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 62. in these coming days of this

week i hope this body can come together and reverse this provision which unfairly changes the terms of retirement for our veterans. our veterans have stood up for us as a nation when they're overseas and we must stand up for them here at home. the second, madam president, i want to express hope in the bipartisan spirit that just led to an agreement to debate the bill regarding restoring emergency unemployment. i've had eight town halls over the weekend and i can tell you that it strikes people as fundamentally unfair that in states with high unemployment like the home state of oregon that these weeks of emergency unemployment which were a deal

hammered out in a bipartisan fashion under a republican president, president bush, that this deal should be sent asunder. indeed on december 28, 18,000 oregon's families fought a lump of coal in their stocking. and in the course of this coming year another 58,000 oregon families will be thrown out in the cold, if you will, due to this action of failing to reauthorizing this program. indeed, the failure to reauthorize it not only affects those families directly who need a longer bridge to the next job because of the high unemployment levels but it also affects the economy, destroying an estimated 4,000 jobs. our citizens want to see us create jobs, not destroy jobs. so i hope that the bipartisan spirit that led to us -- to agree to debate restoring the

emergency unemployment program will lead to us actually reauthorizing the emergency unemployment program. thank you, madam president. and i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: madam president, this new year represents an opportunity for us to refocus and plan for our year ahead. unfortunately, of course, for millions of americans their focus will be on just trying to stay afloat over the next year while they search for work. all of us here know there is no more important issue for middle-class families across america right now than jobs and the economy. this is what they want their elected officials to be focused on and it is exactly what i think we ought to be working on here every day.

now, by reaching a bipartisan agreement last month, we did a number of things to work towards that goal. first of all, and importantly, we showed the american people that members of congress can work together, that we can listen to each other, and that we can get into a room and, frankly, without trying to talk without trying to hurt each other politically. but secondly, by breaking through that partisanship we finally ended that seemingly never-ending cycle of lurching from crisis to crisis. and third, we showed compromises isn't a dirty word and that there is a big coalition that is ready to make some sacrifices politically to get things done. and finally and importantly, for our efforts to continue to grow our economy, we gave american families and businesses the certainty that they need to grow. but, of course, there is much more to do and as much as we are heartened by the headlines that

predict a strong economy this year, we understand just how fragile our recovery still is with millions of americans still out of work. madam president, now is the time to redouble our efforts, not shrink from the challenges we face because the truth is that all the economic predictions in the world mean nothing if we don't continue to support policies that help our middle class and that work absolutely starts with extending unemployment benefits for the millions of americans who have been losing their benefits since december 28. because unemployment assistance goes right back into the economies of communities large and small and nonpartisan economists have found it is one of the most effective ways to build a recovery that lasts. those same economists have said that failure to continue these benefits will cost us over 200,000 jobs, and renewing

these benefits is simply the right thing to do at a time when millions of american families continue to teeter on the brink in states where unemployment remains stubbornly high. madam president, i've come to the senate floor today with the hopes that we can continue with the bipartisan momentum that we saw with today's cloture vote and that we've seen over the last few weeks and take a final vote to provide a life line for millions of americans. this should be an easy issue. it would be simply wrong to cut the support off while our economy continues to struggle and so many workers are really having difficulty finding work. right now, in fact, there are three unemployed workers for every single job opening. if every opening was filled tomorrow, we would still have more than 7 million american workers across the country without a job to even apply for. and more than one-third of all

unemployed workers have been out of a job for six months or longer, above historic averages and higher than in past recoveries. so millions of americans are unemployed today not because they don't want to work, not because they don't have valuable skills, but simply because they found themselves in an economy that isn't creating jobs as quickly as we need to. these unemployed workers are desperate to get back on the job and unemployment benefits made all the difference for them and their families while they scoured the want ads, pointed the pavement and sent out resume after resume. in fact, i have received story after story from workers and families across my home state of washington about what unemployment benefits have meant to them. and what losing them would mean for their future. these men and women can't afford to have the rug pulled out from underneath them and are now struggling with each day that passes. one of these stories came from a

woman named carol who lives in pullyup in my home state. she was a nurse and was laid off. she cied decided to start her own legal nurse consulting business and so she enrolled in classes to help her hone her entirely skills. while taking classes carol relied on our unemployment benefit to get by. then not only were her benefits slashed significantly due to sequestration, carol just found out she's one of the 25,000 people in washington state whose benefits were completely cut off december 28. as a leader in the classroom, carol has spoken to many other soon-to-be business owners who were suffering. in the face of unexpected job loss they now feel like they're punished for deciding to chart a new course in their lives. they're creating work for themselves and potentially others, but now have to decide if they can continue following

that dream without the critical support that unemployment benefits provide them. carol's not alone. i heard from a woman who was laid off from her job at a plant in keyport, washington last year and she told me -- and i quote -- "living in this county, we are geographically isolated and finding work with so many qualified applicants right now is much more difficult. this year i have applied for over 200 jobs and in spite of a stellar resume i've only gotten four phone interviews. i've lowered my standards throughout the year and applied for jobs far below my pay grade, to no avail. my husband and i have had to claim briewpsy and i -- bankruptciy and i truly worry about losing my home and displacing my children" -- end quote. madam president, that's what people are facing today. finally, address from everett, a former executive assistant with 20 years of experience. after taking time off from work

to care for her dying mother and a daughter suffering from bipolar disorder and drug addiction, address found herself -- tracy found herself without a job. while tracy was receiving unemployment benefits they were barely enough to cover the care her daughter required. tracy told me that she now can't afford food and has lost over 50 pounds. she even asked that i send her a video of the speech i'm making right here because she won't be able to tune in today because she had to get rid of her television in the process of finding savings. like so many others, tracy is searching high and low for that one break and she told me -- and i quote -- "i just need time for someone to give me a chance" -- end quote. madam president, for tracy unemployment benefits are not the solution. a job is what she wants. but they provide her with some

critical support while she takes care of her family and tries to find that work. those are just a few of the stories i've heard but there are a lot like them. millions of people across america including an almost additional 38,000 in my state stand to lose the benefits they count on if congress doesn't act soon. these workers are not looking for handout. they don't want to be a burden, but they need support while they work to get back on their feet and back on the job. so, madam president, in this struggling economy renewing these benefits is truly crucial. the nonpartisan congressional budget office has said renewing unemployment benefits is one of the most effective policy tools we have to boost the economy and get money in the pockets of consumers. so i'm really hopeful that the senate will act quickly without political gaimsz because failure -- games because failure to do so wouldn't just be devastating for the families who count on this, it would

also hurt many small businesses and communities to have the billions of dollars pulled away from consumers who spend it every month on food and rent and clothing. last month's budget deal provided us with a glimmer of bipartisan hope coming into this new year. however, we have to continue working together to focus on improving the economy for middle-class americans. we cannot afford to allow this life line to be cut off. the stories that i just shared today like so many others are heartbreaking. but they also show the fierce determination that so many who are out of work exhibit in the struggle to get back on their feet. they are stories of applying for work far below their own qualifications, of going back to school to earn the skills needed to change careers, or waking up every day to scour for jobs in their communities that all too often lack opportunity. and i believe it's congress that

needs to match their determination and grit. we took an important first step today, and i know that unemployed workers that i've heard from are watching. today's vote is a glimmer of hope for them. we can't let it fade. we need to move and pass this extension quickly and the house needs to follow suit. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. leahy: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: madam president, i ask consent the call of the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: madam president, what is the parliament situation? the presiding officer: the senate is in postcloture on the motion to proceed to s. 1845.

