consideration of a bipartisan bill to extend unemployment benefits that expired dec. 28 by three months through march of this year. democrat senator jack reed and republican dean heller of nevada crafted the bill. a test vote is set for 10:30. live coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. and the chaplain, retired admiral barry black. will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. out of the depths we lift our hearts to you, o god, waiting for your providence to prevail

more than they that watch for sunrise. guide our senators to find hope in your presence as they trust the unstoppable cycle of seedtime and harvest. lord, give our lawmakers such reverence for you that they will stand for right although the heavens fall. may they delight in any work they do for you and tire of any rest that is apart from you. create in them clean hearts, which no unworthy purpose may tempt aside.

may they wait for the power of your spirit, working through their faith, to do more than they can ask or imagine. we pray in your great name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. mr. reid: mr. president? the president pro tempore: the majority leader. mr. reid: i note the absence of a quorum. the president pro tempore: the

clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: mr. speaker. mr. majority leader. mr. reid: following leader

remarks and those -- the presiding officer: we are in a quorum call, mr. leader. mr. reid: and i did it. i should have known. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, following my remarks and those of the republican leader, the senate will resume the motion to proceed to calendar number 265, unemployment insurance compensation. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the time that i use, leader time, and that of senator mcconnell not count against the half-hour that the proponents and opponents of this legislation have to speak, 15 minutes on each side. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: so the vote will drag just a little bit but it won't be much. my remarks are fairly short. so, mr. president, the senate will recess from 12:30 to 2:15 to allow for weekly caucus meetings. mr. president, over the last 45 months, america's private sector has done okay.

not great, but done pretty well. eight million jobs have been created. the stock market's booming, and even the housing market is starting to show signs of life. a number of states were hit so hard with the decline of the housing market. nevada was hit the hardest. california, florida, michigan; a number of states were hit really hard. but even in those states, the housing market is turning around a little bit. not enough, but turning around. so, mr. president, it's clear that the economy is picking up steam. not enough steam but picking up steam. but for too many americans, far too many americans, these bright headlines that i've just announced, touting good economic news, don't match the darker reality of their lives. they sit at the kitchen table, if they're lucky and have a kitchen table to sit. they're juggling their bills. mr. president, on the way to

work this morning this was brought to my attention so very, very clearly about how hard it is for some people. on constitution avenue, as we were waiting for a light, i could see off to the left a news camera and a reporter trying to wake up somebody that had been spending the night there on the pavement. not on one of the grates where heat comes up. they kept pushing and pushing. you could see they were talking to him. he didn't come out of there, or she, didn't come out of that bundle on that sidewalk. now, mr. president, i don't know if this man is one of the long-term unemployed. i don't know. but there are lots of people who are in desperate shape. they may not be sleeping on a sidewalk on constitution avenue 14 blocks from the white house, but there are people who are

desperate in america for help. 1.3 million people have already lost their unemployment insurance benefits. this is not good for the country. because we're told by economists that for every dollar we spend on unemployment benefits, it gets $1.50 back to us just like that. and so we have to start understanding that we have a country that not everyone's benefiting from what's going on with the headlines i just reported. mr. president, during the last 30 years the top 1%'s income and wealth has increased 300%. the middle class dropped 10%, almost 10%. think about that. 300%. middle class about 10% drop.

i haven't even mentioned the poor. they have been hit harder than anyone else. when i say this, it's true. the rich are getting a lot richer and the poor are getting poorer. the middle class is being squeezed. mr. president, i have nothing against people of wealth. it's great we live in a country where people can make a lot of money. but we have to understand there are people really hurting. and for those who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own, millions of whom have struggled for months to find new work, a booming stock market is of little comfort to them. americans looking for work have been able to rely on unemployment insurance to get them through the tough times. for 1.3 million people, no deal. 20,000 of them are veterans returning from wars in

afghanistan and iraq. at the end of last year, just a few days ago, congress failed to extend emergency unemployment insurance for americans who have been looking for work for more than six months. we have never in the history of our country have long-term unemployment like we have today. never in the history of our republic. and yet we're turning 1.3 million people away. are they going to be the next ones sleeping on some street wherever they come from, trying to stay warm? for many americans, these benefits make the difference between being able to live a decent life -- not a good life -- a decent life and going hungry or becoming homeless.

last year -- let's go back to 2012. in 2012 unemployment insurance helped 2.5 million people, including 600,000 children, from going into the rolls of poverty. we don't have all the results from last year. these families live in red states, blue states, are republicans, democrats, independents. we shouldn't turn our backs on them, mr. president. in the past we've worked together on this. did we complain when president bush came to us? unemployment was nowhere where it is now. there were not long-term unemployed. and we just automatically together extended those benefits. not today. we're not doing it because we can't get the republicans to help us. we've reached out a hand to hardworking americans struggling to get by. i would hope, mr. president, we can get a few republicans to

join dean heller of nevada, a conservative senator, join with dean heller, the junior senator from nevada, and help get this legislation passed. the latest round of emergency assistance, you know who signed that bill? it was president bush. at the time the unemployment rate was about 5.5%. in nevada today and in rhode island, where senator jack reed is going to come and talk about this, i'm sure, it's 9%. so today's long-term unemployment rate is more than double what it was at the time that we let emergency jobless assistance expire. senator heller understands this. i am troubled that most of senator heller's republican

