Mr. Chairman, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have simply put a new number on last year's bill without any apparent attempt to address the new realities of this worsening economy. That bill is, in terms, harsh and seems to be divorced from today's reality. As written, the legislation will impact some 48,000 families in my State of Massachusetts alone, which is now in its toughest economy in a decade. It would cost the State, which is already drowning in red ink, some $222 million over the next 5 years in order to implement what essentially are unfunded mandates. Health care and housing assistance are already being cut back, and in my district the unemployment rate is now 7.3 percent. In this type of an economy, we should be helping States, not putting a further strain on the safety net for America's families. Obviously, first we need a better policy to create jobs than the one being offered by this administration and the majority. But then we need this measure to be crafted so that it will actually help people qualify and enable them to fill jobs and to lift them out of poverty to self-sustainability. In the current economic climate, we have to look at the principles that really work. Education and training have to count towards the work requirement more than the bill on the floor allows for.
John Tierney: “Mr. Chairman, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have simply put a new number on last year's bill without any…”
Editor's note · Context
Criticizing a bill's impact on families and the economy during a House committee discussion.
Share
More from John Tierney
When we got into Congress that year after that election and the Speaker of the House now was the chairman of this committee, long time from Wisconsin, I offered an amendment to the bill that would fully fund IDEA. Not a single member of…
In view of Libya's challenges in building and stabilizing democratic institutions it seems advisable that we review whether or not the success of that country in transitioning has impacted its ability to meet national security requirements.
I think, two points, most appalling are that on Pell Grants, it would eliminate some $90 billion of the mandatory funding that we have already paid for going forward and then when you talk about student loan repayment benefits, it would…
At this time, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), who is the ranking member of the committee and, as the chairman of the committee has said, is no stranger to this issue. He has been a…