mr. leahy: thank you very much, madam president. i want to congratulate senator reid, who i know worked extraordinarily hard to get the votes for this. i -- i had read something someone wrote in the press saying that they are afraid that senator reid didn't talk about these issues enough yesterday on the floor, and i point out that you can either talk or do. he spoke, i thought, quite well, but he basically spent the timelining up the votes and won. a lot of people talk about what they want to do. senator reid usually gets it accomplished. i'd rather -- as one who has served here longer than anybody else in this body, i would rather see people get things done, and he did. now, speaking of things to get done, in this new year, in this

new congressional session, the farm bill still remains as one of the nation's top legislative priorities, but it's languished in congress' inbox. the senate begins its new season, it is a relief at last to be able to say there are glimmers of hope the congress has finally reached a point where we could complete work on a farm bill. we -- we passed this farm bill twice here in the senate. and i compliment the chair of the agricultural committee, senator stabenow. she brought together democrats and republicans. any of us who have served at one time or another as either chair or ranking member or both on that committee, say why don't we just do it the old-fashioned way. instead of just talking about it a lot, why don't we sit down and actually write it, pass it, bring something to the floor

that could pass. it did and it passed twice. and it languished over in the house for some period of time. they are finally going forward with it. chairwoman stabenow and chairman lucas from the house have worked throughout the holiday break, and i know my own staff, adrian mojohowski and others have worked with them very hard to produce a bipartisan, comprehensive bill to address the needs of farmers and families, communities and taxpayers. a farm bill is a dynamic element of our truer economy, actually of our overall national economy. a farm bill touches every family in ways large and small. it has now been more than 460 days since the last farm bill expired, well over a year ago. since then, american farmers,

though, have to farm every single day. they can't wait. they have had to make long-term planting decisions. they have struggled with that. and more than 20 programs such as those affecting organic certification or cost sharing or beginning farmers or relief from livestock disasters or renewable energy or rural small businesses, they have all been stranded without funding. rural small business is a major part, i say to the presiding officer, of her state and my state, but then every state has some rural area in it. that is extremely important. the organic certification cost sharing, how important that is, organic farming is the fastest growing area of agriculture in the country, but the farm bill limbo is part of a string of artificial made-by-congress dilemmas. this limbo not only hurts

farmers, but their communities and our economy. it hampers efforts to help those who are struggling the most in our community with food security for their families, but also holds us back from greater energy security. now, last month, the republican leadership of the house of representatives proposed a short farm bill extension. short extensions are nothing new here on capitol hill. they could go by the term most of us know, that is kicking the can down the road. they pass things over from one crisis to the next. but just as a temporary extension of funding government offers neither certainty nor meaningful change, a short extension of the farm bill would not provide farmers the certainty they need to plan or funding for stranded programs. farming is a business. if you are going to plant, if you are going to harvest, you're making plans for months in advance, even years in advance,

and you can't have the congress say sorry, we'll extend it for a couple of weeks, bye-bye, we're going home on recess. you saddle farmers with this needless uncertainty. it makes what is already difficult even more difficult. even worse, the proposed house extension would prolong direct payment subsidies for another year, and because they won't do their work over there, the republican leadership hasn't done their work, they senselessly cost taxpayers untold millions of dollars. now, i wish we could leave it, chairman lucas who has been very responsible on this and sharewoman stabenow here let us move forward with their bills, because at this point the only acceptable path forward is to deliver a full five-year comprehensive farm bill by the end of january and not only

avoid the so-called dairy cliff but help families put food on the table, improve conservation efforts, it will support regional farming and put an end to wasteful subsidies. it's a win-win for the taxpayers and voters of this country. now, i know i have looked at these. the farm bill marks the seventh time, the seventh time i have served as a member of a farm bill conference committee on a five-year farm bill. i know how difficult it is to bring a complex five-year bill to the floor and ultimately to final passage after a conference. i don't in any way diminish the difficulty in that. i know, i have been there, i have done that. while there have been many significant changes in agriculture policies since the 1981 farm bill, which i had the privilege to write, one thing has remained the same -- no farm bill is easy and no farm bill is

perfect, but to finalize a farm bill and to make it better than the situation today, the senate and the house have to work together to reach a bipartisan agreement. it means whether you are a republican or democrat, forget the symbolism, start dealing with substance. stop rhetoric, go to reality. the conference committee is making steady progress. chairwoman stabenow, a democrat, chairman lucas, a republican, deserve credit and our appreciation for working closely together to bridge the wide differences between our two bills, and the cuts included will not go unnoticed as we have already seen spending reductions for the sequester followed by the end of the recovery act attrition benefits. you know, sometimes we can talk here on the floor, we're all

going to collect our paycheck every month, but we sometimes forget these cuts and policy changes affect real people in real ways. we have to continue to do the best we can, -- separating many provisions in the bill. speaking as a vermonter, i would note that every farm bill is important to vermont just as every farm bill is important to every state represented in this body. farm bills make real difference in our quality of life. and the fact that congress every five years or so would renew and pass a farm bill was once something that americans could take for granted. in my time here in the senate, this is the first time we haven't been able to. the delay has been unfortunate and they've been needless. but i'm increasingly hopeful this recent dark chapter is coming to a close. farmers and families around the

nation are looking to us to pass forward-looking, fiscally responsible, regionally sensitive food and farm policy and the two have to be together, the food and the farm policy. farmers have to be able to plan but families have to know when their children go to school they're going to be fed. because everybody -- every teacher will tell you, a hungry child doesn't learn. and if a child doesn't learn, what are we doing for the next generation? that's our responsibility here. so now is the time without further delay to enact a farm bill that will strengthen the nation, support the economy. i know we're up to this challenge. we've done it twice already here in this body, forging a bipartisan coalition. now i'm hoping the other body, notwithstanding some of the republicans who try to block it will come forward and speak not just for a small part of one

political party but speak for all americans. with that, madam president, -- before i yield the floor i ask unanimous consent that all time during the recess count postcloture on the motion to proceed to s. 1845. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: and --. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate previous order, the senate >> so the senate is taking a break for the weekly party lunches. last hour lawmakers voted to move ahead on a work extending unemployment for three months for the long-term jobless. "the hill" has a story about it today. in a 60-37 vote the senate ended debate on a motion to consider the bill.

