The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS ADDRESSES UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Labor was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H176-H182 on Jan. 13, 2014.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS ADDRESSES UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Collins of New York). Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Horsford) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this designated hour at the beginning of this week for the Congressional Black Caucus, as it normally does, to come to this floor to bring forward issues that are very important to the American people. Tonight I join with my colleagues to speak about the importance of extending unemployment insurance benefits, growing our economy, and putting people back to work. So for the next hour, the Congressional Black Caucus will talk about the dire need for emergency unemployment insurance benefits and the fact that it is time for Congress to do its job.
I would like to thank my coanchor, Mr. Jeffries from New York, and our chair, the Honorable Marcia Fudge from Ohio, for their leadership and working tonight to bring forward these important issues.
At this time, I would like to yield to the gentlelady from New York, Representative Clarke.
Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Las Vegas (Mr. Horsford) for his leadership and guidance during this CBC Special Order.
Today I rise to support the extension of emergency unemployment benefits. Since 2008, both parties have come together to provide extra weeks of unemployment benefits for our fellow Americans. These Americans are our neighbors, our relatives, our friends, and constituents who are unemployed through no fault of their own. They have consistently tried to find employment, having pounded the pavement each and every day but, unfortunately, to no avail. They deserve our help.
Unemployment benefits help Americans pay for their most basic survival needs: food, housing, and medical care. If unemployment benefits are not extended, approximately 5 million Americans are expected to lose emergency unemployment benefits over the next 12 months; and of that number, 383,000 are New Yorkers.
Failing to extend the emergency benefits will reduce economic growth by 0.4 percent in the first quarter of 2014 and cost our economy 310,000 jobs next year. Is this really another problem that we want to have our Nation face?
It is important to realize that unemployment not only negatively affects individuals and their families but also our economy, in particular, small business owners. The mom-and-pop shops that are the pillars in our communities suffer more when their customers cannot patronize their businesses.
Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, has found that every $1 spent on unemployment insurance grows the economy by $1.55.
{time} 1930
These dollars circulating through the economy create jobs. Despite statements to the contrary made by some of my Republican colleagues, no one wants to be unemployed. Americans want to work. It is part of the American ethos. It is also part of the American ethos to help our fellow citizens out when they are down. We all must remember that, but for the grace of God, go I.
I close by asking Speaker Boehner to bring an emergency unemployment benefit extension bill to the floor, and, in doing so, help not only our economy but, most importantly, millions of deserving and unemployed Americans.
Mr. HORSFORD. I would like to thank the gentlelady from New York. Thank you for your hard work and for bringing your perspective to the need for extending the unemployment insurance benefits to the 1.3 million Americans who, as of this week, have now lost receiving that benefit. This is the week that they would have otherwise received that unemployment insurance benefit in the mail. So this is real for some 1.3 million Americans who are struggling this week to meet their obligations to keep the lights on, to put food on the table and to pay the rent. This is the week. Each week that Congress fails to act, 72,000 Americans--additional Americans--lose their unemployment insurance benefits. One person every 8 seconds, Mr. Speaker, loses their uninsurance benefits when Congress fails to act.
That is why the Congressional Black Caucus is here this evening, to bring attention to this urgency of now. Every week, 72,000 Americans are struggling--additional Americans--on top of the 1.3 million who already, as of December 28, have lost their unemployment insurance.
So this is real, and the impacts are real.
I would like to go to the vice chairman now of the Congressional Black Caucus, the gentleman from North Carolina, who provides tremendous leadership to our caucus and to the issues important to the American people, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Butterfield).
Mr. BUTTERFIELD. Let me thank you, Mr. Horsford, for yielding to me this evening. Let me also thank you for your passion and your tireless work not only on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus but on behalf of the people of Clark County, Nevada, and all of the other people that you represent in your great State.
Thank you very much for your tireless energy. I have watched you from the first day that you have come to the House floor, and you are, no doubt, one of the hardest working Members of this House, and I thank you so very much.
Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today to urge my Republican colleagues to pass an extension of the Emergency Unemployment Compensation program and to do it now. This program is a crucial safety net for those who are most in need. My colleagues know that I represent North Carolina, but what many of you may not know is that my State, the State of North Carolina, already lost its Federal unemployment insurance last year. Republican Governor Pat McCrory turned away $780 million in Federal funding to assist the long-term unemployed. Now, on December 28, a few days ago, 1.3 million Americans joined tens of thousands of my constituents in losing out on the support that they deserve.
This program, Mr. Speaker, is a response to the greatest recession since the Great Depression. In the last 5 years, President Obama has led our Nation back from the brink of economic collapse, but there is still work to be done. Now is not the time to abandon this program. 1.3 million Americans have been searching for work for more than 26 weeks, often after being laid off from jobs they have worked at for years.