colleagues, according to what we're hearing in the press, callously turn their backs on the long-term unemployed. so, mr. president, i am just saying i hope that we can get them to move over and help us to help these people who just need it so very, very much. failing to restore emergency assistance would not only be a crushing blow to long-term unemployed, it would be a blow to our economy. americans use their unemployment benefits to buy food and fuel at gas stations, to pay the landlord or to purchase a child a coat. that's why every dollar we spend on unemployment benefits -- i repeat -- the economy grows by $1.50. this investment on our fellow americans is one of the most effective ways to spark and sustain an economic recovery. last night the senior senator from texas, a republican, asked why -- asked that we delay this vote on legislation today. i was glad to do that. he called this a serious issue,

and he is so right. the senior senator from texas is so right. this is a serious issue. it's as serious to people from outside nevada as it is to those people in nevada who have been out of work for so long. but those people in nevada who have written and called my office begging for a little more time, for every job that is available there are three that are unemployed in america. we democrats stand united in support of this extension. republicans need to take this seriously as well as we do. so i hope republicans remember that during hard times, during times of high unemployment, regardless of who is in the white house or who led this chamber, congress has always been willing to put politics aside and put american families first. i would ask the chair announce the business of the day. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved -- mr. reid: mr. president, i

would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the presiding officerthe presidr the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous

consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i had indicated to the majority ader i would i. i was going to ask consent which i am prepared to do at this poipts. i have to admit aim little surprised at the fervor with which the majority is dedicated to reviving the expired emergency unemployment benefits after they ignored the issue all of last year. i'm sure that many on my side who would like to see these additional weeks of benefits extended, if like the speaker of the house indicated he supported we could find a way to extend them without actually adding to the national debt. so to that end, i'd like to propose that we be allowed -- my side be allowed to offer an amendment to pay for these benefits by lifting the burden of obamacare's individual mandate for one year and take care of our veterans who were harmed by the recently agreed to budget deal while we are at it in the same amendment. and once that is disposed of, we can have an actual debate on this issue and an amendment

process here in the senate which hasn't happened very often in recent times. therefore, i ask unanimous consent that if cloture sip voked on the motion to proceed to s. 1845, that all postcloture time be yielded back and the senate proceed to consideration of the bill and that my amendment with senator hatch be the first amendment in order and that there be up to one hour of debate on the amendment divided in the usual form. following the lewi use use or yg back of tiernlg the senate -- i ask following the dpoftion that amendment, it be in order for the majority leader or his designee to offer an amendment and it be in order for the leaders or their designee continue to offer amendments in alternating fashion which use you had to be the way we did business around here. the presiding officer: is will an objection? mr. reid: reserving the right to db ash i appreciate how

candid my republican counterpart is. i do speak with some -- i trierks i'm not real good at speaking with a lot of fervor, but i feel very stongly about this issue. people are unemployed. can't find a job. it is a tough deal. i've fortunately always had a job. i can't say the same for my family, especially my dad past t

several days we've seen a number of stories about how democrats plan to spend the year gearing up for november elections by making an issue out of economic hardships faced by americans. in other words, instead of working on reforms that would actually help people overcome the challenges so many of them face they were trying to exploit those folks for political gain. it is amazing when you think about it. we're now in the sixth year -- sixth year of the obama

administration. we all know the stock market's been doing great, so the richest among us are doing just fine. but what about the poor? what about working class folks? what about folks that work in industries that liberals don't approve of, like coal? how many of these americans have been doing well during the obama economy? record numbers of them are having a perfectly terrible time. one indicator is the growth of the food stamp program. consider this. since the president took office, the number of americans who signed up for food stamp -ps has literally skyrocketed. corroboratinged. it is up -- skyrocketed. it is up almost half. nearly four out of ten americans are literally trapped in long term unemployment. what's worse, the poorest

americans are the ones who have had a hard time recovering in this economy. yes, the president took office in the midst of an economic crisis. no one disputes that. but for many americans, a terrible situation seems to have only gotten worse over the course of this administration. so for the president to turn around and try to blame his political opponents for the suffering we've seen out there, that takes a pretty good amount of nerve. it also sends a collective case of national amnesia. it would take a collective case of national amnesia to reach those conclusions. because remember, these are the same folks who gave us the stimulus, who gave us tax increases, who gave us obamacare. all of it was done in the name of helping the little guy. in the name of greater equality. so what they've given us, it's

given us this mess that we have in our country? record numbers of long-term unemployed. record numbers on food stamp -ps, people losing their health care plans, others seeing premiums shoot up when they can least afford it. and now another call, one more call for a government fix. washington democrats have shown almost no interest for five years in working together on ways to create the kind of good, stable, high-paying jobs that people really want and need. this is a real disservice. first and foremost to those who are struggling the most out there, from the college graduate who suddenly finds herself wondering why she's got huge student loan debts but no prospects of work to the 50-year-old dad who's worked his whole adult life and suddenly can't find a job that meets either his needs or his potential. and yet, this administration's proposed solution is just to

slap another band-aid from washington on it and call it a day. yes, we should work on solutions to support those who are out of work through no fault of their own. but there's literally no excuse to pass unemployment insurance legislation without also finding ways to create good, stable, high-paying jobs and also trying to find the money to pay for it. what i'm saying is let's support meaningful job creation measures and let's find a way to pay for these u.i. benefits so we're not adding to an already completely unsustainable debt. unfortunately, the administration seems almost totally disinterested in solutions that don't put government in the lead, and it seems nearly incapable of working with those who don't share that belief. and that in many ways is precisely why we're in the situation we're in. because it's only when you believe government is the answer to all of your problems that you talk about unemployment

