Sherrod Brown

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Under a previous order, at 2:15, the Senate will proceed to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to the small business jobs bill.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Michigan. I think the Senator said it exactly right. She talks about statistics and so many people being laid off. Yes, 750,000 people a month were losing their jobs when President Obama started in office. We are seeing job growth now but not as much as we would like. In Ohio, in April, we had the largest job growth in the country, with 37,000, which is not great, but it is better than when President Obama inherited this economy from President Bush. I think when you speak to individual people, you understand it. I want to share a handful of letters from constituents. I know Senator Stabenow gets letters like this from Lansing, Grand Rapids, all over Detroit, and everywhere in her State, from people who have been affected by the failure of the Republicans to want to extend unemployment benefits. It seems to me that our Republican colleagues--the people who consistently voted no on something as simple as extending unemployment benefits--some of them view unemployment as welfare, when it is called unemployment insurance not unemployment welfare. When you have a job, whether you live in Detroit or Columbus or whether you live in Dayton or Toledo, you pay into the unemployment insurance fund when you are working, and you get assistance when you are not. That is the whole point of unemployment insurance. You hope you never need it, like you hope you never need your car insurance, to cash in your car insurance, or you hope you don't need your health insurance. You want it to protect yourself. That is what unemployment insurance is. I think some of my colleagues, who are so ultra conservative, think it is welfare. I don't understand that because very few people in the public think that. Too many colleagues--the people who vote no on extending unemployment insurance--don't know anybody who lost their job or they don't know anybody who has lost her insurance or anybody who has lost their home. Senator Stabenow is out all the time in Michigan. She is all over the State. I will be in Columbus tomorrow, and I will also be in Lorraine and Cleveland tomorrow. I think a lot of colleagues who vote no on extending unemployment insurance simply don't meet with people who might have lost their job. They hang around with other Senators and with people who are pretty privileged. Do they look somebody in the eye and say: What is it like to lose your insurance or your home? Try to imagine somebody--a parent or a husband and wife or a mother and father--who lost their job and lost their health insurance and are about to lose their home, and they have to explain to their 12- or 13- year-old child: We are going to have to move and don't know where we will be living, and I don't know what school district we will be in yet. Just think of the uncertainty and sadness of that. I don't think they think about that. Maybe we can help by sharing a few real letters from people in Akron and Lima and Cleveland and Urbana, around Ohio. I will share these. Ellen from Summit County, in Akron, writes: I am writing to make you aware of my situation, which I fear is very similar to that of many other people. If an unemployment insurance extension is not passed, it will in essence destroy my family. We are struggling to keep our bills paid and have come to the point of alternating months on paying our mortgage and utility bills. Think of that--one month you pay your mortgage and the next month you pay your utility bills, hoping that neither will your utilities be cut off nor your home foreclosed on. We need this extension. Until my husband lost his job, he worked over 20 years in the banking industry--he has more than paid into the system to receive his fair share of compensation. We are nine years into our 30-year mortgage and are at risk of losing our home. We are fighting just to stay above water. A UI extension will in no way guarantee our future, but it will at least give us a chance. Like most people who have worked for years, people don't ever choose to lose their jobs. They are not getting rich on unemployment. It is a bridge until they find a job. As you know, unemployment insurance allows you to receive the benefits you need to keep looking for work. You send in resumes. I get letters from people all the time saying: I drive in a five-county area looking for a job, I apply more, and I send in resumes and nobody answers half the time because they are buried with resumes. Aaron, from Allen County, near the Indiana border in Lima, writes: I worked at a company for 19 years before it was closed and moved to Mexico. Since then, I went back to college to earn a mechanical engineering degree, while working part-time. But I recently lost my unemployment benefits, which means I won't be able to support my family. There are so many people in my situation. If unemployment benefits are extended, it would help thousands of dislocated workers and their families. Mr. President, it is not just the individual help for these families, it is their next-door neighbor because if Aaron's house is foreclosed on, the next-door neighbor's home drops in value. If he gets his unemployment, the local hardware store will get some of that money, as will the local clothing store and the local restaurant or grocery store where they are spending this money. The unemployment insurance that people receive--according to former Presidential candidate, John McCain and one of his top economic advisers--has the biggest multiplier effect of any stimulus. It doesn't stay in the pockets of the unemployed workers very long. It immediately goes into the community and is spent and respent. Here are the last two letters I will read. This is from Elizabeth from Cuyahoga County, the Cleveland area: I turned 60 this year and have spent the last 30 years as a computer programmer. Since losing my job, I have tried to learn new programming skills to make me a stronger applicant. In the meantime, I apply for every single job that I can possibly perform. I have hoped beyond hope for jobs at grocery stores, home health care agencies, and retail stores. I am now at the end of my rope. I don't have any other ideas of what to do. I have worked for 42 years, since high school, and even full-time while attending college. Those who are not unemployed or have no one in their family who is unemployed, don't understand what it feels like. I have other friends who are losing their unemployment benefits now and in the coming weeks. I am not out here by myself. I simply cannot imagine someone voting against extending unemployment to Elizabeth or Aaron or Ellen or if they know people who have lost their benefits, who have lost their jobs, their health care, or their homes. I cannot imagine anybody standing on the floor of the Senate, when their names are called, saying Mr. Burris, Ms. Stabenow, or Mr. Brown, and saying no. Lastly, Jane, from Champaigne County, west of Columbus near Dayton, in Urbana: I am an unemployed mother of two children. I will lose my unemployment benefits by the end of the month. I go above and beyond the minimum requirements to receive unemployment benefits. I apply to 4 to 10 jobs per week. It's not that I don't want to work, as some people are implying. I worked in the same job for ten years, since I was 19 years old. I lost that job through no fault of my own, which is the story of most unemployed Americans today. I have lost my house and my car. My family's American dream has been crushed. If this bill doesn't pass, my family's nightmare will be just the beginning. Please do whatever you can to urge your fellow Senators that this extension is needed. This vote shouldn't be about anything else except the American people. Mr. President, they could not have said it better. I can read their letters and meet with people like this, but I cannot understand because that has never happened to me. I wish my colleagues--those people who walk down in this well when their name is called and vote no on extending unemployment benefits to these workers--these people live in every State and, frankly, they should be ashamed of themselves for voting no. