U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

55–806 2010

S. HRG. 111–421 

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: NOVEMBER 2009 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE 

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

DECEMBER 4, 2009 

Printed for the use of the Joint Economic Committee 

( 

(II) 

JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE 

[Created pursuant to Sec. 5(a) of Public Law 304, 79th Congress] 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Chair 

MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York 

BARON P. HILL, Indiana 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland 

VIC SNYDER, Arkansas 

KEVIN BRADY, Texas 

RON PAUL, Texas 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, M.D., Texas 

JOHN CAMPBELL, California 

SENATE 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York, Vice 

Chairman 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania 

JIM WEBB, Virginia 

MARK R. WARNER, Virginia 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas, Ranking Minority 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah 

GAIL COHEN, Acting Executive Director 

JEFF SCHLAGENHAUF, Minority Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

MEMBERS

Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney, Chair, a U.S. Representative from New York .......... 1 

Hon. Sam Brownback, Ranking Minority, a U.S. Senator from Kansas ............. 3 

Hon. Elijah E. Cummings, a U.S. Representative from Maryland ...................... 4 

Hon. Kevin Brady, a U.S. Representative from Texas ......................................... 5 

Hon. Amy Klobuchar, a U.S. Senator from Minnesota ......................................... 6 

Hon. Michael C. Burgess, M.D., A U.S. Representative from Texas ................... 8 

WITNESSES

Dr. Keith Hall, Commissioner, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, DC; 

accompanied by: Dr. Michael Horrigan, Commissioner for Prices and Living 

Conditions, Bureau of Labor Statistics; and Mr. Philip Rones, Deputy Commissioner, Bureau of Labor Statistics ................................................................ 10 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Prepared statement of Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, Chair .................... 24 

Prepared statement of Representative Kevin Brady ............................................ 25 

Prepared Statement of Dr. Keith Hall, Commissioner, Bureau of Labor Statistics, together with Press Release No. 09–1479 .................................................. 26 

Chart titled ‘‘Monthly Change in Nonfarm Payrolls’’ ........................................... 57 

(1) 

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: NOVEMBER 

2009 

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2009 

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, 

JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE, 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:37 a.m., in Room 216 

of the Hart Senate Office Building, The Honorable Carolyn B. 

Maloney (Chair) presiding. 

Representatives present: Maloney, Cummings, Brady, and 

Burgess. 

Senators present: Klobuchar and Brownback. 

Staff present: Gail Cohen, Colleen Healy, Elisabeth Jacobs, Andrew Wilson, Lydia Mashburn, Jeff Schlagenhauf, and Ted Boll. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CAROLYN B. 

MALONEY, CHAIR, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW YORK 

Chair Maloney. The meeting will come to order. 

The Chair recognizes herself for an opening statement, and then 

later each Member will have five minutes for their opening statements. 

For the first time since the recession began two years ago, the 

labor market has stabilized. Employment remained steady in November, and the unemployment rate ticked down to 10 percent. 

The current Administration took office less than 11 months ago. 

The economy was in the midst of the worst crisis since the Great 

Depression. In fact, the Council of Economic Advisers Chair, Christina Roemer, testified before this Committee that the shocks we endured in this great recession were actually worse than those in the 

Great Depression. 

Less than a year ago, job losses were growing more and more severe. Last November, the economy shed 600,000 jobs. Losses increased until January when they hit a post-Great Depression 

record of 741,000 jobs lost, the last month that former President 

Bush was in office. 

But we turned a corner. Job losses have steadily fallen for the 

past six months, and today we have learned that the labor market 

remained stable in November. The trend is heading in the right direction. 

There is no escaping the cruel math of recoveries. The recovery 

of the job market lags behind the recovery of the broader economy. 

Businesses must have more customers before they add more employees. 

2 

However, thanks to the Recovery Act we are now seeing signs of 

growth. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates 

that at least 600,000 additional workers were employed in the 

third quarter of 2009 because of the stimulus. 

We are on track to create or save at least 3.5 million jobs over 

the life of the Recovery Act. Average weekly hours are climbing, 

with indications that the manufacturing sector is driving that upward trend. 

Average hourly earnings are up, too, and job creation in the temporary help sector is a leading indicator of progress in the labor 

market. 

Since July, temporary help services has added 117,000 jobs, 

86,000 in November alone. Although the labor market appears to 

be stabilizing, too many Americans remain out of work. More than 

15 million workers are unemployed. 

At the Joint Economic Committee we estimate that well over 4 

million Americans have seen their employment-sponsored health 

insurance coverage evaporate because of job loss. 

In the longer term, the passage of comprehensive health insurance reform will help assure that a lost job no longer means lost 

access to affordable, quality health care. 

In the meantime, we must ensure that a jobs’ crisis does not turn 

into a health care crisis for more families. The COBRA benefit program allows laid-off employees to remain insured by purchasing 

continuing coverage from their employer’s health insurance plan. 