60 votes are required to move forward. gop senators susan collins, kelly a ayote, rob portman, dan coates, joined dean heller vote with democrats. they objected to the $6.4 billion cost of the three month extension is not offset with spending cuts. senate minority leader mitch mcconnell said his party could accept extending benefits that go to people that exhausted state benefits only if they were paid for. many would like to see them extended without adding to the national debt, mr. mcconnell said on the senate floor. you can read the story at thehill.com. senators return from the party lunch as the two 15 eastern. we have live coverage on c-span2. we have set up a facebook page related to the senate work on unemployment benefits. go to facebook .com/cspan. before the vote, senate leaders

came to the floor to talk about the pending vote. >> mr. president, over the past several days, we have 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 in this economy democrats plan to exploit those folks for political gain. it is really pretty amazing when you think about it. we are now in the sixth year, sixth year of the obama administration. we all know thmie stockwe markes 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 who work in industry has liberals don't approve of?

like coal? how many of these americans have been doing well during the obama economy? well record numbers of them are having a perfectly terrible time. e 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 stamps has literally skyrocketed, skyrocketed. it is up almost half. and nearly four out of 10 unemployed americans are trapped, literally trapped in long-term unemployment. what's worse, the poorest americans are the ones who often had the hardest time recovering in this economy. yes, the president took office in the midst of an economic crisis. no onest disputes that but for many americans a terrible situation seems to have only gotten worse. over the course of this

administration. so for the presidentn. to turn around and try to blame his political open popes for the suffering we have seen out there, well that takes a pretty good amount of nerve. it also sends a collective case of national amnesia. it would taklee a collective cae of national amnesia to reach those conclusions. remember these are the same folks who gave us stimulus, who gave us, tax increases, who gave us obamacare. all ofob it was done in the name of helping the little guy. in the name of greater equality. so what have they given us? it has given us this mess we have in our country. record numbers about long-term unemployed, record numbers on food stamps, people losing their health care plans. others are seeing premiums shoot up when they can least at ford it. now, another call, one more

call, for a government fix. washington democrats have shown almost no interests for five years 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 has got huge student loan debts but no prospects of work, to the 50-year-old dad who has worked his whole adult life, suddenly can't find a job that meets either his needs or his potential. and yetpo this administration's proposed solution is to slap another bandaid 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. so what i'm saying is, let's support meaningful job creation measures and let's find a way to pay for these ui benefits so we're not adding to an already completely unsustainable debt. unfortunateluny the administratn seems almost totally disinterested in solution that is 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'rate in. because it is len oy when you believe government is the answer to all of your props that you talk about unemployment insurance instead of job creation. and 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 toolse they need to drive the economy that truly

works for them, and for their families. we can start with one of the real bright spots in our economy and that's energy. a field that is 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 t work together is healh care. lm 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. now even the left is starting to come to grip with the painfully obvious fact that the law it fell in love with can't possibly work. last week one of the great poobhass of the left admitted

that admitted that obama care is awful, direct quote. call it, quote, a dirty little secret that many liberals avoided to say out loud. i don't agree with that man on broader ideas of health care, but good to hear a grandee of the left to admit it isn't working. the president's amen chorus had ample opportunity to speak truth to power when it mattered, and most, most chose to remain silent. for that the law's apologists have left the american people to pay the price. let me read you part of a letter i recently received from jennifer bell, a constituent of mine in hopkinsville. this is what she said. i have less coverage than i did before. i didn't get to keep my policy that i was happy with. every dollar i have to pay more is as dollar taken from my family. i never thought that in america we would be forced to purchase something we can

not afford. we worked hard to get where we are. now we're being forced to pay more in order to pay for somebodyme else's insurance. how is that fair? i hear you, jennifer. everyone on this side of the aisle hears those concerns. and here's something else. many kentuckians are finding that obamacareth is more than jt higher premiums and cuts to medicare. it is also about a bo lack of access to doctors and hospitals. one of the most left-wing papers in my state recently ran a big story how many obamacare coverage networks, exclude, exclude, so many of the hospitals myal constituents want to use. a few weeks ago, the majority leader basically said criticisms of obamacare amounted to jokes. well, he might like to think this is all some joke but the constituents who have 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 see so many americans hurting because of decisions they made and feel absolutely nothing. well let me say this to our colleagues on the other side of the's aisle. it's a new year and a time for new beginnings. so if you're ready to work with us, we're here. together we can startto over on health care. give the american people the kind of health reform they really deserve. reform that cant lower costs and improve the quality of care. but just like with solving the problems o of joblessness and unemployment, it is something we can only do together. mr. president, i yield the floor.r. >> 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 --

>> motion to proceed to calendar number 265, s-11445, a bill to provide for the extension of certaiorn unemployment benefits and for other purposes. under the previous order there will be 30 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled intr the usual form. >> mr. president. >> the assistant majority leader. >> mr. president, on the side supporting the pending motion there are 15 minutes under the unanimous consent agreement. similar amount of time on the other side. if all time is used, notify members our roll call vote will be about 11:00. i ask consent on our side supporting the motion i will be allowed five minutes. senatorto reid of rhode island, five minutes and senator close blew char of minnesota five minutes. >> without objection,. >> mr. president, listen

carefully to the republicanhe leader here, here's what he said. here'se what he said. if we're 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 p 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 pool saying to everyone across the america, you have the 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 americansn 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 f family because oa preexisting condition. wow. what a tradeoff. 1.3 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 bashir, a democrat, is promoting affordable care in kentucky and has one of the most successful efforts underway across america, yet every day he is 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 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. and about 11:00 that vote will take place. mr. president, this used to

abbey partisan issue. you're the newest member of senate here. i have 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 were. breadwinners are out of work, need to feed their children, they 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 is what it is all about and they don't get it. they say we should talk about creating jobs. creating some food in the bellies of children? what about paying the utility bill or the rent or keeping the light 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 christmas and new year's, unemployed people. they wrote me letters. a 35-year-old man from anti-okay, illinois, ryan, writes about two children, how difficult it is to keep his family together while he continues day after weary day looking for a job. what i d hear from the republicn leader is, well, isn't it a shame ryan i doesn't have a job, but we can't let government come in and provide the solution. well, i'll tell you, historically government stepped up when the private sector can not or will not and in this case we know it is 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 on the debate on unemployment insurance. this is basic and it's humane. it used to be bipartisan before 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 giveaway. for goodness sakes, it defines who we are as a nation. if we can't stand up and help these peoplean looking for work, then, sadly, it is a sad e are, where wew are, and our principles. and finally, this notion of thrashing out obamacare every time there is an issue every time 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 senator from rhode island. >> mr. president, could you instruct me when i reach the four-minute mark. >> yes.