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I ask unanimous consent to speak in morning business on the Democratic time for about 10 minutes.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I come to the floor to plead with our Republican colleagues to pass the extension of unemployment benefits. I still am amazed, as are so many Ohioans and so many Coloradans and people from all over the country, that all of a sudden my colleagues care so much about the budget deficit, when if we go back 10 years, we had a budget surplus. Then three things happened. One was the war in Iraq. The Presiding Officer opposed it, as did I. But more than that, we went to war and didn't pay for it. We put the cost of the war on our children and grandchildren. There was not an outcry from anybody on the other side of the aisle saying we should pay for that war, that we should not go to war and charge it to the children and grandchildren. Around the same time, President Bush came to the Congress and asked for major tax cuts for the richest Americans. Again, the Presiding Officer and I opposed these tax cuts and said, at a minimum, if we are going to give tax cuts to the richest Americans, we need to find a way to pay for them. There was no interest on that side of the aisle when they were in the majority in paying for the tax cuts. Then soon after that, President Bush came to this body and the House, where the Presiding Officer and I served in those days, and asked for a huge subsidy for the drug companies and the insurance companies in the name of Medicare privatization. We both opposed that, but not only did we oppose it because we thought it wasn't done right--it was not the way to provide a drug benefit to seniors--but it was not paid for either. There was nary an outcry on that side of the aisle. So when it was a $1 trillion war, tax cuts for the richest Americans, and subsidies for the drug and insurance companies, there was no interest in paying for it; just charge that to the grandchildren. But now that it is workers who lose jobs, people who lose their insurance, people who then lose their homes, there seems to be an outcry: We can't do this. Forget the statistics; forget that there are 900,000 Americans losing their unemployment; forget the numbers. Listen to what people say. I am going to read four letters from around my State. I know the Presiding Officer gets them from Boulder and Colorado Springs and Denver. I know my colleagues get them from Tallahassee and Omaha and New York, letters from people who played by the rules, worked hard, lost their jobs through no fault of their own, who keep fighting to find jobs, keep sending out resumes. You have to do that if you are going to receive unemployment. And then their unemployment insurance ran out. I wonder sometimes if my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who are voting no every time we try to bring this up, if they know anybody who lost a job, if they know anybody who lost insurance, if they know anybody who lost a home. I plead with them, I ask them, the people who have voted no, to try some empathy. Try to imagine you are a father or a mother and you have lost a job, lost your insurance. You have a sick child. You are borrowing money. You are trying every week to find a job, and you are three payments behind on your home. You have to sit down at dinner one night--a pretty inadequate dinner because you are stretching every cent you have--and you have to explain to your son and daughter, 10- and 12-year-olds, that they will have to move out of their room, out of the house. Where are we going to go? I don't know yet, but we don't have much space. What you have collected in your room, we will have to give some of that away. What school will I go to? We don't know that yet either. I wish they would think of the human cost of what this means when people can't get unemployment insurance or can't get assistance in continuing health care insurance, so-called COBRA, with the subsidy the government paid for the last year and a half--something that had never been done before--so people can keep their health insurance. Zoe from Columbiana, a county just south of Youngstown, writes: I lost my job at the end of August. Until then I was gainfully employed. I worked hard to support my 13 year old twins at home. I am 50 years old. If [unemployment insurance] is not extended, things don't look good for my family. We have lived in a rural area for 12 years and chose this community because it is great for the kids. My house is not fancy or expensive. We don't waste money. We are falling behind payments on our electric bill. Pretty soon our service might be cut. We are just trying to hang on. Please make opponents of the extension realize that most people who are unemployed are not lazy. We lost our jobs, which can happen to anyone. Please help me. My colleagues don't understand, people voting against this don't understand that unemployment insurance is not welfare; it is insurance. You pay into it when you are working. You get help when you lose your job. That is the whole point. Most people hope they never draw unemployment insurance, of course. But that is what insurance is. Just like car insurance, you hope you don't have to use it. If you have health insurance, you hope you don't have to use it except for regular checkups. Monica from Hamilton County--Cincinnati, Norwood, that area, southwest Ohio--writes: My son was laid off last year. He soon enrolled in college at Cincinnati State to obtain an engineering degree because he was hoping to be more marketable in the future. He works hard. He is doing well. He is excited about a new life. But soon his [unemployment insurance] will expire. With other expenses, he is now afraid he may have to quit school and not be able to support his son. Please continue to work to pass an unemployment extension right away. This support is so vital to so many people right now. Joseph from Stark County writes: My July 4th will be nothing to celebrate since I will be out of unemployment benefits. Folks are not finding the jobs or the income to supplant the cash that goes to pay their mortgages and other expenses. Helping a whole lot of people to prevent another failure--like massive foreclosures--will save more in the long run. Please consider a vote to help us. He is right. The thing about unemployment benefits, it doesn't just help the family who gets the benefits; it helps them pay insurance and helps them stay in their home. Think of the ripple effect when they don't get it. It means if your home is foreclosed on, your next door neighbor's home declines in value. And then two streets away, somebody else is foreclosed on. Somebody else is foreclosed on across the street. The whole neighborhood begins to unravel. These are people's personal stories, people's lives. It absolutely