insurance instead of job creation. and the minimum wage instead of helping people reach their maximum potential. so it's time to get away from -- quote -- "temporary government programs" and give the american people the tools they need to drive an economy that truly works for them and for their families. we could start with one of the real bright spots in our economy, and that's energy. a field that's poised to help our economy create literally millions of jobs if only the administration would get out of the way. another area where we should be able to work together is health care. by almost any metric, affordability, accessibility, even the ratio of cancellations to enrollments, this law has imposed more pain and more distress than many had ever thought possible. centrists, moderates, conservatives, just about any sensible person outside the congressional democratic leadership here in washington

has long understood this. but now even the left is starting to come to grips with the painfully obvious fact that the law that it fell in love with can't possibly work. last week one of the great ones of the left admitted that obamacare is awful, direct quote. calling it -- quote -- "the dirty little secret many liberals avoided saying out loud." i don't agree with this man on much else including his ideas on health care but it is good to hear him to at least admit this is not working. the president's amen chorus had ample opportunity to speak truth to power when it mattered. and at most, most, chose to remain silent. for that, the law's apologists left the american people to pay the price. let me rea -- let me read you part of a letter from a constituent of mine in hopkinsville.

this ithis is what she. "i have less coverage dhain b i didn't get to keep my policy that i was happy with. i. every dollar i have to pay more is a dollar taken from my family. i never thought that in america we would be forced to purchase something we cannot afford. we worked hard to get where we are. now we're being forced to pay more in order to pay for somebody else's insurance. how is that fair?" i hear you, jennifer. everyone on this side of the aisle hears those concerns. here's something else. many kentuckians are finding that obamacare is about more than just higher premiums and cuts to medicare. it's also about a lack of access to doctors and hospitals. one of the most left-wing papers in my state recently ran a big story about how many obamacare coverage networks exclude -- exclude -- so many of the hospitals my constituents want to use. a few weeks ago the majority

leader basically said the criticisms of obamacare amounted to jokes. well, he might like to think this is all some joke, but the constituents who've been writing me about the consequences of this failed law don't see it that way. i know this must weigh heavily on our democratic colleagues. i know they can't see so many americans hurting because of decisions they made and feel absolutely nothing. let me say that to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. it's a new year, a time for new beginnings. so if you're ready to work with us, we're here. together we can start over on health care. together we can give the american people the kind of health reform they really deserve, reform that can lower costs and improve the quality of care. but just like with solving the problems of joblessness and unemployment, it's something we can only do together.

mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to s. 1845, which the clerk will report. under the previous order -- the clerk: motion to proceed to calendar number 265, s. 1845, a bill to.for the extension of certain unemployment benefits and for other purposes. the presiding officer: under the previous order, there will be 30 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled in the usual form. mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the assistant majority leader. mr. durbin: mr. president, on the side supporting the pending motion, there's 15 minutes under the unanimous consent agreement. a similar amount of time on the other sievmentd if all time is used, notified members, our roll

call vote will be at about 11:00. i ask unanimous consent that on our side supporting the motion that i be allotted five minutes, senator reed of rhode island, five minutes and senator klobuchar of minnesota five minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i listened carefully to the republican leader here. here's what he said. here's what he said. if we are going to give 1.3 million americans unemployment insurance that is now expired, if we're going to give it to them, we have to pay for it. and then he suggested how he would pay for it. he would pay for it by attacking obamacare. that's no surprise. but the provision that he would attack is the individual mandate, the mandate that people buy health insurance. well, what's the impact of that? the mandate that people have a responsibility to buy health insurance is necessary if we are going to protect americans from being discriminated against who

have preexisting conditions in their families. follow me now. in order to make sure that a parent with a child who has asthma or a child who has diabetes can still buy health insurance, we need to expand the insurance pool. we expanded the insurance poolly saying to everyone across america, you have a responsibility to buy health insurance. so what senator mcconnell, on behalf of senate republicans, is suggesting is this: if we're going to give 1.3 million americans unemployment insurance, we have to say to everyone living in america, we can no longer keep our promise that health insurance will not discriminate against your family because of of a preexisting condition. wow, what a trade-off. 1.3 is million people get unemployment benefits. over 300 million americans lose the protection of discrimination in their health insurance because of a preexisting

condition in their families. that is the republican logic. that's the republican logic. help the unemployed, but at the expense of 300 million american families and their health insurance protection. it's interesting to note that we have had a dramatic increase in people living in the commonwealth of kentucky, represented by senator mcconnell, when it comes to the affordable care act. governor bashear, a democrat, is promoting affordable care in kentucky and has one of the most successful efforts underway across america. yet every day he's given a chance, the senators from kentucky -- both, i might add -- come to the floor and criticize the very program that is so popular in their state. the second point i want to make is this. all we are asking for this morning is a vote to start the debate on unemployment insurance benefits. we are asking five republicans

to join 55 democrats to let us debate whether we extend unemployment benefits across america. it is just that simple. at about 11:00 that vote will take place. mr. president, this used to be a bipartisan issue. you are the newest member of the senate here, and i welcome you again, from the state of new jersey. there was a time when republican presidents thought unemployment compensation was a pretty good idea. why? because families or the breadwinners who are out of work need to feed their children, need to feed themselves. senator mcconnell criticizes this program as a temporary government handout. let me tell you, if you don't have food on the table, you need a temporary helping hand so you can put food on the table so you're strong enough tomorrow to go out and look for jobs again. that's what it's all about, and they don't get it. they say we should be talking about creating jobs. what about creating some food in

