments is no more important than paying for them. America is facing a debt crisis that is threatening to undermine our economic and national security. We can no longer afford to exacerbate the problem because the decisions about how to pay for what we spend are getting harder.''

This one is fairly easy. We have a way to pay for it, and yet the majority chose to bring this to the floor unpaid for, and without an opportunity to even offer an amendment.

So I ask our colleagues on the other side, Are you listening to the American people? Madam Speaker, are they even listening to each other? And do they agree with the Speaker that it's about debt? All we're hearing are mixed signals. If so, join us in voting down this unpaid- for bill and begin working together on a new bill, which we could do very quickly, that does right by the unemployed as well as our children and our grandchildren. That's what the American people expect of us today.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Again I say, there was a way to pay for this. We have to be frank with the American people on this. Jobless benefits have cost so far $319 billion, and yet unemployment is still at 9.6 percent; and we've seen really nothing coming from the other side who has controlled the majority in the House, controlled the majority in the Senate, controlled the White House. We've seen nothing to help small businesses get going again to hire. We've seen nothing to promote competitiveness in the U.S. economy. Their answer is to continue to extend unemployment benefits unpaid for.

Now there's agreement. We're not disagreeing about extending the unemployment benefits at this time. We're saying, let's do it in a responsible way and pay for it.

It wasn't always this way. This is the ninth attempt to extend this program. And when Democrats passed their only paid-for unemployment insurance extender bill in November of 2009--the only one that was paid for--the Obama administration hailed that ``fiscally responsible approach to expanding unemployment benefits,'' adding that ``fiscal responsibility is central to the medium-term recovery of the economy and the creation of jobs.''

That was from the administration's statement of policy about the Democrats' one paid-for UI extension bill, which was H.R. 4548. There were 156 Republicans who supported that November 2009 bill.

By the administration's own logic, the Democrats' latest fiscally irresponsible bill, H.R. 6419, which increases the deficit by an estimated $12 billion, undermines the medium-term recovery of the economy and the creation of jobs. The sad thing, Madam Speaker, is this: we could extend unemployment benefits and pay for it. This is not a hard one. There are harder decisions coming with the debt that our country is facing and economic uncertainty. Republicans are ready to move forward and get this country going again and restore American competitiveness, but I see our friends on the other side of the aisle are up to their old ways.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, may I ask what the division of minutes is at the moment?

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

I rise in support of H.R. 6419, which will extend current unemployment insurance benefits through February of next year and will provide much needed help to unemployed Americans during the holiday season.

From the beginning of the unemployment insurance program 75 years ago, we have never cut off benefits for out-of-work Americans when the unemployment rates have been this high. Without this extension, temporary Federal extended benefits will shut down shortly after Thanksgiving, the 27th, denying benefits to 2 million of our fellow citizens over the holiday season. It is unthinkable to me that we can allow these benefits to lapse during the holiday season and before the economic recovery is on solid ground.

Despite the severity of the Republican economic collapse, which started under Mr. Bush, there have been 10 straight months of private sector growth under this Democratically controlled Congress and administration. Despite the huge accomplishment of digging the American economy out of the Republican economic ditch, too many Americans remain unemployed. There is still only one available job for every five unemployed Americans. To make matters worse, the press is now carrying reports that employers around the country are refusing to hire the unemployed.

They're saying to the unemployed, We want to hire somebody who has a job to come over and fill our job because we know you were laid off because you weren't a good employee, and that's why they let you go. We don't want to hire people who aren't worth anything.

That's the message that's going out in this country now to the unemployed. Many of those people are middle class people who have worked very hard, and through no fault of their own, their industries have collapsed--banking, housing--as a direct result of what the Bush administration did--or didn't do, really, which is to have regulated Wall Street.

Unfortunately, the Republicans have already made it clear that, instead of helping the middle class, one of their top priorities is to give millionaires and billionaires a huge $700 billion break. Now, the same people who are saying this should be paid for will be out on this floor sometime in the next couple of weeks, saying, We don't have to pay for a tax break. Why, that'll pump jobs into the world. All we have to do is cut taxes everywhere and give $700 billion to people who make more than $500,000 a year--that's okay--but an unemployment check for somebody to keep bread on the table and keep a mortgage paid is not okay.