matters. The other thing unemployment benefits do--John McCain, the Republican Presidential candidate, one of his top economic advisers said unemployment is the best stimulus to the economy because every dollar put in the pocket of Joseph from Stark County or Monica from Cincinnati or Zoe from Columbiana County, every dollar we give them in unemployment compensation gets spent. It is spent. It is spent in Canton and Cincinnati and Lisbon and East Liverpool. The dollars are spent going into the economy, and they have a multiplier effect that Senator McCain's economic adviser used to talk about, that that multiplier effect means generating economic benefits for everyone in the community--the hardware store, the local school, because you pay your property taxes, all the things that come with that. The last letter I will read is from Gerald from Wood County, south of Toledo, Bowling Green. Wood County is the site of the terrible tornado in Millbury that happened a couple weeks ago, where we are working with President Obama to get help for people whose homes were destroyed, and there were many. Gerald writes: I know Republicans are holding an extension to unemployment benefits. Quite frankly it makes me sick. I'm unemployed and am looking for a job--but the jobs are not out there. Most people must not realize what will happen when unemployment insurance runs out. We will suddenly have millions of people without the support they need to live on. Just think of what that will do to the nation's economy. Again, this is not a welfare program. It is an insurance program. It is not something people want to stay on. They have to show they are working to find a job. They have to continue to apply for jobs during this whole period. Most people in this country want to work. Most people want to protect their family and provide for their family and be good citizens. This is a bridge. Unemployment benefits--it is a bridge that has gone on longer than we had hoped because of the terrible economy President Obama inherited in January 2009, where three-quarters of a million jobs were lost that month. There has been some good economic news. Ohio, my State, in April had more jobs created than any other State in the country--37,000. Not enough, not where we need to go, not sustained yet, but some good economic news. But the unemployment benefits provide that bridge so people can get along until they find that job where they can begin again to rebuild their lives and join the middle class, as most of these people have been a part of for most of their lives. So I ask my colleagues, this time please vote to extend unemployment benefits, please support the help for COBRA, health insurance so people can stay insured and can get their lives in order until the economy improves enough where they are actually able to find a job. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, as we search for solutions to our twin challenges in the housing and energy sectors, we should pause to celebrate, remember, and learn from the life of a legislator who brokered solutions to these very same problems more than 30 years ago ``Lud'' Ashley, the distinguished gentlemen who represented the 9th Congressional District of Ohio. Thomas Ludlow Ashley represented the Toledo area from 1955 until 1981. He was a pragmatic progressive who knew how to broker a deal to move the Nation forward. He was tapped by the late Speaker Tip O'Neill to lead the effort to develop a bipartisan set of proposals to address the Nation's energy crisis. His work laid the foundation for the passage of a series of bills that aimed to reduce our dependence on oil and spur the research and development of new, clean energy sources. We could use his advice and counsel today. Congressman Ashley made a profound difference in the well-being of everyday Americans. He was known as ``Mr. Housing'' for his leadership of the House Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development. In this role, he authored landmark pieces of legislation in the Housing and Community Development Acts of 1974 and 1977. ``Americans sleep in better homes today because of Lud Ashley,'' Senator Ted Kennedy once said of Congressman Ashley. As a legislator, Congressman Ashley continued the family legacy of fighting for equality. His great-grandfather, who represented Toledo in Congress during the Civil War era, co-authored the 13th amendment abolishing slavery. A century later, Lud Ashley worked tirelessly to secure the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. An Army veteran, who served in the Pacific during World War II, Lud Ashley returned home to pursue his education. He earned degrees from Yale University and the Ohio State University College of Law. Hearing the call to public service, Lud Ashley ran and won the privilege of representing the 9th Congressional District of Ohio in 1954. His service was defined by a passionate but collegial devotion to liberal causes, one that earned him the respect and friendship of his peers on both sides of the aisle. I hope that my colleagues will take a moment to honor the life and legacy of Congressman Lud Ashley a great Ohioan and a great American.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I thank Senator Whitehouse for his comments. As Senator Whitehouse said, I have been in this body only since January of 2007. Most of the damage from the estate tax was done prior to our being here. But I spent some years before being elected to the Senate in the House of Representatives, and anytime we talked about the estate tax in the House, my Republican colleagues would use two terms. They would talk about the ``politics of envy'' and they would talk about ``class warfare;'' that Democrats were envious of success and that we were engaging in class warfare, wanting to turn one social class against another. But the issue here isn't any strong desire for us to engage in retribution against anybody or any class envy. The situation is this, and let's start with this chart. This is a percentage of estates subject to tax. The estate tax, which the Republicans called the ``death tax,'' does not impact 99.3 percent of people who die in this country. Their families pay zero estate tax. It is only, as Senator Whitehouse said, the absolute mega superrich. It is not people worth just a few million but only seven-tenths of 1 percent. That means it is 7 out of 1,000 who will pay any estate tax at all. And so this issue-- not aimed at any one person--raises the question of: What do we do instead? The Duncan family--this is Mr. Duncan, whom Senator Whitehouse talked about--died with $9 billion, and his family pays no estate tax whatsoever. Senator Whitehouse pointed out that if there are fewer than nine members of that family, they all woke up the next morning certainly very sad about their father or their uncle or their brother, but they also woke up as billionaires the next day, and our condolences go out to that family, but something has to replace this. If the estate tax was where it should have been, he would have--his family would have--paid the Federal Government $3 billion or $4 billion. What does that mean? It means that during this previous Congress--the 2002 and 2003 Congresses--when the Bush administration ran up this huge debt, with tax cuts for the rich, not paid for but passed on to our children and grandchildren; the Iraq war, not paid for and passed on to our children and grandchildren; the giveaway to the drug and insurance companies in the name of Medicare privatization, passed on to our children and grandchildren; and the billions of