the bellies of children? what about paying the utility bill or the rent, or keeping the lights on, or keeping the place that you live warm enough while you're out looking for a job? that is part of the reality facing people across america. 81,867 individuals in my home state of illinois lost their benefits between kph-s and new year's -- between christmas and new year's. they have written me letters. a 35-year-old man from antioch, ryan, writes to me about two children, how difficult it for him to keep his family together while he continues day after weary day looking for a job. what i hear from the republican leader is isn't it a shame that ryan doesn't have a job but we can't let government come in and provide the solution. i tell you, historically government has stepped up when the private sector cannot or will not. and in this case we know it's absolutely essential. what we need to ask is five republicans to at least give us

a chance this morning at 11:00 to move forward 0 on the debate on 0 unemployment insurance. this is basic and it's humane t. used to be bipartisan before the tea party takeover of the republican party. i hope there are enough moderates left on the republican side to join us to make this a bipartisan issue again. helping people keep their families together, the lights on, the heat in their homes and food on the table while they're looking for a job is not a government give-away. for goodness sakes, it defines who we are as a nation. if we can't stand up and help these people looking for work, then sadly it's a sad commentary about who we are, where we are and our principles. and finally, this notion of thrashing out at obamacare every time there is an issue coming up on the floor has reached its extreme today when the republican leader would eliminate the protection against discrimination for preexisting

conditions for 300 million americans in order to provide unemployment benefits for 1.3 million. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: mr. president, could you instruct me when i reach the four-minute mark, so i may reserve a minute at the very end? the presiding officer: yes. mr. reed: thank you, mr. president. i rise to urge all my colleagues to support this notion to bring this legislation to the floor to begin a debate. 1.3 million americans have been pushed off an economic cliff on december 28 when their unemployment benefits or extended benefits ended. they're searching for work. they have to search for work. they're in a market where there is typically two or three applicants for one job. yesterday i read a story from "the washington post" that talked about the opening of a new dairy plant in maryland. they're expecting a lot of interest in the 36 jobs.

1,600 applicants. i would wager many of those applicants never thought in their lives after being the vice president of sales in a company or a sophisticated manager of a financial aspects of a company would be applying to work in a dairy. someone i expect might even be on extended benefits and that's the only thing keeping them whole. and they're looking for work. 1,600 applicants. 36 jobs. that's not unique to maryland. that is in my home state of rhode island. that is in states across this country, nevada, tennessee, arizona. states that have unemployment numbers that are above the national average, above 7%. in my case it's 9%. we have to help these families. and as senator durbin pointed out, we've done this on a bipartisan basis until very recently. this is a smart economic program. this program will, according to c.b.o., create 200,000 jobs next year if we extend it.

those are jobs we're going to give away. and the minority leader was talking about how we've got to do more to create jobs around here. well, if we don't pass this measure, c.b.o. has told us we're going to forfeit 200,000 jobs. so from an economic basis in this country, this is smart. but from a human basis, from helping people who have worked their lives, the only way you qualify for this program is you work, and then you're let go through no fault of your own. so we have to do this. and the other side we're talking about, and other colleagues are talking about, we've got to pay for these benefits. well, this is a selective sort of notion. the last time we extended these benefits, in january of 2013, it was not offset. and the vote was 89-8. now it included tax provisions and other provisions. but we extended these benefits unpaid for 89-8. and yet now we have to pay for

these benefits. well, what we've done, senator heller and i, is said listen, we need to help these people now. let's do a 90-day extension, provide some retroactive relief and keep these 1.3 million -- and it will grow because there will be several more million people will lose their benefits this year. let's do it and then let's sit down and work on this program. but let me also remind my colleagues, we have made significant changes to the unemployment insurance program. in early 2012, we had a conference report in the house and senate that made changes in unemployment insurance. we reduced the total time from 99 weeks to 73 weeks. we created work-sharing program, a very innovative program for a lot of people to collect for part of the week but stay employed the rest of the company. it is a program that helps

companies across the country. we've given states more flexibility in job training, more flexibility in oversight of their programs. we've made changes. we're willing to listen to thoughts or proposals again but we can't do it on the backs of 1.3 million americans who have lost the only benefit they've got. and if you really want to talk about job training, if you want to talk about cooperation, why haven't we been able to reauthorize the workforce investment act since 1998? we have not reauthorized since 1998. we have not made the changes in workforce training that affect this whole country. not just the unemployed but those young people who are trying to move out of high school, junior college, into the workforce. we haven't done it. why? in 1998, republican congress, a republican congress until 2007. and since 2007 we've been struggling very mightily with an economic crisis and we've made progress. but if you want to start

cooperation bring that workforce investment act to the floor. it's passed in the help committee. let's by it to the floor and let's help these people. mr. durbin: would the senator from rhode island yield for a question? does the senator have remaining time? the presiding officer: there are 3 1/2 minutes remaining on the proponents side. mr. durbin: i'd ask the senator from rhode island under that time to yield for the following question. the senator -- i don't know if you were on the floor when the republican leader came and said he wanted to pay for the cost of these unemployment benefits by eliminating the individual mandate under the affordable care, which is the key element in protecting families who have children with preexisting conditions: cancer survivors, children with diabetes, children with asthma. as i understood the republican leader, he believes that the best way to take care of people who are unemployed and can't feed their children is to deny the protections of the

affordable care act for those families who have children with preexisting conditions. would the senator from rhode island comment on whether that is a good trade for either side? mr. reed: i think it is a terrible trade because it's not just about families with children. it's about many of these working adults who, if they get a preexisting condition, they lose their coverage. it's not just a question of children. that, i think, is very, very sensitive. but without the affordable care act, if you get sick, you can't get coverage. the only people who can get coverage if you're middle aged is if you're really healthy and you don't need it. once you need it, the insurance companies take it away before affordable care. mr. durbin: i might ask another question of the senator from rhode island of the time that is allotted on our side. i listened carefully to the speech given by the republican leader, the senate leader this morning, and i see my colleague from new york has taken the floor. we have a limited amount of