>> may i may reserve a minute for the very end. thank you, mr. president. mr. president i rise with my colleagues to support this motion to bring this legislation to the floor. to begin a debate, 1.3 million americans have been pushed off an economic cliff on december 2th when their unemployment benefits or extended benefits ended. they are serving 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 theng opening of a new dairy plant in maryland. they were expecting a lot of interest into the 36 jobs. 1600 applicants. i would wager misdemeanor many of those applicants never thought in their lives after being a vice president of sales in a company, or a sophisticated manager of a financial aspects of ap can would be applying to work in a dairy. some, i might expect would be on

extended benefits. that is the only thing keeping them whole and they're looking for work. 1600 applicants, 36 jobs. that is not unique to maryland. that is in my home state of rhode island. that i ss in states across the country, nevada, tennessee, arizona, states that have unemployment numbers that are above the national average, abovege 7%. my case it is 9%. we have to help these families and as senator durbin pointed out, we have done this on a bipartisan basis until very recently. this is a smart economic program. this program, will, according to cbo rather, create 200,000 jobs next year, if we extend it. those are 200 jobs we'll give away and minority leader was talking about how we need to do more to create jobs around here. well, about we don't pass this measure,'r cbo told us we'll forfeit 200,000 jobs. so from an economic basis, in

this country, this isn't smart. from a human basis, helping people who worked their lives, only way you qualify for this program is you work and you're let go, through no fault of your own. so we have to do this. and the other side is talking about, and others colleagues talking about, well, we've got to pay for these benefits. this is selective sort of notion because frankly the last time we extended these benefits in january of 2003, rather 2013, it was not offset. the vote was 89-8. now it included tax provisions and other provisions but we extended benefits unpaid for, 89-8. yet now woe have to pay for these benefits. well what we've done, senator heller and i 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, it will be several million more people will lose their benefits this year. let's do it, let's sit down to work on the program. let me also remind my colleagues, we have made significant changes to the unemployment insurance program. in early 2012 we had a conference report between the house and senate that made changes in unemployment insurance. we reduced total time from 99 weeks, to 73 weeks. we created the work-sharing program. very innovative program for a lot of people to collect part of the week but stay employed the rest of the week. it is a program that helped companies across the country, small companies particularly. we have given states more flexibility on job training. we have given states more flexibility in oversight of their programs. we have made changes. we're willing to listen to thoughtful proposals again, but we can't do it on the backs of 1.3 million a americans who are lost the only benefit they have

got and if you really want to talk about job training, if you really want to talk about cooperation, why b haven't we bn able to rehorse the workforce investment act since 1998? we have not reauthorized since 1998. we have notut made the changes n workforce training that affects this whole country, not just unemployed, but those young people we're trying to move out of high school and junior college into the workforce. we haven't done it. why? well, 1998, republican congress, republican congress until 2007. and since 2007 we have been struggling mightily with a economic crisis and we made progress. if you want to start cooperating bring then workforce investment act to the floor. it pass ad on bipartisan basis from the health committee. bring it to the floor. i yield myle time. >> would the senator from rhode island yield for crest? does the senator? have remaining time? >> 3 1/2 minutes remaining. >> there are 3 1/2 minutes

remainingem on the proponent's side. >> i askmr the senator from rhoe island under that time to yield to 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 say for the cost of these unemployment benefits by eliminating the individual mandate, 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 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. woulstd the senator from rhode island comment whether that is a good trade for either side? >> i think it's a terrible trade, because not just families with children. it is about many of these working adults who, if they get

a preexisting condition, they lose their coverage. it is not just a question of children. that, i think is very, very sensitive and you put a point on it but without the affordable carere act, if you get sick you can't get coverage. the only people that can get coverage if you're middle-aged and you're really healthy and you don't need need it. once you need it the insurance companies take it away before affordable care. >> from the senator rhode island in time allotted on our side, i listened carefully to the speechen by the republican leader, the senate leader this morning, i see my colleague from new york taking the floor. we have a limited amount of time. i will yield my time. >> thank you my friend from illinois. >> the senator frommr new york. >> thank you, mr. president. i thank my friend from illinois and my friend from rhode island. hutch time is left on our side? >> one minute, 30 seconds. >> thank you, mr. president.

i see what is 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. so they're putting impossible logjams in the past. who would believe that on this side of the aisle we would delay an important part of the aca 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 t do that. not going to do it on the fly. what i would say to my colleagues, 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 you know would be insurmountable, get it done. and i would make one other point. and that is this. my, and i see my colleague from minnesota here. if she wants to take the

remaining seconds -- okay. i would make this point, mr. president. bottom line is very simple. very simple. peopleop want to work. people whoop have lost their jos after working decades for a company are knocking on doors every day. they areth going online. they are desperate to work and this idea -- >> the senator's time has expired? that they don't want to work. that unemployment benefits encourage them not to work is balderdash. yield the floor. >> later in the morning the senate voted to advance the bill. the vote was 60-37. six republicans joined with all the democrats in supporting further debate on the bipartisan legislation. the senate taking a break now for their weekly party lunches. they will return at 2:15 eastern for more debate and votes and you can see the senate live here on c-span2 when they return.

after the vote, in the senate, democrats held a news conference to discuss the results and the way forward with the bipartisan legislation. >> good morning. the united states senate just took a very important step forward in assisting 1.3 million americans who lost their extended unemployment benefits on december 28, and also the millions more that will lose it throughout the course of this year. there are still a great deal of work to be done but, we have literally changed this debate. just a few weeks ago, there were colleagues who are talking about unemployment insurance as a disservice to the american worker. today, we're talking about the vital nature of this program and also the need to extend it and now we're also talking about,

should it be paid for in the long term? are there other changes that could be made? we made several changes in 2012 and so we're moving forth. we have to collaborate. we have to be constructive but today, i think we've given a bit of hope to millions of americans who are struggling in a difficult economy to find jobs, who are struggling to provide sub 10 nance to their families, to pay their heat bill, put some gas in the car and keep looking for work. we also under this is just providing immediate assistance people need. the longer term is to created jobs, to build the economy where this, these programs are not as necessary as they are today. . .

it's good not just for the 1.3 million families who will benefit, but it's also going to be good for the economy and the united states. numerous economists, including what mark zandi said this is one of the best things we can do to keep the money in the economy, keep it stimulated. it's a good way to spend public dollars to encourage private

sector response. so this is good for families but it's also going to be good for our economy as we know people who get unemployment insurance are going to spend those dollars, they are not going to put them in the bank. if we think about how do we create jobs, this is one of the challenges we have, making sure people can still go out and work but those dollars can be used to buy gasoline, pay for groceries, he people's rent its import and because it keeps a lot of other people working in the economy. so it's very good news now. serious negotiations have to start as we think about how we get this passed. >> before i introduce the senator, i have to personally thank the senator of nevada. he stood up, responding to his constituents and to what he was seeing in his home state and across the country. he provided great leadership and

he did it with thoughtful, persistent advocacy. and we are here today because of his efforts and all of my colleagues on all of my democratic colleagues but also my republican colleagues who stepped forward and said let's put the rhetoric aside for a moment and try to help people and then to fit in a constructive and a collaborative way and without that we recognize. >> it's 8 degrees below zero in cleveland today and it seems like it is almost that cold here. and i spoke on this bipartisan vote and we will help those people who have lost jobs. it will help them go to the grocery store and help them fix their car with local car mechanics who can sort of -- this is all about social

insurance. people pay into this when they are working and when the foster jobs it's important that they get those benefits. and no one gets these benefits without looking for jobs day after day and that's why it's so important and it's important that we got a strong bipartisan for a minimum wage. in 2007 was strong bipartisan vote signed by president bush, by the president of the united states. we hope to replicate to that kind of effort in 2014 in a factory in the job growth issues that we are working on a bipartisan can from the meeting with manufacturing group from the senate from both parties who care about job creation and manufacturing. the last point i would like to