dollars of cost that was added to the bill, this would have helped pay for some of that. The $3 billion or $4 billion that would have been generated by the Duncan estate, where does that money come from? What do we replace that with? We either continue to tax middle-class people in this country too heavily or we cut programs for that $3 billion or $4 billion or we charge it to our grandchildren. And that is what has happened. As Senator Whitehouse said, it is a contrast. What do we do? We can do as Republicans do: We can deny unemployment compensation; deny COBRA insurance coverage, so people can keep their health insurance; deny Pell grants for people, which could be paid for by this $3 billion or $4 billion, or should we tax more people to pay for it? The Republicans didn't care about the budget deficit when it was the Iraq war. They didn't pay for the Iraq war. They didn't care about the budget deficit when it was the giveaway to the drug companies. Now all of a sudden they do. This is the face of people we deal with. This is a General Motors auto worker in Lorain, OH, somewhere near Dayton, where this GM plant closed in the last 2 years. These workers waiting here are losing their unemployment insurance because people on the other side of the aisle-- our Republican colleagues--simply would rather protect the super wealthiest people in our society--they would rather protect these seven-tenths or 7 out of every 1,000 people--and helping them pay no taxes, rather than taking care of this unemployed worker. That is the tragedy of the choices they have made. Those contrasts, as Senator Whitehouse said, are very clear, between Republicans wanting to protect the superrich and Democrats wanting to make sure that unemployment compensation is extended. These are human beings, each with a story. You can bet in this crowd some of these people not only lost their job but they lost their insurance, and some of them have lost their home as well. Because I know what has happened in the Dayton area, in Miami Valley. Far too many people have lost their homes. So while the Republicans are trying to protect the Duncan estate, with billions and billions of dollars in that estate, people such as Senator Whitehouse, Majority Leader Reid, who is on the floor, and Senator Kaufman want to see us take care of the unemployed workers, take care of those who have lost their insurance, take care of those who are faced with foreclosure because of the economic situation. As Senator Whitehouse said, these people didn't choose to be in this situation. As Warren Buffett said in 2007: The average American went exactly nowhere on the economic scale in the last 20 years. They have been on a treadmill while the super rich have been on a space ship. That is exactly what happened in this country. The wealthiest people have done better and better as their tax rate went down and down. Those middle-class kids who need Pell grants, the middle-class families who lost their jobs who are now on the unemployment line, those workers who have lost their insurance through no fault of their own--they lost their jobs--they are on this downward spiral which simply is not what our country stands for.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order following the remarks of the senior Senator from Oklahoma, Senator Inhofe.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 561, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, June 22; that following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and that following any leader remarks, the Senate proceed to a period of morning business until 12:30 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling the first 30 minutes and Republicans controlling the next 30 minutes, and the majority controlling the final 30 minutes.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements relating to the resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 560, and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam President, more than 57,000 Ohioans--that is about the size of Elyria, OH, or Mansfield, OH, or twice the size of Zanesville, OH--more than 57,000 Ohioans are estimated to have lost unemployment benefits since the extension ended in May 2010, a month ago. If the Senate does not pass an extension, that number will increase dramatically. More than 90,000 Ohioans could lose their benefits by the end of June. That is more people than live in Youngstown, more people than live in Springfield, OH, more people than live in Cleveland Heights or Lakewood, OH. Madam President, 90,000 Ohioans could lose their benefits by the end of June. Nationwide, since the beginning of June, some 900,000 workers have run out of jobless benefits. That number will surpass 1 million by next week. Now, those are numbers, and we can stand around here and debate back and forth, and talk about 50,000 here and 100,000 here and a million there. But later in my remarks I am going to share, as I often do, Madam President--as you and I have talked about--letters from people in Crawford County, Warren County, Pickaway County, and Hamilton County, OH, where I was earlier today--letters from people, individuals who are part of those 50,000 or 90,000 Ohioans who could lose their benefits. Senate Republicans are denying tens of thousands of Ohioans--and thousands of people in New Hampshire and hundreds of thousands of people in California and Texas and Florida--the Republicans are denying tens of thousands of Ohioans the unemployment insurance benefits they have earned during years of hard work. This year, this Chamber spent 9 weeks on the floor struggling to extend unemployment insurance and COBRA. Over the past week, every single Republican voted again and again to block a bill just to extend unemployment insurance. They chose to vote against extending COBRA, a critical benefit for workers who not only lose their jobs but also their health insurance. You know how this happens, Madam President. Someone is laid off from their job. They lose their income. Then they cannot afford their insurance. They lose their insurance--unless they are enrolled in COBRA. COBRA is a bit of a cruel hoax. In order to keep your insurance, you have to pay what you were paying as an employee when you had a job and full pay and you have to pay the employer side of the insurance in order to continue your insurance. That is why a year ago, in the stimulus package, for the first time in American history, the Federal Government helped people who had lost their insurance keep their insurance by paying about two-thirds of the COBRA premium. If you lose your job, you get a little bit of unemployment insurance, although the Republicans have blocked that. Then you lose your insurance. Then if you get sick, you are going to lose your house. When I hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle talk the way they do about unemployment insurance, they act as if it is a welfare program. Unemployment insurance, decidedly, is not a welfare program. We do not call it unemployment welfare. We call it unemployment insurance. What does that mean? It means when you are working--if you are an ironworker in New Hampshire, if you are a steelworker in Ohio or you work at Burger King in Cleveland--wherever you are working, you pay into this unemployment insurance plan. When you lose your job, if you are full time, you get money back, some of the money you paid in. It is called insurance. That is why we call it insurance. Yet my Republican colleagues act as if unemployment insurance is welfare. Well, it is not. It really is insurance. I think it