We can't not fund that. This is an emergency.

People who talk like that on the floor of this House have never been unemployed or have never known anybody who has been unemployed. You would not talk that way about unemployed people if you knew them.

Now, this should give every middle class American a lot to think about with the results of this last election. This is your first chance to observe what you can expect in the next 2 years. The minority leader in the other body said, My number one priority is to prevent Barack Obama from having a second term. Not public policy. Not jobs for people. Not health care for people--but political gain.

And that's what this is all about. The experts agree--two out of every three people who get unemployment benefits are in the middle class. We're not talking about people who weren't trying or weren't working or weren't doing their part as Americans.

While the Republicans were bankrupting the country to help the rich with one hand, giving tax breaks all over the place, the Republicans were using the other hand to push the unemployed middle class of America out of their homes and never dealt with the foreclosure issue to prevent them from having food on their tables and to keep their children from being properly clothed.

On the campaign trail Republicans called the unemployed ``lazy.'' Boy, you haven't met an unemployed person or you would never say that a second time to them. And they said that unemployment benefits ``spoil'' out of work Americans. They get lazy and they just sit around the house and wait for their unemployment check. Those checks aren't that big in the first place, and secondly, people don't like to be unemployed in this country. People look for work, and they are looking for work and they are now being told you've been unemployed for 2 years, we're not interested in hiring you. We want somebody who's got a job over here. That was on NPR just yesterday. So it isn't made up. That's what's going on.

Some Republicans even question the constitutionality of the Unemployment Insurance Program. The health and welfare of the American people is unconstitutional, according to some people.

Fortunately, the American people don't feel the same way. A recent poll showed that 86 percent of Americans believe the unemployed really want to work. That's what the people think. That's not the political rhetoric of people running for election. That's what the people really think.

The election is over now, and Americans have said we want both parties to work together to get things done and do it by listening to the American people. Americans don't want to push American families whose breadwinners lost their jobs through no fault of their own into poverty during the holidays.

I think we should end these debates and extend benefits longer and allow benefits to be scaled back as the economy improves. The reason we've had all these votes out here is because the Senate is unable to do anything. We've tried to extend this for extended periods of time, and over in the Senate, they say, well, let's extend it for a month, let's see if we can starve them for a month, and then we'll go in. They let this program lapse for 3 months over there, and you're telling me that we're going to work together. Well, I think we ought to work together.

This is a short-term extension in an effort to see if our Republican colleagues will support any kind of help for the unemployed. I am told by the other side that there's no plan in the Senate to take up this bill. Well, they're waiting to see if we can get it out of here. If you don't help, maybe it won't get out of here, but the message to 4 million Americans will be the Republican Party doesn't care whether you have a Christmas or a way to fund your mortgage or a way to put food on the table for the first three months of the next year. I hope my Republican colleagues will join the American people in supporting this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself 30 additional seconds.

My friend on the other side clearly understands, I'm sure, the legislative process. We put a bill over to the Senate. They can make a change. If they want to pay for it, they can pay for it. They are safe, they're comfortable, because they know you're going to stop the bill or try to stop the bill. They know that the House Republicans are determined that they're not going to let this bill through here. So they say, all right, we can say we don't have any way to do anything with it. My belief is that we put a bill over there, they will pass a bill.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Madam Speaker, could you tell us how much time we have left?

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

I yield the gentlelady an additional 30 seconds.

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

I have found that the other side is very adroit at finding some reason not to do anything to help the middle class. Now, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the people in this country are not interested in cutting off food and housing and medical coverage for people who are unemployed in this country. And to use these arguments about, Oh, we're going to get the money from the stimulus money, I defy anybody on this floor at this moment to stand up and tell me where that stimulus money is and what the impact would be if you cut it because that money was allocated to various agencies, some to pay salaries for schoolteachers, some to pay salaries for policemen and firemen and local governments, some to pay the States for Medicaid.