make is the senator mentioned how this is good for the economy. 100 years ago this week he announced he was going to pay his workers $5 a day. that was the sweep of the floor. that is what the members of the senate understood and when we put money in people's pockets they spend it and it grows the economy to buy the model in his day 100 years ago, but it means they spend that money locally in grocery stores and when the hardware store buying clothes for their kids and keeping them alive what it means so of their unemployment expired at the end of last year and what it means to our economy as a whole. >> 18,000 families in order again got a lump of coal in their stocking when they failed

to authorize the reemployment program. and this coming year we are going to see another 58,000 families affected. and then we have a broad economy and would eliminate about 4,000 jobs. i can tell you that the citizens want to see a string of jobs not to destroy the jobs och. the families themselves have a strong foundation and a strong bridge to the next job in the areas of high a unemployment and something that is helping the broad economy at the same time. this was a bipartisan program developed under president bush. today, this morning we had a bipartisan vote to the date and now we have to make sure that we have a bipartisan support to back to leave the authorized this program and take those lumps of coal out of the stockings.

this weekend i was doing the town halls in oregon and for them in the rural areas there was higher unemployment across america the average unemployment in oregon and now it's 7.3%. but in three counties it is almost 12%. and so that time it takes to get another job is much longer. that's true and high unemployment states, and that's true across the country. so, huge logic and impact on families, but let's understand there is a fundamental viewpoint here. when families are down, are they going to get a helping hand and the bridge to the next job? are they going to get kicked while they are down and i think the helping hand, bipartisan helping hand is what we have to teach a lot to get free authorized.

thank you. >> i want to thank my colleagues, senator reid and senator heller for their leadership and my colleague senator shaheen and berkeley for working on this issue. today brought a glimmer of hope. it's good news in two ways. first it doesn't close the door on actually getting this bill passed. it allows us to sit down and negotiate and i will talk more about that in a second. it shows that the tectonic plates in the politics are moving. the issues that dominated the first five years of the president's term, the deficit above all in obamacare are becoming less important in helping the less than average american family get by. job growth isn't as robust as we would like and as middle class in comes this decade have declined for the first time in history. republican colleagues realize that and that's why they didn't shut the door because they saw as the chart shows, the kind of

unemployment that we face much higher now. second point, we hope this is a good-faith negotiation. the offer that the senator made is obviously a nonstarter. and i hope, we hope and some of us feared republican colleagues while they know the power of this issue they do not want to pass it and they will put some obstacles in the way that will prevent the bill from passing. clearly the amendment proposed is not going to pass. and we don't want a mexican standoff where we put an hour to pay for and they put in tears. i can think of a pay for that makes a lot more sense and is more relevant than senator mcconnell. take away the tax break for the companies that ship jobs overseas.

that would reduce unemployment and lower the cost of unemployment insurance. i would think we would have every democrat to vote for that but i suppose the would be an on starter for the colleagues in the senate and the house. so the fundamental question is are they going through a charade to show that they really, really want a bill, but they just can't come to an agreement and there are two different versions or can we have serious negotiations and get something done? and we hope it is the latter. if our republican colleagues continue to play games with this, they will show how far out of the mainstream they are. as it was mentioned i believe by senator merkley, the original framework was passed by george bush, conservative republican president, when unemployment was 5.6%. it's now 7%. have republicans moved so far out of the mainstream that they reject even that?

even unemployment benefits for people who have worked ten, 20, 30 years at one job, lost their job, and then they are spending every day going on line or knocking on doors trying to find a job and they can't? certainly we didn't hear the theory of the hard right, or what rand paul said that unemployment is a disservice to workers, this idea that people don't want to work is fundamentally misleading the american character. americans do want to work, do want to work, and the satisfaction in a job well done for ceos and people that make sure the floors are really spotlessly clean and a hospital. so, we hope that the vote today indicates that republican colleagues will negotiate. we are open to such negotiations. we believe, i believe and i think most colleagues believe it would be good to pass and paid for if we can't come to an agreement or even if we could because it stimulates the

economy, but we want to get this bill passed. it's too important for the average american family not to. >> are you accepting the notion that these negotiations are going to be aimed at offsetting? senate i would prefer to pass this 90 day extension so that we could assure millions of americans they are going to get the benefits without disruption. my preference frankly, and i think the senator has said the same thing, is because we also want to grow jobs but typically this is the emergency spending which is not offset. last year, the beginning of 2013, we passed with overwhelming republican support

in a one-year extension of unemployment benefits that wouldn't pay for. so the notion of selectively saying that the key issues must be paid for, that is in the case. most times we have to pay for these. so i think we are going to these negotiations saying you know, the reference is clearly that we want to get this done quickly, the 90 day extension. for the yearlong extension, if you have fought for ways to deal with it, and senator schumer suggested one, there are others, again we understand the have to have another bipartisan effort to get this measure finally passed. but from strictly the sort of economic sense, strictly from history the last number of times we've done this in fact most recently in 2013, january, 2013 the benefits were paid for.

>> haslet no strings attached, get it done and get it done quickly. second-best choice, find a reasonable pay for that can work on both sides of the aisle and caution people it's a lot easier said than done and as again, i am worried that we may be somewhat locked into a cul-de-sac by our colleagues that don't have an intention of doing that. that is a possibility. it hurts our economy. >> can you give examples of the really troubled pay for? >> senator schumer suggested to some of these tax provisions that actually not only deprived

the government of revenue, but also help the poor jobs overseas when we need jobs here. but there are a whole list of tax loopholes and other things that we could consider to it i don't want to foreclose the discussions. i think at this point particularly having secured a very positive bipartisan vote be getting us on to the measure that we want to go forward in good faith and spirit and not include, exclude, etc. but say we are willing to listen. as senator schumer cautioned, we have to have something that makes sense for the economy and makes sense for the people. and something that we could generally support. and i hope my republican colleagues would approach it the same way. anyone else?

>> are you surprised by the votes today? >> it was in the balance of the jury last moment. so, i was hopeful, but i guess being irish i'm always expecting the worst. so yes, i was surprised. that might be cultural and political. >> i think we are all a bit surprised, but pope francis said go out and smell like the flock or vote like this. i think members of the senate are increasingly hearing from constituents. there were a number of our colleagues in the defense during the holidays in the last two weeks. and if they were out in public they were hearing from people whose unemployment benefits expired. almost 50,000. in a large state but not the largest, and it was thousands

everywhere in this country. and i think that not only is that good news for the of unemployment insurance, but that is good news for minimum wage and for manufacturing and for really focusing on jobs, and i think more and more of my colleagues are hearing that. thank you. again the senate voted to advance the unemployment benefits fell 63 koza 37. six republicans crossed the party line to join with democrats in supporting further debate on the bipartisan legislation. a

here is what he had to say from the east room of the white house today. ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states accompanied by padget