is important we think about someone losing their job and not getting unemployment insurance, and then losing their health care, and then, very likely, in many cases, losing their home. We do not know many people like that because we dress like this and we make a good bit of money here and a good many of our colleagues are pretty insulated. They do not know a lot of people who have lost their job or lost their insurance or lost their home. But think about it, we should try to put ourselves in the position of someone who has lost their job, then lost their insurance, then lost their home. You are a family in Lima, OH, or Zanesville, OH, or Gallipolis or Dayton. First the breadwinner loses her job. Then they cannot afford the insurance. Then they get not really sick but sick enough that they have bills that have piled up. Then they cannot keep up with paying for their home mortgage. Then they get 3 or 4 months behind. Then they get a notice from the bank that they are going to lose their house. Think of what that does. Say you have two kids. You live in Dayton, OH. You have lost your job. You have lost your insurance. Now you are about to lose your house. You have to explain to your son and daughter in Huber Heights, a suburb of Dayton: Well, little Johnny and Jane, we are going to have to move, and we are going to move to a really small, little apartment, and we don't have any place to put all this stuff, and we are going to have to sell it or give it away. I don't know where you are going to go to school next fall because I am just really unsure of things. The son or daughter says: Well, mom, what about my friends? Where are we going to school? She says: I don't know yet because we don't have an apartment. I don't think my colleagues, particularly my Republican colleagues--who vote no on unemployment insurance benefits, who vote no on COBRA and helping people with their insurance and are unwilling to do anything about these foreclosures--I do not think they think about these individual situations. They look at statistics, like we do. They look at numbers, like we do. They debate this stuff. But I do not think they think about what it would be like if someone they knew or they themselves had to lose their job and their health insurance and their benefits. It is pretty simple in so many ways. As I said, employees pay into the unemployment fund when they are working. When they are laid off-- they did not ask to be laid off--they receive help from that fund. But when it comes to helping middle-class Americans, Republicans too often look the other way. They start talking about deficit spending. I am empathetic with that because I think we have to get our budget house in order. But all I can think of is where was this concern, where were my Republican colleagues, where were they when they voted for two wars--a war with Afghanistan and a war with Iraq--and did not pay for those wars? They took the cost of those wars, which is $1 trillion, which is 1,000 billion. That is 1,000 billion. A billion is a thousand million. So it is a thousand million: a trillion dollars. I know that is a little confusing. But they are spending $1 trillion. They are just charging it to our grandkids for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They do not worry about that being added to our grandkids' tab. Then where were these Republicans, where was the concern of the Republicans when they passed George Bush's tax cuts for the rich? That is why we have this huge budget deficit. In 2000, as the Presiding Officer knows, we had a budget surplus in our country, and then George Bush and the Republicans took over. Two wars; did not pay for it; charged it to our grandchildren. Tax cuts for the rich; did not pay for it; charged it to our grandchildren. A giveaway to the drug and insurance companies in the name of Medicare privatization; did not pay for it; charged it to our grandchildren. Now, when it is not giving money to the drug companies or paying for a war, or giving tax cuts to the richest people in America, now, all of a sudden, when it is unemployment insurance, a bunch of people who are laid off--or it is a bunch of people who have lost their health insurance--middle-class families, then, all of a sudden, they are concerned about the budget deficit. They did not care when it was shoveling money--hundreds of billions of dollars--for a war. They did not care when it was shoveling out money, hundreds of billions of dollars, for tax cuts for the rich. They did not care about the budget deficit when it was just shoveling hundreds of billions of dollars to the drug companies and the insurance companies. That did not matter. They did not care about the budget deficit then. Now, Republicans tell us: Oh, we can't extend unemployment benefits because it would add to the deficit. We cannot help with COBRA. We cannot help give some assistance to people for health care because that would add to the deficit. We cannot help the States with what is called FMAP, helping the States deal with their Medicaid costs going to many previously working families who have lost insurance. We cannot do any of that because all of a sudden the budget deficit is the most important moral question of our times. Where was this important moral question of our times when they added $100 billion--hundreds of billions of dollars--to the deficit for a war, for tax cuts, and for the giveaway to the drug insurance companies? I was in the House when the so-called prescription drug benefit, when they created that huge doughnut hole and gave all those subsidies to the drug companies and insurance companies. That vote took place in the dead of night while most Americans were asleep. Literally, that vote-- the rollcall--started at 3 o'clock in the morning. I was down the hall working there then. The vote started at 3 o'clock in the morning. An overwhelming number of Democrats opposed it. Some Republicans who actually believed that deficit spending was a problem--a few of them-- not very many voted against it. So the vote started at 3 o'clock. Usually, a vote in the House of Representatives takes 15 or 20 minutes. Three hours later, they woke up the President of the United States and had him start calling Republicans--George Bush then--to change their vote and vote yes. Finally, after 3 hours--history-making because the House of Representatives never took 3 hours ever; when my colleague from Oklahoma or my colleague from Maine, who are sitting here, were in the House of Representatives, they never saw us do anything like that-- 3 hours later, finally, President Bush twisted two arms--a Congressman from Idaho and a Congressman from Oklahoma--to change their votes, and they passed the bill in the middle of the night, this huge bailout. It was a bailout--there is no other word for it--a bailout to the drug companies and the insurance companies. It was not a benefit for seniors. We could have done that much more directly and much less expensively and given seniors a prescription drug benefit. No, the Republicans wanted to do a Medicare prescription drug bill. When you give tens of billions of dollars--hundreds of billions of dollars--to the drug and insurance companies and let some trickle down to seniors, that is really the way they believe in doing government. All of this hypocrisy must end. It is wrong. It does a disservice to the American people. Let me share a handful of letters that say this way better than I can say it about why unemployment insurance and COBRA are so important. Barbara from Hancock County--that is south of Toledo. Barbara writes: I cared