The need for emergency unemployment insurance is especially high in communities like those that I represent in North Carolina. Double-digit unemployment still persists in many counties that I represent. In my congressional district, one in four people, including 36 percent of our children, live below the poverty level. Families in transition depend on emergency unemployment insurance to put basic food on the table, to care for their children and to search for new employment.
Last year, North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory dealt a devastating blow to the long-term unemployed by reducing State unemployment benefits. That reduction caused the Federal Emergency Unemployment Compensation program to literally dissolve in our State. Governor McCrory made this decision knowing its harmful impacts and that it would make North Carolina the only State in the country to end emergency jobless benefits for its citizens.
The Governor's decision is a disgrace. That decision forfeited--
forfeited--$780 million in urgently needed Federal benefits for long-
term unemployed North Carolinians and cost our State $1.5 billion in economic activity. The elimination of the EUC program nationwide now could cost an additional 200,000 jobs due to reduced economic activity. This is according to the Congressional Budget Office.
At the beginning of this year, Americans from all 49 other States lost out on their emergency unemployment benefits, just like my State did last year. Now 1 million families will struggle to pay their bills and provide for their families during their search for employment. North Carolinians have already seen firsthand how devastating these cuts can be. My constituents are outraged. They are outraged with Governor McCrory and Republicans in the North Carolina General Assembly who chose to abandon this program.
We must extend this program to give families a chance to get back on their feet. Democratic proposals to extend the program would give my constituents a chance--a fair chance--to receive Federal unemployment benefits held hostage by our Governor. Two times in the last 2 months House Republicans on this floor have nearly unanimously defeated Democratic motions to hold votes on extending this program.
Therefore, we must stand up against those like Governor McCrory who seek to disenfranchise hardworking people who are down on their luck by extending emergency unemployment insurance and other critical programs, a program which they have paid into as insurance payments for many, many years.
We cannot, Mr. Speaker, we must not afford to turn a blind eye and to leave those behind who are most in need.
I want to thank you, Mr. Horsford, for bringing this to the attention of the American people. I hope my colleagues are listening tonight because this is a sense of urgency.
Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentleman from North Carolina, and I thank him for his profound remarks this evening and the call to action, not only for the leadership in North Carolina but for the leadership in this House to do its job in bringing legislation forward to allow us to vote to extend unemployment insurance benefits for the people of North Carolina and across America, who this week, now because of the failure of Congress to act, when they went to their mailbox to receive their unemployment insurance benefit, this is the week that they opened that mailbox and nothing was there to provide that bridge. So this is real, and so people are impacted.
This has been an insurance program that has received bipartisan support in the past, and there is no reason why this Congress cannot do its job to get this done now. I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for his leadership.
I would like to now turn to the gentlelady from Texas, who brought forward and who raised the objections prior to our even adjourning in December, along with 170 of our other colleagues, calling on the leadership to not go on recess but, in fact, to stay here and do its job. We are where we are now, but we have raised these objections, and the gentlelady from Texas has raised these objections.
I would like to yield now to the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson Lee.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Horsford) and Mr. Jeffries again both for convening the Congressional Black Caucus, under your leadership and the leadership of our chairwoman, the honorable Marcia Fudge, and to be joining here on the floor, at least to date, with our colleague from New York, our colleague from North Carolina and our colleague from New Jersey, which is clearly showing the vast depth of this particular crisis going from South to North and to the far western State of Texas.
Let me say to those who are presently unemployed, the 72,000 a week that occurs as we stand on the floor of the House, that you can count on the Members on this floor, the Democratic Members, the Congressional Black Caucus and our good friends on the other side of the aisle, to recognize that this is not a partisan issue but an American issue.
Just a few weeks ago, or just last week, in fact, I had in the Houston Chronicle an op-ed that said the number one job of the House is to extend emergency unemployment aid. The program will help the economy by creating jobs and boosting growth.
I think it is important to emphasize and refute some of the negative stigma that comes from those who misunderstand what the unemployment benefit--or unemployment insurance, let's use that word--means. It means that individuals have actually worked. They are working people. They put into the idea of having an unemployment benefit, and the United States Federal Government determined in times of bad economic times to continue the 47 weeks through an emergency relief.
By the way, it was supported by President George Bush in 2008 when he offered to say that these individuals have worked previously, they are looking for work, and they deserve to be able to support their families.
Individuals like Anetta Parker, who has been looking for work for 2 years, who is holding up the very letter that she held up at my press conference in Houston to acknowledge that this is a letter that many people are getting in their mailboxes. Not only are they getting these letters, but they are not getting any indication for relief, call United Way, call social services. I can tell you, people who work do not have a tendency to know the local social services, and they are desperate. They get a letter that they are being cut off.
