Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. President, America's top priority is the same today as it was last year, the year before that, and the year before that: unemployment, jobs, and how to get this economy growing again.

Of course, these are concerns which transcend any kind of partisan affiliation. They transcend geographic and demographic boundaries. They are shared, of course, by Republicans, Democrats, Independents--everyone--people from all parts of our country.

But the sad fact is it has been almost 5 years since America's official economic recovery began and still too many people who want to work can't find a job. There are still 3.8 million people who have been unemployed for more than 6 months, and the labor force participation rate remains stuck at 63 percent. Of course, those are the people who don't even show up on the unemployment statistics because they have given up looking for work. This is what we talk about when we are talking about the labor participation rate--the lowest number since 30 years ago.

Since the current President took office, the average amount of time the unemployed have been without a job has almost doubled, from less than 20 weeks to more than 37 weeks. This is a shocking statistic.

So since President Obama has been in office, the average time people have been unemployed--have been out of work--went from less than 20 weeks to now 37 weeks, and the number of people on food stamps has increased from 32.2 million to nearly 46.8 million people.

As for median household income, it is now more than $2,400 lower than it was at the end of the recession in June of 2009.

The President talks a lot about income inequality, but the problem is, it has gotten worse since he has been in office, not better.

We should be focused like a laser on things we might be able to do to set the stage to help the economy start growing again, because only when the economy grows do we see the unemployment numbers go down, do we see the labor participation rate go up, and we see regular American families have the opportunity to provide for themselves and to pursue their dreams. But right now that American dream is somewhat cloudy. Many people feel as though it is starting to pass them by, and that is the American tragedy. So you would think that at a time when there is a bipartisan consensus we need to get the economy moving again, we need to get people back to work so they can provide for their families, that there would be bipartisan agreement here in the Senate that anybody with a good idea ought to step up, offer it, debate it, and let's vote on it.

Well, unfortunately, the majority leader has a different point of view. He is refusing to let anyone on this side of the aisle offer any suggestions in the form of amendments that actually might have a chance of improving the situation for people who are out of work or people looking for jobs. Not only is the majority leader blocking votes on bills that would make it easier for Americans to find work, he is also promoting and defending policies that would actually discourage work. For example, both the majority leader and President Obama are advocating a minimum wage increase of 40 percent, while the Congressional Budget Office has told us it could destroy up to 1 million jobs.

Now the majority leader and the President may not agree with that estimate, but I will remind them of what Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellin said; she is President Obama's own appointee as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. She said she wouldn't want to argue with the Congressional Budget Office's assessment about the number of people who would be put out of work if you raised the minimum wage by 40 percent. For that matter, the evidence suggests that any increase in the minimum wage would destroy jobs and do very little, if anything, to reduce poverty rates. The best thing we could do is to get out of the way and let the economy grow again by making the environment more conducive to the people who invest, take risks, and start businesses or grow small businesses. That is the thing we could do that would help people the most.

But in addition to the minimum wage increase, the majority leader and President Obama are pushing for yet another extension of long-term unemployment benefits, even though President Obama's own former chief White House economist has said that ``job search is inversely related to the generosity of unemployment benefits.'' So, in other words, people react in situs, and when the government continues to pay unemployment benefits for people who are out of work, human nature is such that people are disincentivized to go back to work and look for work on occasion.

We all recognize the importance of this safety net program, and the truth is under the current law 26 weeks or 6 months are available for unemployment benefits. But under this administration we have seen unemployment benefits go from 6 months to 2 years. Two years after people have been out of work and those benefits lapsed, we have done nothing to improve job training programs that would help match the skills of out-of-work Americans to the jobs that are out there which pay good money--and I have seen many of them in my State, and I am sure the Presiding Officer has as well. We have seen a lot of good jobs go wanting for lack of a skilled workforce to be able to perform those jobs. So what we ought to be doing instead of extending unemployment benefits is we ought to be focusing on how we can train workers and provide them with the skills they need in order to qualify for those good, high-paying jobs.