time, so i'm going to yield the floor at this point. mr. schumer: i thank my friend from illinois. the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. i thank my friend from illinois and my friend from rhode island. how much time is left on our side? the presiding officer: 1 minute, 30 seconds. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. i see what's going on here. our colleagues on the other side of the aisle know the power of this issue, but don't really want to vote for it. and so they're putting impossible logjams in the path. who would believe that on this side of the aisle we would delay an important part of the a.c.a. that would hurt, as my colleague from illinois and my colleague from rhode island brought out, parents who have kids with cancer? not going to do that and not going to do it on the fly. and so what i'd say to my colleagues is if you believe in unemployment benefits and extending them, pass them clean

and simple. don't play games. don't put obstacles in their path that you know would be insurmountable. get it done. and i'd make one other point, and that is this. i see my colleague from minnesota here. if she wants to take the remaining seconds? okay. i'd make this point, mr. president. the bottom line is very simple. very simple. people want to work. people who have lost their jobs after working decades for a company are knocking on doors every day. they are going online. they're desperate for work -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. schumer: -- that they don't want to work, that unemployment benefits encourage them not to work is balderdash. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. isakson: i yield back all time on the republican side.

the presiding officer: all time is yielded back. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: we the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate hereby move to bring to a close the debate on the motion to proceed to calendar number 265, s. 1845, a bill to provide for the extension of certain unemployment benefits, and for other purposes. signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate the debate on the motion to proceed to s. 1845, a bill to provide for the extension of certain unemployment benefits and for other purposes, shall be brought to a close? the yeas and the nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or change their vote? on this vote the yeas are 60. the nays are 37. three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn having

voted in the affirmative, the motion is agreed to. mr. reid: move to reconsider. a senator: lay it on the table. the presiding officer: it is not in order to reconsider a successful cloture motion. mr. reid: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

box mr. president, i ask that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. boxer: mr. president, i am so pleased that six republicans -- six -- out of all the republicans joined with us, every democrat present, to reach that magic 60 votes we needed to proceed to consider the unemployment compensation bill. i think it is so important to recognize that federal unemployment programs have been extended no less than 28 times since 1958.

15 times under republican presidents and 13 times under democratic presidents. so this is nothing new. this is nothing new, and the fact that it's been made such a big deal is incomprehensible given the circumstances of us recovering from the greatest recession since the great depression. with a very special number, very large number -- and i'd ask that there be some quiet in the chamber. thank you. the fact is, we have a long-term unemployment rate that is very, very high. way higher than normal. and the fact is that since we have extended federal

unemployment bivments s benefito many times, that it shouldn't be a problem is shocking that it is a problem. in november 2008, unemployment insurance was extended with bipartisan support, without an offset, which seems to be the excuse the republicans have for not voting with us. now, what's very interesting about that is, these are the same republicans who voted to go to war twice and put those wars on the credit card. never paid for them, mr. president. these are the same republicans that voted for tax cuts to billionaires and multimillionaires and never paid for it. and yet still when it comes to the middle class, oh, they can't possibly extend unemployment without paying pour it. -- paying for it.

well, if anyone knows anything about economics, they should know that when you're trying to stimulate jobs and stimulate the economy, not depress jobs and lose jobs, you don't contract spending. now, we already have dealt with deficits, and we continue to deal with deficits. now, i want to shoi the progress we've made -- i want to show you the progress we've made under president obama. now, this is something you never hear from the republicans. they would make you feel that deficits are raging, as they were under george w. bush. when president obama took over, he inherited a $1.4 trillion deficit from george bush. and george bush inherited surpluses from bill clinton. it took him -- and i'm exaggeratexagerating -- 15 minut

two wars on a credit card. no problem, no offsets. tax cuts to billionaires. no problem, no offset. and the deficit soared to $1 bo- $1.4 trillion. when president obama came in he not only had to deal with raging deficits, he had to deal with the worst recession since the great depression, and all you hear is -- from the republican side -- this president didn't do enough here, didn't do enough ... nothing is enough. nothing is enough. we are now in a situation where this deficit has been cut in half -- cut in half, mr. president. down to $560 billion. and we want to see it disappear, just as we did when bill clinton was president, the democrats passed a budget that balanced and set in motion a surplus, which was destroyed when george

w. bush was president. let's be clear on the history. there's facts. there's stubborn things. they're real. these are the facts. so now we come to a place where we want to extend long-term unemployment benefits for those who got deeply hurt in this great recession. and we hear that you have to offset it, which goes against the economic experts who say it's important that we stimulate this economy and keep these jobs rolling. now, remember, in the 20 -- hang on a second. in the president george w. bush recession, we had a similar extended benefit. it was not offset. it was extended twice in 2003, strong bipartisan support, no offset. so why is it when a republican is president, the republicans

say, okay, let's help the unemployed without an offset, without extending cuts. but when a democrat is president, oh, no, we couldn't do it. honestly, itious is so political on -- it just is so political on its face. democrats have been consistent.s president or a democrat is president, we want to help the middle class. we want to help the unemployed. that is the difference between the parties. i say god bless those six republicans who joined with us today so we can in fact do our job and help the long-term unemployed. the long-term unemployment rate is 2.6%. the long-term unemployment rate. twice as high as it was at any other time that these extended unemployment benefits were allowed to expire. let me say that again. how urgent this is.