[applause] >> thank you. >> the good morning. my name is catherine hacket from connecticut. i am very grateful president obama invited me here today to respond to a letter that i wrote to him about the discontinuation of the federal unemployment insurance. i am unemployed, and i will be significantly affected by this decision. jobs lost is devastating, and i am working very hard every day to look for a position. in the interim, unemployment benefits have been absolutely essentials to cover my bear necessities. i have cut expenses everywhere possible, and i am not just sitting home enjoying the good

life. my cuts include heating my house to 58 degrees, wearing a hat and coat to stay warm because oil is expensive. i have lost weight because food is expensive. as a single mother, i worked many different jobs and never asked for a handout. while i raise to wonderful boys. both of my sons are serving in the military. it was very hard to let one of them serve a year in afghanistan, but i did. and he was proud to serve his country. i hope our leaders in washington can find a solution to help families like mine. at this time, it is my great honor to introduce the president of the united states, president barack obama. [applause]

>> happy new year, everybody. hope you are keeping warm. a few weeks ago i said that 2014 could be a breakthrough year for america. five years ago this month, our economy was shedding 800,000 jobs just in one month. but as americans buckled down and worked hard and sacrificed, we began to come back. and our businesses have created more than 8 million new jobs since we hit the bottom. our auto industry has gone from bust to boo me and manufacturing is rebounding the market, stock markets are restoring and retirement accounts. the promise of energy independence is actually in

sight. health care costs eat up less of the economy over the past four years it was the slowest rate on record. and since i took office we cut the deficit by more than half. so america is getting stronger and we have made progress. the economy is growing and we have to do more to make sure that all americans share that growth. we have to help the businesses create more jobs and make sure they offer the wages and benefits that let families rebuild their security. in other words, we have to make sure that this leaves nobody behind. and we have a lot of work to do on that front. the good news is i'm optimistic that we can do it if we do it together. before the holidays, both parties compromised on a budget that lists some of the drugs that have been on the economy from the indiscriminate cuts that we call the sequester and as a consequence of this year,

we may seem more stability when it comes to economic growth. i am not alone and saying that we are all grateful and the new year that we won't have another partisan shot down hopefully -- shutdown bulkeley. [applause] so that was a good sign and we should build on that progress. what i said should be the first order of business in 2014. and that is extending insurance for the unemployed. [applause] the good news is this morning the senate took an important step in the direction. for the americans who joined me at the white house today and the millions like them who are laid off in every session through no fault of their own, unemployment

insurance has been a vital economic lifeline. for a lot of people it is the only source of income they have to support their families while they look for a new job. these aren't folks that are just sitting back waiting for things to happen. they are actively out there looking for work. they desperately want work. but although the economy has been growing and we have been adding new jobs, the truth of the matter is the financial crisis was so devastating that there's still a lot of people who are struggling. and in fact if we don't provide unemployment insurance it makes it harder for them to find a job. you heard catherines story and she was far more eloquent than i could ever be. she wrote to me last month that said please let those that think i'm sitting at home enjoying

being unemployed know i would much rather be working. i had a chance to talk with her and i think it's pretty clear that that's the case. catherine went on to say that i've applied to everything for which i impossibly qualified to no avail. i have worked hard all of my life, paid taxes, voted, engaged in political discussion and made the ultimate sacrifice my sons served in the military. job loss is devastating and if i could fix it myself, i would treat i challenge any lawmaker that live without an income. that is what catherine said. it's hard. [applause] so when we have a mother of two of our troops who is working hard out there having to wear a

coat inside the house, we have a problem. and it's one that can be fixed. and katherine is not alone. evelyn smith who is watching today from her home in california wrote me about her hunt for a new job. and she was laid off 13 months ago. she sent out hundreds of resume, she is volunteered, done seasonal work, she doesn't want to be sitting around the house. she's taking online courses to learn more skills. without unemployment insurance though, she will not be able to pay for her car or herself, what makes it that much harder. she wrote to me and said i wanted nothing more than to find a new full-time job and i indicated every day to that mission. i'm asking you to advocate for me and the millions like me who need extended unemployment

benefits to make ends meet. i just want everybody to understand this is not an abstraction. these are not statistics. these are your neighbors, friends, family members and could at some point be any of us. that's why we set up a system of unemployment insurance. the notion was everybody is making a contribution because you don't know when the business cycle or economic crisis might make any of us vulnerable and this insurance helps to keep food on the table while sending not resume is and while she's learning new skills for that job. it provides that extra bit of security so that losing your job doesn't mean that you have to lose your house. where everything that you have worked so hard to build for

years. we make this promise to our fellow americans who are working hard to get back on their feet. because when times get tough, we are not the people that say you are on your own. we are people who believe that we are all in it together and we know by the grace of god. [applause] so that is the value case and the moral case for this, but there's an economic case as well. the independent economists have shown extending emergency unemployment insurance actually helps the economy and creates new jobs. when folks like katherine have a little more to spend to turn up the heat in the house or to buy a few extra groceries, that means more spending with businesses in the local communities, which in turn may

mean businesses hire one more person, maybe kathryn. that's why in the past both parties have repeatedly put partisanship and ideology aside to offer some security for the job seekers with no strings attached. it's been done regardless whether democrats and republicans were in the white house. it has been done regardless democrats or republicans control the congress. and by the way, it has been done multiple times when the unemployment rate was significantly lower than it is today. what is important to keep in mind also is that the recovery and a big country like the united states is going to be someone uneven so there are some states that have a 2.5 unemployment rate and some places that may still have seven, eight, 9% unemployment rate the people living in the respective states may be working

equally hard to find a job but it's going to be harder in some places than others. two weeks ago the congress went home for the holidays and let the lifeline expire for 1.3 million americans. if this doesn't get fixed it will hurt about 14 million americans over the course of this year. ..

>> that really sells the american people short. i meet a lot of people as president of the united states and as a candidate for president of the united states and as a u.s. senator, and as a state senator. i meet a lot of people. and i can't, i can't name a time when i met an american who would rather have an unemployment check than the pride of having a job. [applause] >> the long-term unemployed are not lazy. they're not lacking in motivation. they are coping with the aftermath of the worst economic crisis in generations. in some cases they may have a skills mismatch, right? and may have been doing a

certain job for 20 years. suddenly, they lose that job. they may be an older worker, may have to get retrained. it's hard. sometimes employers will discriminate if you've been out of work for a while. they decide, well, we are not sure want to hire you. we'd rather hire somebody was to working right now. so it's hard out there. there are a lot of our friends, a lot of our neighbors who've lost their jobs, and they are working their tails off every single day trying to find a new job. now, as the job market keeps getting better, more and more of these folks will find work. but in the meantime, the insurance keeps them from falling off a cliff. it make sure they can pay their car note to go to that interview. it make sure they can pay their cell phone bill so that if

somebody calls back for an interview, they can answer it. and catherine explains this. catherine, in the later -- in the letter that she wrote to me, said, do folks really think that cutting this benefit will make someone hire me ask i mean, that's not how employers are thinking. so letting unemployment insurance expire for millions of americans is wrong. congress should make things right. i am very appreciative that they're on their way doing just that thanks to the bipartisan work of two senators. you have a democrat from rhode island, senator reid, and yet a conservative republican from nevada, senator heller. and despite their political differences, they worked together on a plan to extend unemployment insurance at least for three months, temporarily, while we figure out a longer-term solution.