In the midst of this I met individuals who are looking for work and said, I am now homeless because those dollars were allowing me to pay week to week for a place to live, a place to clean myself, if you will, to make myself presentable for work, to look for work, which is a requirement of the emergency unemployment insurance benefit, and they are now on the streets.
Not only are they on the streets, Mr. Horsford, but when I went home on Friday and sat down again at the career and recovery resources to look for or to talk with more individuals, many of these persons are veterans, because veterans are taught to suck it up, and they have not even, in some instances, attempted to get these benefits--to those who would say that everybody just wants to be on the dole. So beyond the unemployment benefits of 1.3 million, there are many others that we have not approached.
So it is important that this Special Order is done to reach to the other side of the aisle for the Speaker to put on the floor of the House an emergency 3-month extension of unemployment benefits, to not cast aside individuals who have been looking for work and to not ignore the fact that over this cold December, we lost 16,000 jobs in construction, we lost some 11,000 jobs in the movie industry, we lost jobs in the sports industry, and we are continuing to lose jobs because this month was a cold month. So the production of jobs was 78,000. Even though this economy is rebounding and we have had some other good months, this month, the December month, it was 78,000.
Don't you think that those individuals who are looking for work were rebuffed by the fact, or were blocked by the fact, that there were jobs that were lost?
So I would like to encourage my friends in the other body to quickly find a way of coming together. As my colleagues know, they postponed the votes today. I believe that some of the suggestions being made about pension relief for military persons may be a basis of finding compromise, but I think when we pit the idea of fiscal responsibilities and deficits against individuals having a roof over their head and children having food on the table, it is disgraceful.
It is equally disgraceful when people misinterpret the idea of what unemployment benefits are all about. As I wrote this op-ed, it saddened me, though I believe in the First Amendment, when letters came in response to the op-ed, and they wanted to ask a question: Why don't these people get a job?
{time} 1945
Why don't we have a jobs program? That didn't disappoint me; I think that is a good question. But they didn't seem to understand that it was people looking for work who could not find work. It was long lines of people who couldn't find work. They want to work. So I would say to them, this is not a hand out but a helping hand. I expect to introduce soon a training bill that allows individuals who are on unemployment benefits to get a stipend to be able to utilize for Labor Department-
designated disciplines of work, to train for work that needs additional workers.
So it is not a stipend to go out to your local job-training setup that somebody set up. It is actually to have officially documented needs for the particular profession that you are training for. You get your unemployment benefit, you are not cut off, and you get a stipend for that training. That creates jobs.
But just to say let's pass various bills, like the Keystone bill, and that is the cause of no jobs is not accurate. But I do think we can support the jobs bill of the President, and we will create jobs.
So I want to thank the gentleman for allowing us to come and to be able to highlight that in the cold of the winter there are people on line trying to get work, and that were people on line trying to get work in November and October and September and August and July, because this young lady, Ms. Parker, has been looking for work for 2 years. She is a very competent administrative assistant, along with many others. Veterans have been looking for work.
So I would like to say to those I met with on Friday, we will not forget you. We recognize that you are deserving of human dignity and that you want to work, that you have worked, that you are not looking for a handout, and that the unemployment insurance is not a handout. It is an emergency relief for those who have worked. Let us have compassion. Let us have sympathy. Let us care about others, and let us work together to extend the unemployment insurance benefit to provide for the families of America.
I thank the gentleman.
No. 1 Job for House: Extend Emergency Unemployment Aid
(By Sheila Jackson Lee)
Right now, 1.9 million Americans are experiencing an economic emergency, which will turn into a catastrophe for them and their families if Congress does not act immediately to extend the emergency unemployment program that expired on Dec. 28. Unless the aid is extended through 2014, nearly 14 million Americans will be negatively affected--the 4.9 million workers who will see unemployment insurance cut off and the approximately 9 million additional family members those workers are supporting.
There are some who believe that there is no economic emergency justifying an extension of the emergency unemployment program. They are wrong. Let them tell that to jobless veterans looking for a new job in an economy in which there are still nearly 2 million fewer jobs now than there were before the recession began. Let them tell that to the persons who know from experience there are more than three applicants for each new job created. The national employment rate is 7 percent and of these unemployed, the long-term unemployment rate--the share of unemployed workers who have been unemployed for 27 weeks or longer--is 37 percent, the highest it has been in 20 years.
Behind these grim statistics are the heart-breaking stories of real people--veterans, parents, seniors--struggling to get by on about $300 a week. These benefits, which the recipients earned and paid for through their payroll taxes, are needed to pay rent and utilities, buy groceries, pay for Internet access to search for jobs and gas to get to job interviews.