the long-term unemployment rate -- that means people who have been out for a long time, six months, six months or more -- is 2.6%, twice as high as it is, as it was at any other time in our history that we extended unemployment benefits. there are almost three unemployed people for every job opening nationwide. let me repeat. there are almost three unemployed people for every job opening nationwide. and we need to understand while some of our republican colleagues are blaming the unemployed and saying it's a disservice to give them unemployment compensation, that these folks are actively looking for jobs. that's part of the deal. first of all, this is insurance.

second of all, they're looking for work. third of all, they are stuck in a situation where it is not their fault. a christmas present was given by the republicans to the unemployed, 1.3 million, when the christmas present was, sorry, you're not getting your unemployment benefits. we left here without being able to deal with it. but today we have a chance, mr. president, a chance to do the right thing. in california, my state alone, there are 222,000 people who lost their extended unemployment benefits. an additional 1.9 million people are projected to lose their benefits over the next six months if an unemployment

insurance is not extended. now what are these grandiose amounts of money that people get when their long-term unemployed? $300 a week on average. $300 a week on average. so for our colleagues to say people want to be purposely unemployed to collect $300 a week, could i tell you, try living on $300 a week. if you're lucky, you can keep a roof over your head. but you have to be pretty lucky. if you're lucky, you can get maybe a little bit of nutrition. but that $300 a week is a lifeline. they can put some groceries on the table, pay their rent and cover the expenses they have of looking for a job. american families are kept afloat at a critical time, and i

want to give you a few stories from my home state of the real face of long-term unemployment and why we have to vote to extend these benefits. one woman wrote -- and i quote -- "i'm 58 years old, and i'm receiving unemployment benefits for the first time in my life. i'm currently receiving my first federal extension. i was laid off because the nonprofit i was working for lost a major portion of its state funding. get unemployment benefits is not preventing me from looking for work. in fact, people getting extended unemployment benefits are required to prove they're looking for work. i spend hours every week filling out applications and posting my resume without result. tell me how am i and thousands like me supposed to pay my rent and eat? i agree that washington should focus on job creation, but that

should be in addition to, not instead of extending benefits. i beg you," she writes to me, "please extend unemployment benefits. thank you." another californiaan wrote from los angeles -- quote -- "after working 27 years for one employer, the bad economy finally led me to my first layoff and my first time ever on unemployment." remember, this person worked 27 years for one employer. "i was told that because of the bad economy, i would get up to 63 weeks without the federal extension. now i'm being told without further action, my benefits end at the end of the year even though that leaves me three months short. after paying into the system for 32 years, this is the only time i've ever asked for anything back, and this is how i'm treated. there are other stories. caitlin smith of twenty nine palms, 24 years old, lost her

$450-a-week benefit when the federal extension expired. she is a marine corps veteran, the mother of two young kids. she's been searching for work. the family can't move because her husband, a veteran of the afghanistan and iraq wars, must remain near the combat center until he's discharged from the marines. the loss of her benefits will cut deeply into the couple's income. smith said the family is already skimping on basics including heat. including heat. i have to keep the house at 55 degrees even though i have two little kids age two and a half and one and a half. keeping the house at 55 degrees. that story appeared in the los angeles time on new year's eve. laura walker, a 63-year-old paralegal, has been looking for work since january when she was laid off from a california law firm. she counted on her benefits that have n run out -- quote -- "not all of us have savings and

a lot of us have to take care of family because of what happened in the economy," said walker of santa clarita, who said she applied for at least three jobs a week and shares an apartment with her son, wife and children. it is going to put me and my family out on the streets. unquote. and that appeared on the bloomberg news on the 31st. we have a story of a software engineer who leaves in san diego county. she's one of 18,000 san diego county residents to lose their payment. she says her $450 weekly unemployment payment going to food, dental insurance and other living necessities. she's tried zealously to find work. she's volunteered. she's attended meetings, she'd cold called, written letters, joined project management institute of san diego. she says i haven't been sitting here watching soap operas. i'd go to work tomorrow or

today. i'm so tired of this. that story appeared in the san diego tribune. i ask unanimous consent to put some more stories into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. boxer: so here you have the facts, and i will just recap them. we have a situation where the long-term unemployment rate, those looking for work, out of work for more than six months, is higher than it's ever been. higher than it's ever been. 2.8%. we have a situation where we're coming out of the worst recession since the great depression. and even though president obama has done an amazing job on job creation, creating eight million private sector jobs in his time -- eight million private sector jobs under president obama. less than a million in eight years under george w. bush. we still have a problem because how many jobs were lost in that

recession? more than eight million. so we need to restore those jobs. so this is not the time when you go for a job and there's three applicants for one job to tell people they're cut off from unemployment. now, here's the issue. in a state that has a really good economy with a very low unemployment rate -- less than about 5% -- this extension doesn't go forward. it only goes forward to states that have a high unemployment rate. so it's targeted. it's not going to states where there's a boom going on or a really strong economy. it goes to states that are, that have a tough unemployment rate and have all these people coming for one job opening. in some states it's five to one. remember, the average is three to one. three people for every job. in some states they're doing better. maybe there's just two people for every job.

