Madam Speaker, I rise today to address the egregious actions taken by both the House and Senate against unemployed Americans. Members of this body have continued to vote against extending benefits to millions of Americans who need it the…
Madam Speaker, I rise today to address the egregious actions taken by both the House and Senate against unemployed Americans. Members of this body have continued to vote against extending benefits to millions of Americans who need it the most right now. While these citizens are facing the worst job market that this Nation has seen in generations, these Members have turned their backs on them. They claim that the Restoration of Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act is budget-busting legislation. Madam Speaker, any bill whose intention is to assist 14.7 million jobless Americans while adding a needed infusion of cash into our still fragile economy is not budget-busting legislation. It is the right legislation.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has claimed that the Republicans continue to block the extension of unemployment benefits because they are not ``willing to use worthwhile programs as an excuse'' to create ``even bigger national debt than we've already got.'' Where were these same Republicans when we began our descent into fiscal disarray? Where were the Republicans when our national debt doubled when they had control of the White House and Congress? Where were the Republicans in stopping this atrocity from taking place?
And with that, I would like to put a chart up that some of my former colleagues used to show where we were
and where we came from. In western Pennsylvania, where I'm from, many times I've been taught over the years that you have to look back to see where you were to know where you're going. And I think this chart shows pretty dramatically where we were just a decade ago and where the last administration brought us.
Republicans have made a political calculation and decided to present this as a debate about our national debt. If we look back at history, we can see this new mantra of fiscal responsibility heralded by the Republican Party of today was not what they lived by a few years ago. Our national debt grew to enormous numbers because of actions Republicans have taken in the past decade. Let us not forget, when President Bush came into office in 2001, he inherited a $236 billion budget surplus, 2.4 percent of our total GDP. This was the first surplus of this magnitude in the history of our country. These surpluses were projected to continue for at least the next 10 years.
According to a Congressional Budget Office report on the Economic Outlook for the Next Decade published in January of 2000, if the policies in place under President Clinton were maintained, total surpluses would have accumulated to between $3.2 and $4.2 trillion over the next 10 years. With these surpluses, it was projected that the Treasury would have sufficient cash on hand sometime between 2007 and 2009 to retire all debt held by the public. Now, let me read that to you again. With these surpluses, it was projected that the Treasury would have sufficient cash on hand sometime between 2007 and 2009 to retire all debt held by the public.
Madam Speaker, we've come a long way from the days of President Clinton, and it's been under the Republican leadership that this descent has taken place. As a country, we were on a path towards true fiscal responsibility and recovery. Rather than demand that we use these funds to eradicate our national debt then, Republicans dwindled our surplus on unpaid programs that greatly benefited the wealthiest citizens in our Nation. The Economic Growth--and I love the titles--the Economic Growth and Tax Reconciliation Act of 2001 passed the Republican Congress and was signed by President Bush, and it was an unpaid tax cut for the rich.
The CBO revised its economic outlook at the beginning of 2002 to reflect the changes in spending policy that have taken place during President Bush's first year. Although they still projected surpluses, the total amount had dropped by $4 trillion under the prior year's estimate; $2.4 trillion, or 60 percent, of that decline was attributed to laws enacted in 2001, including the Bush tax cuts. When the tax policy was studied for its long-term impact on our national budget, it was determined that the plan would cost us $1.35 trillion over 10 years. At the end of fiscal year 2002, we reported our first budget deficit since 1997 in the amount of $157.8 billion. Even then, there were no trumpets sounded by the Republicans to reverse our spending habits to pay down the national debt. In fact, they continued to embrace policies that would lead us deeper and deeper into the financial black hole we see ourselves in today.
In 2003, there was a second round of major tax cuts enacted. The law accelerated previous provisions from the 2001 cuts while enacting new terms. Here we go with these great titles. The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 was projected to increase Federal budget deficits by $349.7 billion in the next 10 years. From 2001 to 2008, the Republicans added $4.9 trillion to our national debt, bringing it to a total of $10.6 trillion by the time President Obama took office. The Republican leadership was able to turn a projected $4 trillion surplus into a nearly $5 trillion budget deficit in a matter of 8 years.
Madam Speaker, 2008 was a trying year for all Americans. We witnessed a dramatic dip in housing prices, a skyrocketing number of foreclosed homes, the failing of financial institutions, what appeared to be a full collapse of our banking system, and the loss of 3.1 million American jobs by the end of the year. It was a catastrophe on a magnitude this Nation had not seen in decades. The economic meltdown prompted President Bush's Treasury Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke to visit the Speaker's Office on Thursday, September 18 of that year to deliver information to congressional leaders on our country's dire economic situation.
The Treasury Secretary and Chairman of the Fed described how, under the Bush administration, our economy had reached the equivalent of driving a tanker off of Allegheny Mountain. They believed that a serious government intervention was needed in order to rescue the system. On Saturday, September 20, a mere 2 days after this briefing, the Treasury Department delivered a three-page proposal to Congress asking for $700 billion and giving the Secretary authority to purchase mortgage-related assets from any financial institution.
In a hearing held by the House Financial Services Committee on the financial crisis, Secretary Paulson stated this major outlay of government money was needed to restore confidence in our financial markets and financial institutions so that they can perform their mission of supporting future prosperity and growth. The CBO estimated that the bill, signed by President Bush on October 4, 2008, in its entirety, including several tax provisions added on to it, would increase the national debt by $814 billion.