This is why the most urgent task pending before the House of Representatives is to extend the emergency unemployment program. To address this emergency, I introduced legislation last month, the Unemployed Job Hunters Protection and Assistance Act (H.R. 3773), that would extend the program for 12 months to provide the benefits earned by the recipients and avoid what will be a tragedy not only for those who are unemployed but also for an economy still recovering from the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Extending the program is good for the nation's economy because it will create an estimated 200,000 jobs, increase economic growth by .2 percent and generate $1.52 in economic activity for each dollar expended.
The emergency unemployment program was established in 2008 during the Bush Administration and has been reauthorized several times as the economy continues its recovery. Congress has never failed to extend emergency unemployment insurance when the rate of long-term unemployment was even half the current level of 37 percent. And because of the emergency nature of the congressional action, the extension was not subject to any offset requirements during the Bush Administration. There is no good reason to impose any such requirements now; doing so serves no purpose other than to punish the persons who need our help.
Despite a slowly recovering job market, these unemployed job hunters have not lost faith. Every morning, they get up and go out or online looking for jobs. They want to work. They still have hope that things will get better so they can provide for their families. But they need the help that unemployment insurance is intended to provide.
Now is not the time to scapegoat those who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Now is the time to extend the emergency unemployment aid. At a minimum, Congress should and must vote to extend the program for three months while negotiations continue on a long-term solution. On Tuesday, a bipartisan measure that would do this cleared a procedural vote in the Senate, allowing debate to continue on the three-month stopgap. This is an economic emergency. It is time for congressional Republicans to work with their Democratic colleagues on the issues of importance to the American people.
____
Texas and 18th Congressional District Employment and Unemployment
Information
64,294 unemployed workers in Texas lost their benefits on December 28.
11,294 unemployed workers in Harris County lost their benefits on December 28.
An additional 16,900 unemployed workers will lose their benefits in the first six months of 2014.
Employment Situation in Texas:
Unemployment rate: 6.4 percent.
Maximum weeks of benefits available now: 54.
Maximum weeks of benefits if Congress doesn't act: 26.
Reduction in benefits since 2011: -42 percent.
The current average weekly benefit is $338.59.
If EUC is extended in Texas: 11,766 jobs will be saved through the end of 2014.
Percent of unemployed receiving UI before expiration of Federal program--TX--29.
Percent of Unemployed Receiving UI after expiration of Federal program--TX--20.
Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentlelady from Texas. I appreciate very much you bringing to our attention who is covered by unemployment insurance and putting a face to who is receiving this insurance. I am glad you focused on that term ``insurance'' and the fact that these are individuals who have paid into the program, as they have been gainfully employed for some time.
Due to no fault of their own, they are in need of this bridge. Many of them are in training, and this initiative of legislation you are proposing to link job-seekers to employer-based demands is exactly the type of reform that our side supports and that we are willing to work with the other side on, but we need to provide the extension of the unemployment benefits while we work on those reforms.
Right now, the Congress has failed to provide this bridge, and you have documented that very well in your remarks this evening. I thank the gentlelady.
Let me highlight, as well, some of the additional information on who is covered by unemployment insurance benefits. This is according to the Department of Labor: four out of five beneficiaries of unemployment insurance benefits, Mr. Speaker, are individuals with children in the household or another adult in the household, typically a spouse; 44.5 percent of individuals who receive emergency unemployment benefits are households with children. So just think about that for a moment. This is the week that those emergency employment benefits did not come in, the $300 or $400 or $500 that they may have received to help meet their basic needs this month. That impacted not only that job-seeker, not only that unemployed worker, but also their children.
Half of the people receiving emergency unemployment insurance have at least some college education. So for those who continue to use this rhetoric of these are people who are lazy, who are sitting at home channel surfing, they don't want to look for work, half of them are people already with college education or some form of education; 36.4 percent have high school degrees.
And, finally, Mr. Speaker, 50 percent, over nine in 10 live in households with total income less than $75,000 a year. This is the working poor of our country. These are the people who are striving to be part of the middle class; and, if anything, they are using emergency unemployment benefits as a bridge until they can get back on their feet. I also want to point out that 43 percent are individuals with income over $75,000 a year. So this economy has hit virtually every stratum of income level, and so that is why it is important for this Congress to do its job in extending unemployment insurance benefits.
I want to commend the other Chamber, the leadership, Majority Leader Harry Reid from my home State of Nevada, and Republican U.S. Senator Dean Heller, also from Nevada, in large part our State, because we have unemployment at about 9 percent. We are tied with Rhode Island for the highest unemployment in the country, not because job-seekers don't want to go to work, because the second highest industry in our State was construction and because of the bust of the construction economy in our State, there are no jobs or there are very few jobs for those trades workers, for engineering firms, for architecture firms. I have one architecture firm that has had to lay off 70 percent of their workforce in the last few years because there simply aren't the jobs in the construction sector. Despite the fact that our economy is beginning to rebound, it is not rebounding in all sectors or all regions of the country. That is why it is critically important that this Congress do its job to extend unemployment insurance benefits for the 20,000 Nevadans who have lost them, and the 1.3 million Americans who have also lost them.