this morning a bipartisan majority of senators agreed to allow this common supervision to a lease to move forward in the process. the senate is a complicated place. just because they agreed on this vote, all the degree to so far is that we're going to have a vote on it. they haven't actually passed it. so we've got to get this across the finish line without obstruction or delay. and we need the house of representatives to be able to vote for it as well. and it's -- [applause] that's the bottom line. [applause] voting for implement insurance helps people and create jobs. and voting against it is not. congress should pass this bipartisan plan right away, and i will sign it right away. and more than 1 million americans across the country will feel a little help right away. and hope it's contagioucontagiou s. you know, when --

[applause] when catherine has a little bit more confidence about her situation, when she finds a job she's going to be able to help somebody down the line, maybe is also down on their luck. you know, when congress passes a bipartisan effort starting here, right at the beginning of the new year, who knows, we might actually get some things done this year. [laughter] you know, so after all the hard work and sacrifice of the past five years to recover and rebuild from the crisis, what i think the american people are really looking for in 2014 is just a little bit of stability. let's just use the common sense thing. let's do what's right. we are going to have to -- were going to have to see action though on the part of congress. i'll be willing to work with

them every step of the way, action to our businesses to create more of the good jobs that our growing middle class requires, action to restore economic mobility and reduce inequality, action to open more doors of opportunity for everybody who is willing to work hard and walk through those doors. you know, when i was listening to catherine, i was just so struck by her strength and dignity, and i think people, when they bump into some tough times, like catherine, they're not looking for pity. they just want a shot. and they just want to feel as if -- [applause] they just want to feel as if, you know what, as a part of this country, as a part of their communities that if misfortune

strikes, all the things that they've done in the past, all the hard work they've done raising children and paying taxes and working hard, you know, that counts for something. and that folks aren't suddenly just going to dismiss their concerns, but they're going to rally behind them. that's not too much to ask. that's who we are as americans. that's what built this country. that's what i want to promote. [applause] so thank you very much, everybody, and let's get to work and let's get this done. i appreciate it. [applause]

russell berman, how did the senate managed to get the 60 votes needed to move forward with the bill? >> this is a little bit of a surprise but the democrats coming into this vote were worried they would be a vote or two short -- short of the 60 threshold but openly six republicans including rob portman ohio, senator collins of maine and for others did vote along with all the democrats who are voting to advance this. but it still has a long way to go. at least two more probably senate votes and some of the republicans who voted for this procedural vote said that they would need offsetting spending cuts to pay for the cost of the three months, about $6 billion before they would vote for final

passage, or potentially the final cloture vote which would require 60 votes as well. >> in terms of this bipartisan bill the president called this a bipartisan bill calling out the dean heller support of the, where will his allegiances fall when the vote comes later this week, likely? >> where will the president stated where will senator heller's allegiance of all? >> right. yes, this bill as of right now is i'm paid for. he was the first republican to get on board with senator jack reed of rhode island on a three-month extension, the unemployment rate in nevada is still very high. that was probably one reason for his support for this. but it's likely -- to get through both the senate and the house, speaker boehner has already said that he needs to be paid for. right now over the next few days are probably going to be entering into negotiations over what kind of cuts to make elsewhere that we pay for this

bill. and potentially, you know, the democrats want to extend it for a full year, the three much extension was mentioned along a solution that might increase some of the reforms to the program. so we will see if it stays in the three-month window or if a kind of broaden it out to a one year extension. >> is it possible this bill could be attached to something bigger? and on the bus spending bill, the farm bill? >> it's possible. in the past, unemployment insurance have been attached to other bills. they're working to finish up the farm bill and there's been some talk on the democratic side in the house of using the savings from the farm bill with cuts to food stamp and farm subsidies to pay for the unemployment benefits, because that money matches up pretty well across -- costs about 26 bundlers to extend emergency unemployment insurance for the full year. so that is a possibility. it's also -- the other bill that

you mentioned that is definite eagle that would move forward, probably in the next few weeks is that on the bus spending bill. so it could be attached to one or the other or if it's attached to the farm bill that will likely be combined, some of the money from the farm bill would be used for the. >> in the article you write for thehill.com, you wrote about the democrats hoping to change the conversation in 2014 away from discussion on health care reform law, and how, in addition to the bill, might be try to do that? >> they are going to focus on the topic of the moment which is income inequality. to present a corset and talk about this in various forms since the reelection and even before then. has gotten a lot of attention with the election of build applause you, the mayor of new your city, for example. and other liberal democrats have been focusing on this. so the push to extend unemployment insurance and also to raise the minimum wage is all

part of that. you can expect to see the president and congressional democrats talking as he has in the state of the union address later this month about other issues. and most notably a push to increase the minimum wage which is really an uphill battle with republicans controllicontrolli ng the house, republicans have long been opposed, most of them, to raising the minimum wage saying that it would hurt job creation, especially among small businesses. so it's going to be a tough battle for democrats, now that we're into the election year, everything has a political and electoral connotation. that's how it's going to be frank. >> thanks for the update. >> thank you. >> shortly after the senate voted to advance the jobless benefits bill, house speaker john boehner's office issued this statement.

>> that from house speaker john boehner. house minority leader nancy pelosi said this in her statement. we expect to hear from senate democratic and republican leaders as their weekly lunch and wrap up. they are are expected to start in about 20 minutes, about 2 p.m. eastern and will have their remarks live here on c-span2. while we wait, the segment from today's "washington journal" on social conservatism. " host: we are joined now by franwak kenney, president of the american principles project for a conversation about sociale are conservative agenda in 2014.

mr. kelley, a political article yesterday referred to your group as the advanced guard of a plant abatement effort by the of on thestabright to push back on the establishment efforts to minimize the advice of issues like t abortion rights and gay marriage. yo that that you would define your group? >> guest: no. that wouldn'tur be my self-definition. there are two aspects to but we do. we certainly do defend the social issues within politics,mf and think that it's both right for the country and a political winner. but we also handle economic issues. we tried to push for an economics that is more centered running for working families and working people rather than just on the business class and large corporations. >> host: where does your group and social conservative right

now fit into theic republican party? a different political article about your group noted that social conservatives have been n largely relegated to the sidelines as the business wing of the gop establishment, wages a bitter and expensive struggle against the tea party for the soul of the republican party. >> guest: let's start with thecn idea that the tea party is not totally distinct from social pat conservatives. a large portion of the tea party, 70% or so, all are whatho you u would call fugitive conservative. both economic conservatives and conservatives.the idea the idea that social issues cans be pushed aside in the party republican party is suicidal, suicidal thinking, because the great bulk of the rank-and-file workers within the party are

from the social conservative wing of the party. it represents a large portion of the coalition that has been the conservative governing coalition going back to reagan. >> host: what are the key issues that you're going to be talking about going into the 2014 election? what the social conservatives run on this year? >> guest: well, i think, for example, on the abortion issue, there are a lot of ways in which the democratic party has abandoned its safe, legal and rare stance, and it's become very extreme on the issue. overe are common groundspr provisions like the 20 week bill that was passed by the house off representatives and beenpresents introduced by senator graham in the senate that goes to where 60, 65% of americans are.aying