Many out-of-work families were able to purchase affordable 

health insurance coverage, thanks to temporary COBRA premium 

support included in the Recovery Act. But that support expired this 

week, and many unemployed families will see their premiums skyrocket. Congress should now extend COBRA support to help struggling families. 

Today’s jobs report makes it clear we are making progress, but 

the road to recovery will be long and it will not be easy. While we 

have brought the economy back from the brink, we are not yet 

where we need to be in terms of jobs creation. 

The mission is to create high-quality, private-sector jobs. Yesterday, President Obama convened a jobs summit where small and 

medium sized businesses, major employers, academics, and working men and women in labor brainstormed ideas for putting Americans back to work. 

In the last year, Congress has enacted policies that support 

struggling families and encourage jobs creation. The $700 billion 

Recovery Act included a tax cut for 95 percent of American families 

and created jobs, while investing in clean energy, infrastructure, 

and education. 

Just last month we extended the $8000 first-time home buyer’s 

credit that will help spur construction jobs. We extended a host of 

safety net programs that will help struggling families weather this 

economic storm. 

We extended the net operating loss carryback provision that will 

help small businesses hire new employees, and we are boosting 

funding for small business loans via the Small Business Administration. 

3 

Congress is continuing to work on new policies that will jump 

start job creation. Putting unemployed Americans to work rebuilding our Nation’s crumbling infrastructure is an investment in our 

future. 

Other potential policies include targeted tax credits for job creation, and additional investments in education, health care, and 

energy independence. 

In the coming months, the Joint Economic Committee will be 

holding a series of hearings about job creation ideas from some of 

America’s best and brightest. 

I encourage you all to attend next Thursday’s hearing with Nobel 

Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz who will be kicking off a 

series on job creation ideas. 

I thank the panelists for being here, and I recognize my colleague 

and good friend and Ranking Member Senator Brownback. 

[The prepared statement of Representative Maloney appears in 

the Submissions for the Record on page 24.] 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE SAM BROWNBACK, RANKING MINORITY, A U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS 

Senator Brownback. Thanks, Chair Maloney. I appreciate it, 

and I appreciate the hearing here today. 

Commissioner Hall, good to see you again. Good to see these 

numbers improving. While they are not building yet, they are not 

falling as fast, and so that is generally one of the signs we look for 

in a recovery is that the trend line, though in a fall, stops going 

quite as fast. So I am glad to see that, and glad to see temporary 

help services rise, which is usually another significant feature that 

we look at. 

I have several, though, strong concerns about this. It seems to 

me most of this is probably built on monetary policy not fiscal policy; that it is the Fed flooding the market with money that is doing 

this, creating what I fear could be, if we do not handle it right, a 

government bubble that follows the housing bubble that follows the 

dot com bubble taking place here; and that what we are seeing is 

a government bubble happening. 

These bubbles, it seems like they develop quicker and with more 

frequency, and with more problems each cycle as they go and they 

come around. That is one of the big concerns I have is that, and 

monetary policy. 

I do not think the fiscal policy situation is helping much at all, 

and I think it long term is a significant detriment to us because 

of the huge debt and deficits that are being run. 

The other thing that is very problematic to me in what is taking 

place now is the talk about raising of taxes and centralizing more 

and more things—whether those taxes be in the health insurance 

field, whether these taxes be on cutting the Bush tax cuts and putting more taxes into place; what the message is that small business 

is getting around this country is: Look out, your taxes are going up. 

The thing that put the Japanese—one of the things that put 

them into their lost decade was this raising of taxes at the time 

they were just starting to come out of their deep recession and deflationary situation. 

4 

So what you have got for us is this coming out, probably, hopefully, in the unemployment situation. And then right as you come 

back up to the line you say, okay, now we are going to raise your 

taxes? To where then people that would employ, or would hire people are saying, well, I am not going to do that until that situation 

is stabilized. And you drive yourself back down into it. And your 

recovery is primarily built on monetary policy in the first place 

which has probably run its string here in the Fed in the next six 

to nine months is probably going to start raising rates and pulling 

back on some of the monetary policy. 

So I think we are in a very precarious spot. I would really hope 

that the Administration would stop the discussion on raising taxes, 

whether it is through cap and trade, or health care, or not extending the Bush tax cuts, and start talking about what it is that we 

can do to stimulate the overall economic environment and not 

through spending but for having a better environment for small 

business to grow and prosper. 

Because otherwise, I think we really do risk ourselves of going 

into a—going down again in a very problematic situation with having a lot fewer tools at our disposal to be able to use. 

Commissioner Hall, I look forward to hearing your specifics on 

this testimony today. It is my hope in the Senate we do not pass 

the raising of taxes on health care and cutting of Medicare. I think 

it would really send a bad signal at this point in time. I think it 

would be harmful, very harmful, to our overall economy. It is my 

hope that it will not happen in this body, and we are in session 

today and are going to be discussing that very thing. 

Thanks, Chair. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you very much. 