for my cancer-stricken father while working full- time and raising my three young children. After my father died, I went back to college. I got an associate's degree, three certificates, and a bachelor's degree. Last year I lost my job. I have been looking for work ever since. I have mouths to feed and student loans to pay back. I don't take fancy vacations. I don't buy flashy expensive clothes. I am over 50. I should be preparing for retirement. Because I can't find a job, though, my small savings is gone. Without unemployment insurance, there is no help for me. I send out dozens of resumes, but no one is hiring. Please tell me what I can do. Because the extension has not passed, I will be living on the streets with my three children. Think about that. She is playing by the rules. She worked hard. She took care of her dying father. She has three children. She went back to school. Now she has lost her job, No. 1. No. 2, she has a mortgage; she wants to keep her house. She has children to feed. She has student debt because she did what so many of us want people to do, which is to go back to school and make something better of themselves. She lost her job. She can't get unemployment insurance because my Republican colleagues have said no to extending unemployment insurance. This isn't a political game. This isn't playing with a bunch of facts and figures. This is people like Barbara from Hancock County, OH. We all have Barbaras in every State of this country--people who have lost their jobs and need that unemployment compensation just to tread water. We don't want them to drown. They are not going to get ahead receiving unemployment benefits. They are not going to get rich. Remember, as my Republican friends forget, unemployment insurance is not welfare; it is insurance. You pay into it when you are working, you get help when you are unemployed. I know the Presiding Officer--whether it is in Eugene or whether it is in Portland or wherever it is in Oregon--understands these are people who are working hard. They lost their jobs. They paid into insurance. They should be eligible to receive unemployment compensation. Rebecca is from Crawford County, just 8 or 9 miles from where I grew up in Mansfield. Today is another day I am spending in tears and obsessed with fear. I am in the ranks of the unemployed. I was brought up with a sense of personal accountability and values. I have attempted every method I can think of to obtain a job to support myself. I won't burden you with a discussion of what it feels like to be uninsured and not be able to see a doctor when I am sick. You keep your fingers crossed. You pray you can treat what ails you with over-the-counter remedies. My unemployment insurance was allowing me to keep a roof over my head, although incurring massive credit card debt for the remainder of my essentials--food, gasoline, eating. Most of us who are looking for work want to return to a normal life. Please pass an unemployment extension so we can continue to survive and maintain a degree of dignity. Allow us to rebuild our country and our economy. I know I am one of millions and my voice alone means very little. Please ask your fellow Senators to at least acknowledge us. Think about what she said. She is obsessed with fear. Her future is uncertain. She has lost her unemployment. She has lost her job. She is not getting unemployment insurance now. She said she was brought up to believe in personal accountability, personal responsibility, and those values. She said: My unemployment insurance was helping me to at least get along, even though I was adding to my debt because unemployment insurance is never really enough to do all you need to do. She points out that, as most people do, she wants to work. She sends out resumes every week. You don't just get unemployment insurance by going like this. You get unemployment insurance by filing for it, showing that you are out of work. You have to show that you are searching for work, seeking work, and you can't find it in this economy. Whether it is Rebecca in Crawford County or Barbara in Hancock County or whether it is somebody from Oregon, you don't just automatically get a job. It is clear that it is hard to find work, and these are people who are out trying. If they are not able to find a job, they should be getting this unemployment extension. Three more letters, briefly. Georgetta from Warren County: I am an unemployed single mother of two children, 10 and 14. I was laid off through no fault of my own. I have been doing what I can to secure a new job. I am about to lose my unemployment insurance. How can I feed my children? How can I keep a roof over their heads? What am I supposed to do? My savings are gone. I have no health insurance. I am trying to find a job. I can take the pain, but I can't sit by and watch my children suffer through no fault of their own. Please help me. Please pass an unemployment insurance extension. I wish my colleagues who walk down into this well and, when their name is called, vote no--I wish they would meet people like Georgetta. I wish they would sit down with the Georgettas in their State and listen to their stories. I wish they would look at the pain in her face that she has because of her children suffering, not getting the food they need, the clothes, the books they need for school, not even sure she is going to have a roof over their heads. Think about that. Again, I think we don't know very many people--my colleagues who vote against unemployment insurance, my guess is most of them don't know anybody who lost their job, lost their insurance, lost their house. My guess is they haven't thought through the conversation a parent has with a son or a father has with his daughter telling them the news that they are going to have to move out of their house, maybe move into a different school district, maybe just not know about the future because they are about to lose their home they have lived in for the last 5 or 6 years. What is that like for a parent to explain that to a child? I ask my colleagues to try to empathize and try to put themselves in that position, when that conversation takes place, when parents have lost jobs and then health insurance and then their homes. Joe from Pickaway County, south of Columbus: I was laid off last year after working at a company for 13 years. I am still unemployed. I have lost my house, my car, my credit rating, and my liberty. I relied on unemployment benefits to feed my family. If UI is not extended, there will be people and families starving. Please do what you can to help us. This is in another part of the State, southern Ohio, Appalachia, OH. Joe worked at a place for 13 years. The company laid him off. He is unemployed. He has lost his house and his car and he is struggling. If we don't extend unemployment benefits--even with unemployment benefits, his life is not going to be very easy, but without it where does he turn? What does he do? He goes to food banks. He lives on the street. What does Joe do in Pickaway County if we don't extend unemployment this week? He shouldn't be waiting any longer. The last letter is from Amy from Hamilton County. That is where I was today, near Cincinnati. Amy is writing saying: I am among the many Ohioans who lost their job due to the economic downturn that started 2 years ago. My husband and I did not live beyond our means. We bought a modest house. We lived reasonably on what we could afford. I encourage you to continue to push through passage of the UI extension. It will help pay for basic bills like our mortgage, food and