I now would like to turn to my good friend and freshman colleague. It has been a great opportunity over the last year to get to know him and the work that he does in the great State of New Jersey and the commitment that he brings to serving the people of his congressional district. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne).
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, before I start, let me thank the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Horsford) for his leadership through the first session of the 113th Congress and into the second session of the 113th Congress. I am honored to be one of the freshmen--actually the ranking freshman in the CBC, if I can take that liberty--but the gentleman from Nevada and the gentleman from New York have distinguished themselves in the leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus in the first session of the 113th Congress, and I am honored to serve with them.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today for the 90,000 New Jerseyans who lost their unemployment insurance on December 28 and the 89,000 more New Jerseyans set to lose unemployment benefits in the first half of the new year.
The people back in my district can't understand how out of touch some of my Republican colleagues have become to think that cutting off this assistance will force the unemployed to get a job. Well, I have news for my colleagues: these people are not lazy, quite the opposite. These people are out every single day searching desperately for work, but the fact of the matter is there just aren't enough jobs for the amount of people unemployed.
It is up to Congress to pass a jobs bill to put these people back to work, but this Congress has not done that. Until that time comes, we have a moral obligation to help our fellow Americans out and give them the economic security that they need to put food on the table, to keep a roof over their head, and to pay their bills so that they have the ability to continue to look for a job.
Mr. Speaker, it is called insurance for a reason. These people have paid into this fund, and they must be actively searching for work to receive this critical lifeline. They might have paid into the system for 5, 10, and even 20 years to receive this assistance, and now we talk about cutting them off.
They are filled with anxiety as they compete against hundreds of others for a job. I know, I have heard their stories.
A young man by the name of Adam, an arts teacher from Montclair, New Jersey, who holds a master's degree from Columbia University, recently lost his job--through no fault of his own--because of funding cuts in education. Despite his best efforts, he, like so many others, has been unable to find work. With every passing day, anxiety for the well-being of Adam's family grows. Through no fault of his own, he finds himself in this predicament.
Another young man from my district, Jeffrey from Bloomfield, New Jersey, is now gainfully employed, but was fortunate enough to have unemployment when he lost his job. When he hit hard times during the recession, Jeffrey was thankful that he had at least some money coming in to make ends meet. In his letter to me Jeffrey wrote:
I am concerned for my friends and neighbors who might not have been so lucky, who will be devastated by the sudden loss of income. The ability to pay for a roof over one's head and basic living expenses may seem a small measure of dignity, but it means the world to someone who has lost their job that they have devoted years of their life to.
So I urge my Republican colleagues and the leadership to listen to people like Adam and Jeffrey, to understand this is not about people who are lazy or who are sitting around or who are just biding time and taking in a stipend that they haven't paid into or deserve. These are Americans, your friends, your neighbors, people we all know, relatives, that find themselves in this situation. We must do something for them. We must continue to make sure that they can meet their needs on a minimum basis to keep them afloat until they can find a job. So I urge the Republican House leadership to listen to people like them.
Mr. Speaker, we need to put a bill on the floor that extends unemployment insurance right away; otherwise each and every week my Republican colleagues delay, more than 3,400 more New Jerseyans are kicked off unemployment and find themselves in devastating circumstances.
It is unconscionable, it is unacceptable, and we must as the Congress of the United States of America do something about it.
Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey. Again, I commend you for raising your voice and urging this body to do its job on behalf of your constituents, the people of New Jersey who elected you to bring their perspective to this Congress. You are asking the same question many of us are asking, which is to our colleagues on the other side: Do they know what it is like to be unemployed? Do they know what it is like to have to look for a job day after day, week after week, submitting resumes not knowing if you are going to be called back? Do they know what it is like to struggle, or to look one of your children in the eyes and worry about how you are going to make ends meet? That is the reality for 1.4 million Americans today because Congress has failed to act. Whether they have been in that situation or not, they need to understand that is the reality for many Americans.
I thank you for your comments and for being here during this Special Order hour on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus, and I commend you for your hard work.
Mr. Speaker, the reality of the situation is significant for many.
{time} 2000
Like my colleagues last week, I went to a local work center in my district, Workforce Connections, to talk with and meet with a group of workers, job seekers, people who were looking for work. When I walked into the center, the one-stop center where everybody looks for the jobs on the job board was packed. There was a waiting list to get in in order to get onto a computer to search for jobs.