In the 8 years that President Bush and his administration led this country, they doubled our national debt. Not once did Republicans stand up to say the Bush administration and the Republican-controlled Congress were responsible for this. But now when Americans are in need of help, the Republicans refuse to offer it.
The financial crisis left a lasting effect on our country. Not only were Wall Street and our Nation's financial institutions left in disarray, but millions of Americans were left without jobs. Our unemployment rate jumped to 7.4 percent at the end of December 2008 and now stands over 9 percent. Americans are suffering because of this crisis and are in dire need of assistance, yet Republicans believe that it is politically astute to deny millions of American families the aid they need to put food on their tables while searching for a job during this difficult time.
When the House took up the Restoration of Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act on July 1, it passed by a 270-153 vote. It is wonderful that 270 Members of this body see the needs of the people and are appropriately providing for them, yet 80 percent of the Republicans in the House opted to continue being the party of ``no.''
Nearly all Republicans in the Senate decided to do the same. They continue to turn their backs on American families in need.
Republicans believe that this is all in the name of fiscal responsibility. How is denying Americans needed funding to support their families fiscally irresponsible?
Not only do these funds help American families, they help the American economy. One reason there is not enough jobs right now is weak consumer demand. CBO has found that extending unemployment benefits to be one of the most cost-effective and fast-acting ways to stimulate the economy.
Every dollar in unemployment benefits creates at least $1.64 in economic activity, as opposed to the 29 cents the Bush tax cuts would generate if extended, according to chief economist Mark Zandi of moodys.com. Virtually every dollar from unemployment benefits would be quickly spent on living expenses with the purchase of goods and services.
The CBO projected that the Restoration of Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act of 2010 would cost $33 billion, which works out to be about $2,200 per unemployed person of those 14.7 million people. This is roughly seven-thousandths of 1 percent of the debt amassed by the Republicans under the Bush administration. Yet the Republicans now want to claim fiscal responsibility. Providing these benefits is fiscally responsible and, more than that, it's a moral responsibility.
In the month of May, the State of Pennsylvania had a 9.1 percent unemployment rate. And in my area in southwest Pennsylvania we see many counties that are still hovering around the 10 percent market. While I was in the district over this past week I heard
many stories about families and how they're hurting while I was around visiting them.
At a senior center I talked to a young woman whose husband used to work in one of the factories in Johnstown. He worked there for 30 years. They paid their taxes. They did everything that they were supposed to do. Now his unemployment benefits are running out, but the Republican Members in this body and in the Senate feel it's not important enough to pass the emergency unemployment benefits.
One unemployed constituent lost her car because she's unable to make her payments once she stopped receiving the benefits in June. She's now left to find a jobs with no means of transportation, but that's not important enough for the folks in this body.
I received this letter last week from one of my constituents who desperately needs Congress to pass the unemployment extension. Her letter reads, ``I am writing this message to tell you about the harm that failure to extend unemployment is causing for my family. Both my husband and I lost jobs through no fault of our own, like millions of other Americans. We have worked hard and paid taxes for a combined total of 71 years; two of these include my husband's 2 years in the military service.
``We have tried to get work since being laid off over a year and a half ago. My husband has worked for the Census.'' Remember, those are some of those jobs that have been noted that they're not real jobs. ``My husband has worked for the Census a few weeks each of these past 2 years, but that will end soon. I have tried to get work during the past 2 years, but so far have not found anything. I have read that for every job that opens in Pennsylvania, there are five workers that would need it.
``We feel that we have been let down. Our country has bailed out companies and banks, and has saved high-paying jobs and bonuses, but feels it is too expensive to continue to help the unemployed. Some say that there are jobs out there that people aren't taking. I would like to know what they are and especially whether they are jobs that my husband and I could do.''
Now, this is western Pennsylvania. The people in my district want to work. Sometimes there isn't work though, and they need the help that these unemployment benefits offer. And it really, it hurts my feelings and it angers me that this body can turn that kind of help down.
``Most of our 71 years of work have been in public libraries, which are hurting more than any other service from huge cuts by the State and local governments.
``I don't know how Congressmen and Senators can take a break when millions of Americans' lives are on hold. We can't make the rent or mortgage, pay for prescription drugs, feed and clothe our children, put gas into our cars so that we can continue to look for jobs and many other necessities.''
And just as a side note, before I continue the speech that my staff and I put together, in western Pennsylvania we've seen the loss of jobs over many years. It used to be the hub of the steel industry of this country. Well, steel left in the late seventies and early eighties, and we've been fighting to create jobs in western Pennsylvania for a long time. We're a very hard working people. We do the best job that we can.
And why I'm so angered by the rhetoric that's been thrown around about this unemployment extension of unemployment benefits is these are hard working people, and if the jobs were there they'd be working. They're not looking for any kind of handout. But sometimes you need help, and that's all they're asking for.
She goes on to say, ``I would like for you to share this letter with other Congressmen and Senators. I hope that you will all realize that we did not ask for this situation and would be glad to return to work if only we could.
``The unemployed need help and we need it fast. Please work as hard as you can to get our benefits back.''
Madam Speaker, these families, like millions of other American families, need our help. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to pass the Restoration of Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act and provide our citizens the help they require in this time of crisis.
And again, let me reference where we were and then where we went.
This is not budget busting. This is helping men and women who are in need.