utilities. UI is crucial to my family's viability. Please do whatever you can to pass the extension. We want to restore our basic way of life. She is saying unemployment benefits would not make her life easy, would not even make her life comfortable in any way, but unemployment insurance would give her the bridge until she can, when the economy gets better, find a job. I conclude by just saying again that I hope my Republican colleagues, who have consistently voted no on extending unemployment benefits and helping people keep their health insurance, will open their eyes and look around their States and talk to people, look at the mail they are getting, look at what they are hearing from constituents on the Internet and e-mails and try to put themselves in the shoes of a father who lost his job and his insurance and has to explain to his kids they lost their house or a single mother who was renting and can't even pay the rent because she has lost her insurance and she is going to have to figure out how to explain to her children they will be in a different school district and they don't even know what it will be yet. As people without jobs often do, they change from one school district to another one, and their kids fall farther and farther behind. I ask my Republican colleagues who consistently vote no to try to empathize with those who have less privileges than we do, who don't have huge staffs and don't have a good salary and don't have good insurance and don't have a secure place to live, what their lives would be like if any one of us lost all of those privileges. I think it would make a difference in how they vote. Mr. President, I yield the floor. (Mr. MERKLEY assumed the Chair.)

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent that the Senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 tomorrow to allow for the weekly caucus luncheons.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session and that the Environment and Public Works Committee be discharged of the following and that they then be placed on the Executive Calendar; that the Senate then resume legislative session: PN1730, Malcolm Jackson; PN1672, Christopher Masingill; PN1572, Rafael Moure-Eraso; and PN1574, Mark Griffon.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the legacy of Dr. Robert Smith, cofounder of Alcoholics Anonymous, which is celebrating this year its 75th anniversary. Dr. Smith, commonly referred to as Dr. Bob, was a prominent surgeon in my State in Akron, OH, when his friend, Henrietta Seiberling, an heir to the Goodyear fortune, introduced him to New Yorker Bill Wilson in 1935. Dr. Bob and Bill Wilson's discussion that year on Mother's Day in Gate Lodge on the grounds of the Seiberling's Stan Hywet estate laid out the framework for the modern-day Alcoholics Anonymous. Having shared the common disease of alcoholism, Dr. Bob and Bill Wilson recognized the need to offer dignified healing of sobriety for all people who struggle with the disease of alcoholism. What started as an informal conversation in Gate Lodge on the Stan Hywet estate led to small group meetings and conversations at the home of Dr. Bob and his wife Anne on Ardmore Avenue. Dr. Bob and Anne subsequently opened their home to those seeking sobriety, and the understanding of the 12 steps that Dr. Bob and Bill Wilson were refining. As one of Akron's premier physicians at Summa Health's Akron City Hospital, Dr. Bob also understood that prevailing medical treatment was inadequate in treating a disease that did not discriminate among gender, age, culture, wealth, or social standing. This was an era when alcoholism was not understood as a disease, so those seeking treatment were not admitted to hospitals. Dr. Bob and Bill understood that the alcoholic needed the help of the ``Angel of Alcoholics Anonymous,'' Sister Mary Ignatia and St. Thomas Hospital. Dr. Bob took to bringing alcoholics from the back entrance of the hospital up to empty rooms in Sister Ignatia's unit. Sister Ignatia would ask Dr. Bob: Are they sick? Dr. Bob would respond: Very sick. Sister Ignatia replied: Then they shall come to the front door--a very different treatment of alcoholism than ever before. Sister Ignatia and St. Thomas Hospital then filled the void of the lack of formal treatment to help those battling alcoholism. They helped fill the gap in the lack of public and medical understanding of the disease. Therein lies the root of the modern Alcoholics Anonymous--in Akron, OH, on Olive Street--where St. Thomas Hospital remains an institution committed to offering health services to those afflicted with alcoholism. Since those early days 75 years ago in the 1930s, Dr. Bob and Sister Ignatia helped foment the public consciousness that alcoholism is, in fact, a disease; that it is never fully cured but only managed with self-determination and with family and community support. Dr. Bob and Sister Ignatia imbued a sense of urgency in the movement where literally the common refrain for those who live the disease is to live one day at a time. It is that sense of urgency that often found Sister Ignatia saying, ``Time is running out and I must work while I can.'' Earlier this week, the people of Akron gathered at St. Thomas Hospital to rename Olive Street ``Dr. Bob's Way'' to recognize his contribution to our Nation's history. And earlier this month, thousands of supporters of AA--alcoholics and family members throughout the Nation--traveled to Akron for Founders Day which celebrates the legacy of Dr. Bob and Sister Ignatia. Many visitors traveled to Stan Hywet Hall where they walked along the pristine landscape, walking past the Gate Lodge where AA meetings continue to this day. From that single conversation at Gate Lodge to Dr. Bob and Anne's home on Ardmore Avenue to St. Thomas Hospital on Olive Avenue, AA has turned into one of the most unified and diverse organizations in the world. Since its earliest days, AA opened its doors and services to all those who seek it, regardless of gender, age, socio-economic status, or sexual orientation. Fully self-funded, prominent statesmen and judges have sat alongside paupers and peasants--each seeking a shared experience and the support of each other. Today, 117,000 groups totaling more than 2 million members live in more than 150 countries and are working with them and being helped by AA. It all started in Akron. Ohio has often been an epicenter of our Nation's history--home of more Presidents, and poets to inventors and pioneers; first in light, first in flight--Thomas Edison, the Wright brothers, and so much else. We are also part of our Nation and our world's basic humanity. Through the Great Depression to the wars in the Pacific, Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, and Afghanistan, AA has been a source of strength for servicemembers and veterans. Across borders and devoid of religious affiliation, AA has been a source of faith for one's self. Whether a factory worker or physician, parents and educators, all are alike. Regardless of one's station in life, AA has been a source of resiliency, demonstrating the capacity for all of us to see the better stronger angels within ourselves and within others. To St. Thomas Hospital, now part of Summa Health, and the city of Akron, congratulations for carrying on Dr. Bob and Sister Ignatia's legacy for 75 years. More important, congratulations to the members and supporters of AA. Thank you for your service to our families, our communities, our Nation and for a greater humanity for all of us.