I talked to one unemployed worker. Her name is Alfordeen. I want to just share a bit of her story with you because it hit me that this is who I am fighting for. She is one of those 20,000 Nevadans affected by the expiration of her unemployment insurance.
She worked for 20 years doing patient admissions for a local medical facility in southern Nevada. She was laid off in 2012, which resulted in her losing her health insurance. Unfortunately, she was later diagnosed with breast cancer and has been living with one of her children while she trains to become certified to get another job. Alfordeen is using her remaining unemployment insurance benefits to cover some of her medical costs, and she just found out recently, fortunately, that she qualifies now for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act.
But what Alfordeen told me, what all of the workers I talked to told me, is what she wants most is what she had in 2012: to go back to work, to regain her independence, and to help others do the work that she loves by admitting them and helping them get health care.
So Alfordeen is an example to me of the 1.4 million Americans who are out there who are trying, who want this Congress to try as well. They expected us to do our job, and we failed them. We failed when we left in December, and we are failing them every day that we don't extend unemployment insurance benefits.
So I am urging my colleagues to not allow another day to go without us taking action. It is true that one person every 8 seconds loses unemployment insurance. It is true that 72,000 additional Americans will be affected every week that this Congress fails to act. But we have the ability to do something about it, and that is why we are here tonight.
I want to turn now to my coanchor of this Special Order hour. He is a great colleague, someone who I have profound respect for. He works tirelessly on behalf of the constituents who elected him from New York. He brings so many great perspectives to the Special Order topics that we have been able to cover. I would like to recognize him now, the gentleman from New York, Congressman Jeffries.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Let me thank my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from the Silver State and the anchor of today's CBC Special Order for his eloquence, his continued leadership and, of course, for all of the hard work that you have put in on behalf of the people that you represent back at home. It has been an honor and a privilege to serve with you, as well as with all of the members of the Congressional Black Caucus who continue to be a voice for the voiceless, the conscience of the Congress fighting hard each and every day to bring to life the American Dream for the greatest number of people possible in this wonderful country of ours.
Last week we commemorated the 50th anniversary of the declaration of the war on poverty. In January of 1964, President Lyndon Baines Johnson came to this House before a joint session of Congress and rolled out a series of initiatives designed to march us toward what he would term the Great Society, a war on poverty to lift people out of their perilous condition and bring to life for them the American Dream.
His war on poverty produced programs like Medicare and Medicaid, school breakfast, Head Start, the Food Stamp Act, minimum wage enhancement, Job Corps, college work study, program after program enacted between 1964 and 1966, which, taken together, were effective in lifting millions of Americans out of their impoverished condition.
Fifty years later, we have made a tremendous amount of progress. But, unfortunately, there are many in this Chamber who, instead of continuing the great legacy started by President Lyndon Baines Johnson here in January of 1964, have instead engaged in what perhaps is more appropriately termed a war on the poor, a war on working families, a war on the middle class, a war on senior citizens, and, in its current manifestation, a war on the long-term unemployed.
Unfortunately, whenever folks identify, set their sights on a government program that they don't like, the operating procedure follows a script that is all too familiar: demonize, downsize, and ultimately pulverize.
First, the script says you have got to demonize the program; tell things to the American people that don't necessarily hold up to the scrutiny of a comprehensive factual examination. Once you demonize the program, it enables you to downsize it, to reduce its impact, to reduce our investment. Ultimately, the goal of those who are engaged in this war on the poor, war on the long-term unemployed in its current iteration, ultimately the goal is, once you have demonized it and downsized it, in some way, you just want to pulverize it.
So if you think about this in the context of what we face right now in America, we have heard emanating from this Chamber and other parts of the country this caricature of individuals who supposedly are the long-term unemployed. As the gentleman from Nevada has indicated, we have heard representations suggestive that these are individuals who are couch potatoes sitting at home channel surfing, who only get exercise once a month apparently when they are running out to get their unemployment check and then race back into the house, and that is the only exercise that they get.
What is the basis for this caricature? What analysis has been done of the 1.3 million Americans who you have unceremoniously thrown off the long-term unemployment rolls to come to this conclusion? You have no evidence to make this caricature.
In fact, we know that current statistics suggest that here in America, while we have made significant progress since the Great Recession, 8.1 million private sector jobs that have been created, we know that we still have a way to go. For every 2.8 Americans who are looking for a job, only one job exists.
So the facts are working against those who are unemployed at this point. It is not as if they are not working hard to find a job. The jobs statistically don't exist, simply in terms of the raw numbers. We have an economy that needs to produce more jobs.