All this money is out there. Maybe some of it hasn't yet been spent, but it's allocated. Some of it is for construction projects. I suppose, just like that Governor in New Jersey who thinks it's really politically smart to stop a public works project under the Hudson River because then he can use that money to pave potholes in New Jersey, and he puts the construction workers out of work all over the place.

Those infrastructure projects, you can't spend all the money on the first day. It does take a little while to build it, and you pay it out as you build it. Now, you know that. Republicans are just being deceptive. They think because it still is there in the Treasury, it can be used for something else. Well, it might have been committed for something else.

But not my Republican friends. This emergency that these 4\1/2\ million people have over here who have no benefits coming by the end of March, ``You folks understand that you shouldn't worry about this. I mean, the Speaker will explain it to you that you just have to wait until we can find where that money is in the budget.''

This is an emergency for people who have no check coming.

We would all like this thing to be all over. There isn't anybody on this floor, Republican or Democrat, who wouldn't like the mess that was created by the Bush administration to be over with. It isn't.

And the problem is, a guy in my district said, you know, Jim, I can tell you what the problem with America is, and your Republican side has a bad dose of this. He said, It's the belief in the microwave. If they have a problem, they come down to the refrigerator. They open the refrigerator, pull something out, close the refrigerator, open the microwave, throw it in, hit two buttons and wait 30 seconds and they've got lunch. They think everything can be solved like that.

It took a long time for Mr. Bush to create the mess that we are now dealing with, and it isn't going to be over in 30 seconds like the microwave dinner is.

And the fact is that you've got people who contradict you directly. The real budget--no one's going to ever accuse me of being a big budget warrior or a deficit warrior. I'm no deficit hawk. But Bob Bixby, President of the Concord Coalition, that organization dedicated to eliminating Federal budget deficits said, and I quote: ``As a deficit hawk, I wouldn't worry about extending unemployment benefits. It is not going to add to the long-term structural deficit, and it does address a serious need. I just feel like unemployment benefits wandered into the wrong street corner at the wrong time, and now they're getting mugged.''

He's absolutely right. For us to pick on the unemployment benefits as the problem for this deficit, wait till we have the debate on taxes on this floor and I hear people whining and whining around here about people making more than half a million dollars and we've got to give them a tax cut.

I urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 6419.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I believe that the American people want to work. Those who are unemployed want a job. Those who are out of work want employment benefits. I don't think that there is any excuse that can be given. There is no reason that one can conjure up that would say to a person who's unemployed, out of work, has no food, can't pay their mortgage, can't enjoy the holidays, that there is a reason, especially since they have worked, that they can't have benefits to get them through this situation on an emergency basis.

I am amazed, I am dumbfounded, I can't believe that I'm hearing what I'm hearing, that somehow or another the Democrats, in a technical sense, are keeping individuals from getting unemployment benefits. I would hope that we could change our minds, change our position, and know that when we do this for the least of these, then we're doing the work that we ought to be doing.

Let's pass this measure. Provide benefits to the unemployed.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Madam Speaker, it is with strong conviction that I urge my colleagues to support this short-term extension of

critical unemployment benefits for our citizens. As our Nation and my state continue to struggle out of this recession, this bill will provide vital assistance to almost 400,000 Illinoisans as we enter December. Failure to extend unemployment will directly affect approximately two million Americans, including 125,000 citizens from Illinois. If policymakers vote to block this critical lifeline, these 125,000 Illinoisans living in a state with a 10.8 percent unemployment rate will experience incredible hardship. Their time in unemployment has been difficult, trying to find work when the jobs are few and far between, trying to cover food, housing, and transportation for the families on an average of $290 a week, which typically replaces only half of the average family's expenses.

A government is supposed to help its people in times of need. Failure to extend these benefits would be the first time since the unemployment program's inception that Congress allowed such critical aid to lapse when unemployment remained high for extended periods of time. It is not only these families who will suffer, it is our businesses. The retail sector has been hard hit by this recession. Cutting unemployment benefits for two million people will take a tremendous toll on these businesses as well.