but here there's three nationally and in some states way higher. so we're just saying at this particular point in time let's extend this for a three-month period, do it without offsets because when you offset, you cut something else, and you can strip the economy at a time when you should be expanding it. two-thirds of the time we have never paid for unemployment extension. and under george w. bush, who started the current program, we never did, at least in the beginning we didn't. now we care about jobs in this country. everybody does. if we extend unemployment insurance, we would prevent the loss of 240,000 jobs. you'd say why. that's because when folks get their checks, what do they do with it? they go down to the store and they spend it, buying food for

their families. they don't hold back. they pay their rent. the landlord gets that check and spends that check. so it's an immediate boon to the economy and an immediate fact that we can definitely prove that jobs are not lost because economic activity in those communities go down. we're talking in my state of 46,000 jobs that will be lost if we don't correct this problem. and the congressional budget office has said another year-long extension if we do this and do it for a year, this particular bill is only a few-month extension, if we did it for a year we would add .2% to our gross domestic product. extending unemployment insurance is one of the most cost-effective ways to grow the

economy and create jobs. and in the end that reduces the deficit. so all this talk, let's cut this and cut that to pay for this, it's counterproductive because you will pull back on gross domestic product growth and there will be less revenues coming in to the government. so i don't see how this extension of unemployment is anything but a win-win. it's an obvious win-win. if you took the politics out of it, you'd do the right thing, republicans because you've done it in the past. when republicans were president you did it without an offset. you didn't hold up a bill. you passed it. you stimulated the economy. we create more jobs. the deficit then goes down even faster than it's going down, and look at how it's coming down.

there's no reason why we have to cut something that then depresses spending over here while doing unemployment over here. it doesn't make sense. now i was an economics major a long time ago, so i'm not saying that i'm up to date on the latest theories. but one thing we know makes sense. when you're trying to create jobs, when you're trying to get out of a recession, you don't turn to austerity. especially since we have wrapped our arms around this deficit. it has been hard to do. but who would have thought we could have done it. we did it. so we don't have to now say that while we give an unemployment extension, on the one hand, we're going to cut something on the other hand and lose those jobs over there.

it doesn't make sense, and then put those people on unemployment. it really doesn't make sense. now would i vote to give a little higher taxes to the billionaires? i just watched a documentary called "park avenue." this is what they said. i haven't fact checked it so we have to fact check it. but this is what the documentary said. approximately 400 or 500 families are worth more than 150 million americans, net worth. that's what it said. we're going to fact check it this afternoon. if i'm wrong, i'll correct the record. that's what the movie said. 450, 500 families have more net worth than half of the population of america. that's the income inequality. so would i pay for this by putting a little tax on the billionaires? oh, yeah, i would. but i don't want to start

cutting programs here -- education, housing, health care, whatever they come up with -- which then means people will be laid off. so we can do this. we're not afraid to cut spending. we're not afraid to reduce the deficit. we did it under bill clinton. geawe got a surplus. and we're doing it under obamacare. i defy any republican to show me how this shapes up with a bad way with the bush record which was taking surpluses that job inherited rs turned it into massive deficits and literally no job creation. i forget the exact -- it was less than a million jobs created in the private sector. compared to cutting the deficit in half under barack obama after iinheriting the worst recession

since the great depression. so we know what we're doing. despite what they say. and it's okay, because at the end of the day, the facts are the facts are the facts. i didn't make up this chart. this is a chart that comes from the congressional budget office. these are the numbers that they have. so the stories that i've told and that i've put in the record are poignant. thrur people out there whthere t are at their wit's end -- at their wit's end -- holding their lives together, keeping their homes at 55 degrees when they have little children in it, not knowing if they can pay the rent, not knowing if they can go to the grocery store, not knowing if they'll be homeless, not knowing what the future holds. and the least we can do, the least we can do in this chamber

is stand up and fight for them. what are we here for anyway? are we here forethe koch brothers? i hope not. the billionaires are doing just fine. this country is a great country. it's a great country because everyone can dream to go way to the top, but if we lose the middle class and we're not there with a safety net when they fa fall, we'll lose everything. and this country will not resemble -- will not resemble the america that i agree t i grn that i know -- and i had nothing, and my husband had nothing. he lost his father when he was just a young boy, and his mother was a school crossing guard and raised three boys.

okay? in this country, my husband went to college, to law school, started his own law firm, his own small business. that's what america is. that's what it is. but when we were in trouble, when we were young, we knew we had the hope and the dream. it was real. it wasn't unreachable. it was reachable. because there was a safety net, and part of that safety net is unemployment insurance. and part of that safety net is extending it for the long-term unemployed. i'm going 2 to close with a coue of facts about health care because i am so tired of the bad news bears coming out here every day whining about obamacare.

and i just want to tell you some of the good news about health care. because you don't hear it enou enough. across this country, over 2 million americans have enrolled through the exchanges in private health insurance. over 2 million people. it's pretty amazing. and i want to give you some more facts here. in california, i want to tell you what is happening, we have our own exchanges, covered california.com. i want to tell you what is happening so far because you don't hear it around the beltway. all you hear is, obamacare is bad, obamacare is bad. wcialtion let mwell, let me tele stories of what's really

happening -- and these facts are catch up as well. 400,000 californians now have coverage through the california exchange. that's private coverage. we have more than 200,000 californians on medical. and here is really great number. more than nearly 1 million california families -- that's not people -- families. so we're talking probably a few million -- people have begun the process of applying for coverage. across the country, i can tell you today -- and we know we've had our bumps in the road. and today we're resolving some of those bumps. we had em 2% of the people who wound up in a problem where they

couldn't get the insurance they wanted. and president obama fixed that problem. and now we've got that 2% problem down to way less than 1%, .02%. very few families. so let's get that clear. will there be more bumps? yes. will we fix them? yes. are we still worried about the few thousand families that need our help? yes. and we'll fix it. and i don't shy away from this. you got a proficiency you fix it. -- you got a problem, you fix it. somebody point to me any business that doesn't have a few problems in the rollout and i il say, that's pretty amazing. we had problems with the rollout. it was bad. we're fixing it. and the proof is in the pudding. today -- today 9 million

americans have new, secure health insurance. 9 million americans today. 2.1 million, i told you, on that other chart have gotten it through all the different exchanges. 2.1 million. 3.9 million have enrolled in the new expanded medicaid, and 3 million young adults can now stay on their parents' plans. butches in thbumps in the road. we fix them and we will continue to. but this is a good story. and in this -- i just want to read from some constituents who have wri written to me about the affordable care act, real people speaking, not politicians, not me, not them.