Now, what I found fascinating about this whole situation, in addition to this unwarranted caricature that you have created--folks on the other side of this debate who don't necessarily like unemployment insurance and have been plotting to work against it, perhaps since the moment that it was first put into effect in this great country--is that during the short time that Representative Horsford and Payne and Beatty and Veasey and myself have been here, what folks here in the Congress have systematically done is to undermine our ability to actually recover and produce jobs.
This is now at least the third meaningful instance in which this type of unproductive legislative behavior has been witnessed. We first saw it in the march toward April 1 when economists subjectively warned that if we allow sequestration to take effect, what would happen is that we would cost the economy approximately 750,000 jobs. Yet folks on the other side of the aisle, many people in this town decided that, notwithstanding the random nature of the $85 billion in sequestration effects, the impact that it would have adversely on the economy, that we were going to allow sequestration to take hold on April 1. That is exactly what was done; an unproductive, unconstructive action that robs the American people of jobs that might have otherwise existed.
Then in October of this past year, we see another unproductive action taken by those who constantly complain about the alleged slow pace of the economic recovery but then consistently take actions to undermine it. So on October 1, we shut down the government because of this unbridled obsession that some people have with the Affordable Care Act, even though at the time it was the law of the land, it remains the law of the land, passed by a duly elected Congress in 2010, signed into law by President Obama as a first-term President, passed constitutional muster in a decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, and then reaffirmed by the American people with the Electoral College landslide that took place in November of 2012. Yet you came to this floor and decided that you were going to shut down the government for 16 days.
Why was that unproductive? Because not only did you push hardworking civil servants out of work, but objective analyses of the situation said you cost the economy $24 billion. And then you create this caricature that you want all of us to believe that the unemployed are simply sitting home with this alleged plethora of jobs that exist and they can't find them.
Now we find ourselves in another situation where, instead of coming together to try and reasonably take steps to put Americans back to work, what you have decided to do, since unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed were allowed to expire on December 28, is that you are threatening to cost the economy an additional 240,000 jobs.
So for the third time within the last 12 months, legislative malpractice here in the Congress essentially has resulted, or will result, in the loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars and billions of dollars in lost economic productivity. Yet you create this caricature that there are Americans sitting at home on the couch channel surfing, getting one day of exercise per month racing out to get their unemployment check.
{time} 2015
There is no basis for that conclusion. That is why we are here on the floor of the House of Representatives, saying that we need to pass an extension of unemployment benefits and that we need to pass it now.
As I prepare to yield to my good friend, I just want to point out that, at this point in time, as the chart reflects, the long-term unemployment rate in America is higher than it ever has been before as a percentage of those who are unemployed, which means that, today, 37.7 percent of those Americans who are receiving unemployment insurance are long-term unemployed, meaning they have been out of work for 27 weeks or more.
In prior instances, when this Congress and our government had allowed unemployment insurance to expire for the long-term unemployed, the percentage of those who actually had been out of work for 27 weeks or more was much lower--15 points lower when unemployment insurance was allowed to expire for this category of Americans in March of 2004, about 16 points lower when unemployment insurance was allowed to expire for this category of long-term unemployed folks in April of 1994 under President Clinton, and if my math serves me correctly, about 22 points lower in June of 1985 under President Reagan when unemployment benefits were allowed to expire.
So we are in a very different situation than we have been in the past. It is an urgent situation. Progress has been made. We still have a long way to go, and that is why it is necessary for us to do everything possible to help out those Americans in need and not leave them on the battlefield simply to fend for themselves.
Mr. HORSFORD. I appreciate very much the gentleman from New York--the coanchor--and the chronology and the facts that you have laid out to make the case that, unfortunately, it is not just the unemployment insurance benefits that have been under attack by the House Republicans to reauthorize or to extend but that there have been other bridges that have helped the middle class--or those who are aspiring to be part of the middle class--in just the last year that this Congress has failed to act on.
May I inquire of the Speaker how much time we have left.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Nevada has 10 minutes remaining.
Mr. HORSFORD. I would like to use that final 10 minutes then, Mr. Speaker, to close by highlighting the points that my colleague Mr. Jeffries just did a phenomenal job of laying out, one being that this is not the first time unemployment insurance benefits have been extended. In fact, this chart shows that while there is still more work to be done to help the unemployed--and I completely agree that our focus must be on creating jobs and on growing the economy. That is why the Congressional Black Caucus and individual Members like myself have proposed jobs-creating legislation. The first bill I introduced as a Member of Congress was a jobs-creating measure to help people in Nevada's Fourth District go to work, to help bring down our stubbornly high unemployment.