At a time when the American people are desperate for more jobs and more work, the majority leader is steadfastly determined to pass legislation which would disincentivize people from going back and looking for work and would in fact discourage work and discourage job creation. That is before we even get to ObamaCare, a law the Congressional Budget Office has estimated would effectively reduce the size of America's labor force by 2.5 million people over the next decade. Remarkably, I guess trying to spin it any way they could, the White House actually took the position that was actually a good thing because people would have more time off.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised. After all, this is the same administration that unilaterally gutted the work requirements in the 1996 welfare reform law, one of the most successful welfare reform laws ever passed. It is the same administration that refuses to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline, a project that would directly create thousands of new jobs right here in the United States, and it is the same administration that refuses to embrace progrowth tax reform.

America's corporate tax rate is the highest in the world, and yet the President said he won't enter negotiations to reduce those rates, to eliminate double taxation so people will bring the money they earn overseas back here to hire more Americans and to build their businesses here. The President won't do that without an agreement on this side of the aisle to raise taxes, to raise revenue by $1 trillion. That is not a bargain we are interested in negotiating. This is the same administration that refuses to support energy, the energy renaissance we have seen, and continues to support regulations which actually threaten jobs and hurt families in return for meager or nonexistent benefits.

As I have said before, this administration and its policies have become nothing less than a war on the American worker. I am not suggesting that is their intention, but I am suggesting that is the result.

If there is one thing we ought to all be able to agree upon it is that work is about basic human dignity. It is about self-worth and self-reliance; it is about giving people the opportunity to reach their full potential and to support their families. When the policies of the Federal Government actually discourage people from working, it makes it harder for teenagers to learn basic social skills and professional skills. It makes it harder for college graduates to utilize their education and pay off their student loan debt. It makes it harder for people of all backgrounds to start families. It makes it harder for mothers and fathers to gain the self-respect that comes from providing for your own children.

It is bad enough that the President and the majority leader have embraced an agenda that is fundamentally antiwork. What makes it even more outrageous is that this week the majority leader will deny the opportunity for anyone on this side of the aisle to offer any sort of constructive suggestions about how to deal with that problem. He is refusing to allow proposals that would actually encourage work and encourage job creation.

Here are just a few examples of the amendments and proposals that would come from this side of the aisle if the majority leader--it is his sole prerogative--would allow those amendments to be debated and voted on by the Senate:

For example, the senior Senator from Maine has a bill that would relieve the burden of ObamaCare on workers and businesses alike and restore the traditional 40-hour workweek. This has been one of the primary complaints of organized labor, some of the biggest supporters of ObamaCare. They said that in order to avoid the penalties that go along with ObamaCare, many employers are moving people from full-time work to part-time work. The amendment from the senior Senator from Maine, Senator Collins, would address that problem and fix it.

The senior Senator from Utah, Senator Hatch, has a bill that would abolish the job-killing tax on medical innovation.

The junior Senator from Missouri has a bill that would exempt military veterans from ObamaCare's employer mandate.

The junior Senator from Kentucky has a bill that would make it easier for Congress to block regulations that do not pass a simple cost-benefit test.

The junior Senator from South Carolina has a bill that would modernize workforce training and eliminate duplicative government programs--something I was just talking about a moment ago.

The senior Senator from North Dakota has a bill that would singlehandedly create thousands of jobs by approving the Keystone XL Pipeline.

If and when these bills are offered as amendments to the pending legislation, they deserve a vote, but if the majority leader denies them a vote, he is effectively denying us a chance to expand our economy, create more jobs, and get people back to work. I used to think this was something Republicans and Democrats both agreed was a good thing. I thought we all agreed that job creation and work promotion should be the cornerstones of our economic agenda. With an agenda such as that, perhaps we could finally have a recovery of our economy worthy of its name.

So I hope the majority leader reconsiders his decision to deny an opportunity for a full debate and vote on these constructive suggestions. None of these are nongermane. All of these are directly on point and would actually help improve the underlying legislation and actually do something about the underlying symptom that necessitates in some people's minds this long-term extension of unemployment benefits.

We are not helping people out by continuing to pay unemployment benefits for 2 years and then leaving them hanging without the skills they need in order to reestablish themselves in the workforce. Unfortunately, the only conclusion I could draw is if the majority leader is not interested in having an honest and open debate about how do we solve the problems, then something else must be driving his agenda. I think we should get back to the day when collectively we were more concerned about solving problems than trying to beat on an issue and gain political advantage, but that seems to be the road we are headed down based on the majority leader's decision not to allow any votes on amendments.

Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source