mary nationalwick of of montanaa signed up for a platinum plan for her family of three through covered california.com even though she makes too much to qualify for a disci subsidy and even though they purchased the highest level plan, she is saving $1,000 a month on her premium. and she has a lower deductible. this is what she wrote to me. "needless to say, we are thrilled beyond belief. please accept our gratitude and pass on our thanks to all who voted for this bill." so, mr. president, this is a constituent who likes obamacare, and senator merkley, she thanks you. david specter of ventura and his wife are young retirees, 52 and 58. their old premiums cost $882 a month. now because david and his wife qualify for subsidized premiums,

they will pay a total of $434 a month with lower deductibles. that's $400 a month in savings. calculate what that means in a year. $400 a month. they can spend it in the neighborhood, in the movies, at a restaurant, in the grocery store, on a vacation, gifts for their grand kids. david wrote, "thank you so much for supporting the affordable care act. it may not be perfect, but it sure makes a big difference for us." and i think that sums it up for me. the affordable care act, obamacare, may not be perfect, but it sure is making a difference for americans. so far 9 million strong, and it will be way more than that. maya walls was diagnosed with breast cancer at 27 years of age. since that diagnosis, 20 years

ago, she is either kept working to maintain insurance or paid very high cobra premiums in between her jobs to keep her coverage and to avoid preexisting conditions preexisting conditioexclusions. that's because until obamacare became the law of the land, insurers could walk out on you once you got sick. in september she held her breath and went without coverage. on october 1, she found out she finally qualified for california's new expanded medicaid program which she had never qualified for before. she wrote to me. this is what she writes to meevment "please do not give an inch on the affordable care act. this is the first time i have taken a deep breath in 20 years than.thankthank you." and i see our new presiding officer. this is a story of one of my constituents who was diagnosed

with breast cancer at 27 years of age. since that diagnosis, she was so scared she'd lose her insurance because of her existing condition that she kept paying very high cobra premiums. when she finally ran out of options, she lost her insurance and she just found out she qualifies for the new expanded medicaid. and this is what she say, "please do not give an inch on the a.c.a., the affordable care act, this is the first time i've taken a deep breath in 20 years. thank you." so you know, i say to the american people -- i hope a few would hear my voice -- nothing in life is perfect. no bill is perfect. no business is perfect. no one is perfect. no individual, no president, no senator for sure. but you see a problem, and you do your best to step up to the plate. and if things go wrong, as it did with the rollout, you get mad about it, but you fix it.

and you don't go back to the problems we had before. of kids being kicked off their parents' insurance and having no insurance, of people being told, so, you have asthma or you have breast cancer, or you have high blood pressure, we can't help you. those days are over. being a woman was a preexisting condition. having been a victim of sexual assault was a preexisting condition, if you were in an abusive relationship, they say, you're just too high a rick and they walked away. there were lifetime caps on their policies, there were annual carntion gender discrimination, preexisting condition discrimination. all of that, and i'll just going to say, anyone who wants to repeal obamacare or the affordable care act is going to go back to those days, and, by the way, i will never forget reading a california study that

said, if we hadn't changed health care in this country, we were getting to a place where premiums would have risen to about 50% of our incomes on an average. and at that point, who's going to be able to afford insurance? i met people who were praying on their hands and knees to turn 65. as you get ordinarily, you say, oh, my -- as you get older, you say, oh, my god or, i want to stay young. let me get to my 65th birthday so i can get medicare because i have no insurance. that's what i had from my constituents. now what do i hear? it may not be perfect, but, boy, it's saving my life. fix what's a problem, senator. you can. and i thank the president for acting to make sure that people who got those cancellation notices -- it was about 2% of all americans -- that they were able to stay on similar insurance for an extended period of time.

so, yes, we will fix what's the problems are. but we will also rejoice when we get letters like i'm getting from all over my state. and i ask unanimous consent to place the rest of them into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. boxer: and we will tell those stories, and we'll counteract the stories that we hear and in closing, i want to say, because i know senator america merkley has been waitin. the reason i took to the floor is to make the point that it is the middle class and the working poor who are really being helped. and that's so important in this time of income inequality and really make the point that making sure we extend this unemployment compensation to the long-term unemployed, as they through no fault of of their own try and keep their house and home together, is so critical. and i thank my six republican colleagues who showed courage and stepped up and allow youd us to get on this -- and allowed us

to get on this bill and i hope we pass it. i thank you very much, and i yield the floor. mr. markey: madam president, i have two unanimous consent request for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. i ask unanimous consent that these requests be agreed to and that these requests be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: thank you, madam president. i want to make a few very brief comments and the first is this: in the budget agreement that was hammered out right before we left for the holidays, a provision was inserted by congressman ryan that changed the cola details for our veterans. this provision is an outrageous provision. it's changing the retirement deal in the middle of a person's service or for many of our veterans, even after they have retired. between the time they've retired and the time they reach age 6