For those who are in the unemployment calculation, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, from January 2007 to date, unemployment insurance has repeatedly been extended, including by Republican administrations. It was in June of 2008 that then-President George W. Bush authorized emergency unemployment insurance benefits to be extended. What was the unemployment rate at the time? 5.6 percent. He didn't extend unemployment insurance one time--he extended it five times--and he didn't offer a proposal for how it had to be paid because it was an emergency. It was an emergency then, and it is an emergency now with the national unemployment rate just below 7 percent. When 1.4 million Americans who rely on the unemployment insurance benefit have now lost it, it is an emergency for these individuals, and it is an emergency for our economy.
So, for those on the other side who don't want to do this because it is the right thing to do for our neighbors, for hardworking Americans who have done everything that they can and at no fault of their own they are still unemployed, if you don't want to do it for that reason, then maybe do it because it is good for the local economy, because the money that is provided for under the unemployment insurance benefit is then spent by those beneficiaries in local grocery stores, and it is spent paying utility bills, paying rent, and that all helps affect the economy.
Failing to renew the emergency unemployment insurance program will cost the economy, as my colleague from New York said, over 200,000 jobs this year, including 3,000 jobs in Nevada, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The expiration of the Federal unemployment insurance at the end of last week is already taking more than $400 million out of the pockets of American job seekers nationwide and of State and local economies, according to analysis done by the Ways and Means Committee. In Nevada, in the first week from the loss of uninsurance benefits expiring, $5.4 million has been lost. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has found that unemployment benefits are one of the most effective fiscal policies to increase economic growth and to help employment.
So, if our colleagues on the other side don't want to do it because it is the right thing to do for those four out of five of the beneficiaries who have children, if they don't want to do it for half of the beneficiaries who have gone to some form of college, if they don't want to do it for the veterans who also rely in some part on unemployment insurance benefits, then do it for the local economy, but whatever your reason, do it.
I would like to ask my colleague if he has any final remarks that he would like to offer. Then I want to close by just debunking this pay-
for argument that some on the other side have again proposed, which is that the only way they are going to vote for something is if there is a plan to pay for it.
Mr. JEFFRIES. I appreciate the distinguished gentleman from Nevada.
I think that you have identified a subject matter that is important for discussion before the American people as a result of this argument that we have heard related to the need to pass unemployment benefits only if a pay-for or an offset or a host of programs on the GOP wish list is passed simultaneously to our trying to provide some measure of relief to unemployed Americans. I am going to let the distinguished gentleman from Nevada address this argument in the current situation, but I would note that we have seen this type of ransom-like behavior here in this Chamber before.
We saw it when I first arrived on the floor of the House of Representatives. It was when we were waiting day after day, week after week, month after month for a Superstorm Sandy relief bill to be passed--more than 75 days, unprecedented in the history of our country's response to a natural disaster--for the people I represent back home who were devastated by Superstorm Sandy. The reason for the holdup was that this ransom-like demand of offsets--unprecedented in American history--was put before us. It was the same situation as it relates to the government shutdown, in which we were told that you can keep the government open--that is a proper function for us here in the Congress--but only under circumstances in which you delay, defund or destroy the Affordable Care Act--ransom-like behavior.
Now we find ourselves in a similar situation, and I yield to my distinguished colleague from Nevada to lay out why we once again find ourselves dealing with unreasonable demands to do what otherwise is our proper duty here on the floor of the House of Representatives and in Washington.
Mr. HORSFORD. I thank the gentleman from New York.
As I come to a close, let me just say directly that, President George Bush did it five times and not with a pay-for. On December 14, 2012, during his Weekly Radio Address, he was reminding the Congress that no final bill was sent to him extending these unemployment benefits for 750,000 Americans whose benefits would expire on December 28.
He went on to say:
These Americans rely on their unemployment benefits to pay for their mortgage or rent and their critical bills. They need our assistance in these difficult times, and we cannot let them down.
As I said, the unemployment rate at that time was below 6 percent, and it is now below 7 percent. It is time for this Congress to act, but if you demand a pay-for, then I have one suggestion: What about eliminating or closing a number of the corporate tax loopholes, such as eliminating the tax incentives for companies that get benefits for shipping American jobs overseas? Right now, the United States loses an estimated $150 billion annually to tax avoidance schemes involving tax havens. Many of our largest and most profitable companies paid no Federal taxes in previous years.
So, for the other side to make this argument is disingenuous. It is unconscionable that you would hold hostage the benefits for 1.4 million Americans for 3 months at a cost of $6.5 billion when you have a Tax Code that is littered with corporate tax incentives for shipping American jobs overseas. If we were to close those tax loopholes, we could re-shore those jobs back to America, putting Americans back to work, reducing our unemployment rate, and growing America's economy. That is what we should be doing. That is why this Congress needs to act, and it is time for this Congress, under the leadership of the Speaker, to do just that.
General Leave
Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous materials.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Nevada?
There was no objection.
Mr. HORSFORD. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________