six month of pregnancy when a child can feel pain is not something that the bulk of caoricans support. so legislatively that's one area. sex selection abortion, government funding of abortions, all areas in which a great majority of american people believe that the concert social conservative position is the right position. >> host: are you concerned about republicans who say that some of these issues are too divisive to run on? that republicans should stick more to fiscal issues rather than some of the social issues conservative issues? >> guest: it's an interestin question because the idea thatat republicans win on the economic issues is something that has

been -- based on the data coming out of the elections. that is, republicans are losing on the economic issues. no, losing with the very groups that they feel the need to reach out to. young people with women, with hispanics, that the bulk of the problem they have would be that the american public think that republicans are out of step with the concerns of working peopleti and their greatest problem is in the economic area, not any social issue area. but the groups that they want tu conservatito them to be more conservative onve social issues than the american public as awh. whole. >> host: we are talking to frank cannon. are tal he's the president of thehe is s american principles project. easier to take your questions

and comments as we talk about social conservatives and theira0 agenda in 2014 election and 2016 i guess as well. our phone lines are open. mr. cannon, as voted on in to to talk to, want to get your reaction to the supreme court stepping in yesterday and blocking gay marriages in utah. >> guest: well, i think that it's important that the issue be decided democratically. that is, in the places where a marriage is legal in the various states, it's in the courts that by and large have made a determination that the state

constitution requires gay marriage. and i think that when you talk about this level of social change, it's very important to allow the electorate to be able to voice its opinion rather than have it imposed by the court. that never works in areas of social change. >> host: as we show our viewers a map of same-sex marriage status in the u.s., the states, darker states where same-sex marriage is allowed, and the lighter state where same-sex marriage is banned. frank cannon, how is this issue going to play in the 2014 midterm election? >> guest: i don't think that the issue was one that republicans by and large want to take on. the consulting class of the party and the other classes the

party don't want to engage in a discussion about gay marriage. now, the bulk of the republican grassroots is for traditional marriage by overwhelming numbers. and the country is divided 50/50 on the issue. and so there are states in which it is going to play out in republican primaries, for example, as it did in wyoming with liz cheney and senator graham's away -- republican rank and file, want to see traditional marriage upheld. it will play out in areas like that. but as a main theme of the republican party, you

essentially have a kind of truce, a one-sided truce which is, in fact, a surrender on the issue of marriage. >> host: is this what a group like the american principles project is going to do in the next couple of months in terms of making that issue a topic of those primaries let's and if so, how many members, republican members does your group target for those issues? >> guest: we've got involved in the first race which was the wyoming race, and we ran commercials locating liz cheney on the issue of gay marriage. and it moved the needle about 15 points against her, because the people of wyoming do not want to send a republican senator to washington who was out of step with their views on marriage. how many states this will play

out in depends on who the candidates are and what their positions are. but we certainly would be involved in races in which there's a clear-cut difference on social issues between the candidates. >> host: usage are involved in that add in wyoming. how much money is your group looking to put in the republican primaries this year? >> guest: well, we don't have a definitive number, despite the great -- from politico that where a vanguard. i think that's another word for saying we're a startup that is out there. we are looking to put -- >> host: the article said your group is one to watch in these races. >> guest: we are hopeful we will be able to have a substantial amount of it in to the races. we are nowhere near the 215 million u.s. out of

crossroads or 400 million from the koch brothers operation. would in the single digits to low double digits. >> host: [inaudible] >> guest: we are looking to spend this election. >> host: we are talking to frank cannon, president of the american vegetables project, here to answer your questions. kevin is up for some bloomington, indiana, on our line for independence. kevin, good morning. >> caller: good morning to you. i was surprised with mr. cannon's views in the opening statement. kind of reminded me of franklin roosevelt, you know, being against corporatism, especially fascism that seems to be rampant in today's government. and i'm just going to keep an open mind on his group and be interested to what they have to say. i just think that the republicans would be making a real good move in not being as

mean and against so many things, and for an inclusive to as many people as possible. i think it's a tragedy that we lost a great senator like dick lugar. and it's time to come you know, get these key bill is out of office. i'll let it go from there. thank you so much for letting me speak. >> guest: i think one of the points that the caller was making, there is a frustration in the country with the idea the republicans don't seem to be talking to, or conservatives, don't seem to be talking to working americans. when you have a campaign, and the term job creator comes up more often in your commercials then working american, you know you have a slight problem in who you're speaking to. and i think that we've lost

sight of the fact that when we talk about who built the country, it's not only the industrial class, it's the working class that helped make america the great country that it is, and held build the institutions, economic and political, that make it unique. >> host: the caller brings up former senator dick lugar. would your group have supported him during the primary? >> guest: well, i certainly, like the current senator, so i don't know if it would be a set of issues we would have jumped on against them senator lugar, but i certainly, certainly since that senator coats from indiana is a great senator. and i'm not commenting on the

democratic senator. >> host: los angeles, california, on our line for republicans. rodney, thanks to getting up with us on the "washington journal" transport thank you for having this topic on. i'm an african-american gay e-mail, conservative. and i want to say to the american public that it is a hidden agenda in the gay community, and the fact that the issue is not the rights. you notice how they will say stay out of my bedroom, yet they're knocking on the door asking for your permission do in essence grant something that they know is religious in nature. the bulk of my peers, my gay peers who want to attack the institution because primarily they want to attack the religious institution. now, ask for rights. the rights that they require, ask for can be easily obtained

through civil unions and other methods without actually attacking the institution of marriage. and i lastly want to say that when i discussed this issue with my heterosexual family members, they feel, or they are pressured to feel that they are discriminating against me and my kind, even though religiously they don't agree with it. so in the rush to progressivism, you are trampling over the tradition that the church has held for many, many years. >> guest: well, i think there's a very important point there, which is the balance point between individual rights as a spouse in the gay community and the impact on religious liberty. if you look at the original federal court decisions in california in the prop eight

case, it's amazing but if you read the decision, there is an amazing animus i to judge toward religious belief. he looks at the beliefs of various religions, and they are laid out in the decision, and declared by the judge to be in essence discriminatory. so that people who are behaving off of those beliefs, behaving out of and an animus against gay people in a discriminatory fashion. and so it becomes really difficult to see how it is that somebody wants to the spouse of religious belief is able to do that in an environment in which even as the basis for voting, it's that as something that is beyond -- out of the pale,

beyond what can be reasonably considered. >> host: on this issue of gay marriage, back at the end of december the "washington post" gave social conservatives their weekly worst week in washington award talking about what happened in utah but also some of the other actions around the country that the decision in utah, the story notes, came on the same to a federal judge in the liberal that same-sex marriage performed outside the state would be recognized shortly after new mexico's supreme court legalized such unions. edit notes for those keeping score, three states with huge was in favor of gay marriage in a few days not to mention the fact that hawaii and illinois legalized the unions last month. how would you respond to that award? >> guest: i think it is deserved. it was, it