In addition to this short-term extension, I strongly support determining ways to help those who remain unemployed beyond the 99 weeks currently covered. Long-term unemployment is an unfortunate reality for Chicago and for my constituents. Further, we should extend the TANF Emergency funds as well. This program directly helped over 26,000 individuals and close to 5,000 employers in Illinois by creating subsidized jobs program, a much-needed boost to the economy in the midst of the worst recession in decades. This program put $9 million dollars into the pockets of hard working Illinoisans until Congress allowed it to lapse at the end of September.

Passing this bill today tells our citizens that we are working for them. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote for its passage.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of extending emergency unemployment. This legislation, of which I am a proud cosponsor, is a common sense, non-controversial measure that will help American families.

The unemployment situation in our country is a national emergency. Over the past two years, millions of jobs have been lost as a result of the worst recession in 70 years, caused by Wall Street excesses and an unregulated housing market. Millions of Americans are unemployed today--but through no fault of their own. Our neighbors, our friends, and our families are the ones who agonize as the economy slowly recovers. We cannot afford to abandon the unemployed members of the American workforce, and I won't stand by silently and allow these lifelines to expire.

Unemployment benefits help millions of unemployed Americans help meet the basic needs of rent, food, and transportation while they search for jobs. Any family receiving unemployment insurance would tell you that these benefits do not provide for a luxurious lifestyle without financial worries. These same families would tell you that without these benefits, they will lose their home, lose their car, and lose the ability to feed their children. If the Federal Government does not assist these out-of-work Americans with emergency unemployment compensation, then they will fall to the next level of the social safety net, requiring public housing assistance, seeking medical care in hospital emergency room, or turning to food shelves to put dinner on the table.

We have seen the proof that these benefits significantly stimulate economic growth while making the difference in the lives of struggling Americans. Economists from both sides of the aisle agree that unemployment benefits go directly into the economy, stimulating the kind of activity that creates jobs. And we have never before let federal emergency unemployment expire while the unemployment rate is anywhere close to this high.

I challenge my Republican colleagues who say this legislation is unaffordable to come to the floor right now and tell me how they can pay to give the richest 2 percent of Americans $700 billion while holding this lifeline hostage. Every single vote against this extension is a vote to impoverish more American families. Every single vote against this legislation is a vote against economic growth. Every single vote against this bill is a vote against the middle class.

Our economy will recover. But until our economic growth is fully restored, I simply refuse to abandon America's families during their time of greatest need.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6419) to amend the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 to provide for the further extension of emergency unemployment benefits, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

Madam Speaker, this is called an emergency bill because it is an emergency. For millions of people, this is an emergency. Unemployment benefits are going to run out in a few days. Therefore, it is an emergency for the United States of America. And let me just indicate what is at stake here.

Through January 1 of next year, close to 2 million people will not any longer be eligible for benefits. And then, a month later, the amount almost doubles. This is an emergency.

Last night, I was in my office at 9:30 and a person called from Atlanta, Georgia, to thank me and to thank Mr. McDermott and to thank our party for bringing up this extension.

I don't know what more any of us want. I don't see how we can go home for Thanksgiving when, as a result of failure of benefits, hundreds of thousands of people may not have a turkey on their table because they can't afford it and the next week may not have the moneys they need to meet their daily needs.

This should be a bipartisan effort. This is a totally human effort. This is totally an urgent effort. These are people laid off, people who have been looking for work, people who cannot find work. For every job, at least five people are looking for employment for that job. I don't know what other evidence needs to be brought here. It can be stated very briefly and directly.

If the 2 million people who are going to lose their benefits looking for work were brought here so we could see them, would anyone vote ``no''? Would anyone vote ``no''? Do we need the 2 million here? Can we put ourselves in their homes, in their shoes, in their places with their families, with their children.

This is an emergency. This House must act.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I say to the gentleman from Louisiana that the people of this country who are looking for work don't want empathy; they want the unemployment insurance that they worked for, and you're standing in the way. Don't send them empathy. Send them what they worked for.

I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of my time be controlled by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), the author of this bill.