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S.J. Res. 33, a joint resolution providing for the reconsideration and revision of the proposed Constitution of the U.S. Virgin Islands to correct provisions inconsistent with the Constitution and Federal law, introduced earlier today.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the joint resolution be read a third time, passed; that the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc; and that any statements related to the joint resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I want to talk about something else. I sat here, as did the Presiding Officer from Illinois, who was a strong supporter of passing this legislation that again failed because of the Senate's anachronistic, outmoded requirement of 60 votes, a supermajority. We could not get there because no Republicans--no Republicans--cooperated. We could not do today what we should do, and that is extend unemployment benefits to tens of thousands of Ohioans and millions of Americans. We could not extend the assistance to help them keep their insurance, which Senator Casey has worked so hard on, something called COBRA, so that people who lost their jobs would not lose their insurance. We could not help those physicians who are about to face a 21-percent cut in their payments. We could not stop the outsourcing through our tax system of too many jobs abroad. We could not do any of that today because we did not get any cooperation. I understand partisanship. I understand ideological differences. But what I don't understand is when I hear Republican after Republican stand on this floor and talk about the budget deficit, I am just struck. I have only been in this institution for 3 years. I was in the House of Representatives for 14 years before. I am struck by the utter hypocrisy when I hear Republicans all of a sudden decide deficits matter, all of a sudden decide everything needs to be paid for. When I was in the House of Representatives, George Bush came to Congress and asked for the authority to go to Iraq and did not even try to pay for it. I voted no, but that is beside the point. It passed. It was not paid for. Then President Bush came to the Congress again with a Republican majority and asked for huge tax cuts that overwhelmingly went to the richest Americans. They did not pay for that either. They charged that to our grandchildren. Then around the same time in the name of Medicare privatization, he asked for what he called a Medicare drug benefit, what I call a bailout for the drug and insurance industry, tens of billions in subsidies to drug companies and insurance companies, and they did not pay for that either. Throughout the first decade of this century, Congress has spent close to $1 trillion on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and did not pay for it. Nobody on that side said: Wait a second. We shouldn't do this without paying for it. Then Congress passed hundreds of billions of dollars of tax cuts for the richest Americans and did not pay for that. They did not say we can't do that unless we pay for it. They did the same thing for this give-away to the drug and insurance companies. Now when we want to extend unemployment benefits to people who have lost their jobs, when we want to extend some assistance for health insurance to people who have lost their health insurance, all of a sudden all these conservatives around here say we cannot do this unless we pay for it. Then their little cheerleaders on the Wall Street editorial board, and talk radio, and their people on Fox TV, like one bird flying off a telephone wire, they all fly off and say: We have to pay for it. They never said we have to pay for a trillion-dollar war. They never said we should pay for the tax cuts going to the rich people. They never said we should pay for these subsidies going to the drug companies. We start a war, we attack Iraq, we go to Afghanistan, and we charge it to our grandchildren. We give a tax cut to the richest Americans, and we charge it to our grandchildren. We pass this give- away to the drug and insurance companies, and we charge it to our grandchildren. But again, when it is time to help laid-off workers--we know what happens when a person is laid off. They almost act as if unemployment insurance is a welfare program. All I can think of when I see the behavior of refusal to extend unemployment insurance or the refusal to help people get health insurance when they have lost their jobs, all I can think of is most of my friends on the other side of the aisle, most of my colleagues must not know anybody who has lost their job, who has lost their insurance. They must not know anybody who, because they lost their job and their insurance, may next lose their home. Try to think about this. I know people who have lost their homes. I know people who were doing pretty well and lost their homes. I have tried to understand what it is like. You come home one day and for the last 3 or 4 months you tried to make your mortgage payment. You were late the first month. Then you got the second payment in on time. The next month you were late. The following month you could not pay and you realize you are in trouble. And then the bank comes to you and tells you they will foreclose. Think what that is like. You worked hard. Maybe your kids are still small. You have lost your job. You want to pay your mortgage, but you do not have the money to do it. So the bank is going to foreclose on your house. Think about that. You have three kids and your spouse has lost her job or you don't have enough money to make these payments and you are going to have to tell your kids: Guys, we are going to have to leave our house. Where are we going to live, Dad? We will try to move in with somebody. What are we going to do with all our stuff? I don't know; put it in storage. If we can't afford storage, I guess we will have to give it away. Think about what it would be like to lose your job, then your insurance, then to lose your home. That has happened to a whole lot of people who even look like me, people who dress well and have middle- class jobs. This just doesn't happen to a bunch of people who were just lazy and didn't do anything; this is happening to all kinds of people in this country. I wonder if my Republican colleagues--if the conservatives here who always preach self-reliance and always say we have to do better in this country and that people should have to stand on their own two feet-- really know people who have lost their jobs and lost their insurance and lost their homes. I think if they did, they might be willing to extend unemployment benefits; if they did, they might be willing to extend subsidies to help those people get their health insurance. That is what is so troubling about what has happened the last few weeks. We can't get 60 votes because we need some Republicans. We can't get 60 votes to extend unemployment to help people out a little bit. Again, unemployment insurance is not welfare. You have a job and you pay into unemployment every paycheck. You pay into this insurance fund so that if you lose your job, you get help from that fund. It is as simple as that. So, Mr. President, I guess my patience runs short--as is the case for many of us on this side--when I hear my colleagues saying we can't do this because it would add to the budget deficit. Yet they continue to vote for war funding, and they continue giving tax cuts to the richest people in America, and they continue to subsidize the drug industry in America. It is a moral question, and the Senate failed this moral question.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.