Congressman Cummings. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ELIJAH E. 

CUMMINGS, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM MARYLAND 

Representative Cummings. Thank you very much, Madam 

Chair. 

I want to thank you so much for holding this hearing again. It 

is certainly good to see you, Commissioner Hall. 

The report we received this morning is a clear indicator that the 

economy is slowly returning to growth. Today’s jobs report shows 

employers cut 11,000 jobs in November, the smallest decline since 

the recession began. And despite the fact that there were over 7 

million jobs lost in the current recession and a 10 percent unemployment rate, job losses have moderated since last month’s report. 

While the economic situation is not ideal, we know we are seeing 

signs of a recovery. According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, 

GDP rose at an annualized pace of 3.5 percent in the third quarter 

versus 2.3 percent in the second quarter. 

And of course for most Americans, jobs are the key to a successful recovery and they have not been quick in coming. Americans 

want jobs that will put food on their tables, help send their children to college, and allow them to keep their homes warm at night. 

To support these efforts, President Obama held a forum yesterday to discuss the methods of creating jobs and expanding the 

economy. 

5 

I just want to refer, Madam Chair, to the editorial in The New 

York Times dated December 3rd. Of course this was before the 

summit. But one of the things that they say in there, in that Times 

editorial which I agree with, they said: 

‘‘Mr. Obama must make the case that the immediate need for 

more federal help trumps the longer term need for deficit reduction. Otherwise, the economy is in for a self-reinforcing stretch of 

joblessness that would cost more in the end than additional spending today. Mr. Obama should detail separate plans for taming the 

deficit, including ironclad commitments to pay for health care reform. What he must not do is continue to conflate the need for job 

creation with the need for deficit reduction, to the detriment of 

jobs. 

‘‘Once job creation has the priority status it deserves, the next 

step is to build on proven programs and add new ones to address 

the scale and nature of joblessness.’’ End of quote. 

To support the efforts of President Obama, I think we need to 

take a look at some things that would be extremely helpful. Plans 

within that agenda must address reducing our deficit, while simultaneously building programs. For example, passage of the Transportation Bill, and the Clean Water bill necessary to provide funding for job creation. 

That is something we can do immediately. Unemployment is at 

record levels nationwide, but the impact on the African American 

community is especially devastating with the last unemployment 

rate of 15.6 percent. 

According to a recent New York Times article, race remains a serious obstacle in the job market for African Americans, even for 

those with degrees from respected colleges. 

The unemployment rate for Black male college graduates 25 

years and older is 8.4 percent, compared with 4.4 percent for White 

male college graduates. 

I am encouraged by the efforts of President Obama and the 

Democratic Congressional Leadership in working toward a jobs 

package prior to adjournment. However, we must ensure that the 

entire Nation is brought along into his recovery. 

To that end, a comprehensive jobs package must include the creation of public service jobs improving our Nation’s schools and infrastructure, and strengthening small, disadvantaged businesses. 

We must do all that we can to protect and defend our individual 

constituent, as well as small businesses and institutions that employ them. 

So as we await Commissioner Hall’s testimony on the November 

employment statistics, I would like to close with the acknowledgement that, despite the progress we have made so far, we know we 

have a long way to go. 

With that, Madam Chair, I yield back. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Brady. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE KEVIN BRADY, A 

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM TEXAS 

Representative Brady. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

6 

Welcome, Commissioner Hall. Well the number of jobs lost is better than expected, which is good news. But we cannot celebrate a 

10 percent unemployment rate, especially when the long-term unemployment rate continues to grow in very troubling numbers. 

Our economy continues to bounce along the bottom. Retail was 

up slightly. Temporary jobs were up slightly, and health care of 

course continues to add jobs. 

But key sectors—manufacturing, construction, and this month 

information technology, telecommunications—shed jobs, which I 

will be asking you about, Commissioner Hall, as well because on 

the telecom side that surprised me a bit. 

I was pleased to see the President host a jobs summit. I still 

think there is a disconnect. As I listen to proposals for more government spending, another $300 billion stimulus II, the truth is 

the greatest hurdle to our recovery continues to be businesses’ reluctant to add new workers with Washington contemplating higher 

health care costs, energy costs, more regulation, and new taxes. 

Congress and this White House are frightening the horses. It 

needs to stop, because it is the private sector, not the government, 

that will move America into a sound economic recovery. 

As long, again, as Washington is saying grow jobs, jobs, jobs, and 

pushing on the peddle, but because of taking their eye off the ball 

on jobs and promoting issues that in fact frighten businesses and 

making them less likely to add jobs, we are putting brakes on 

them. 

So again, the sooner I think Washington gets a handle on its 

debt which scares consumers, stops promoting higher taxes which 

scares businesses, and starts looking at real incentives for business 

investment, only then will the private sector be able to lead us into 

a sound economic recovery. 

With that, I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Representative Kevin Brady appears 

in the Submissions for the Record on page 25.] 

Chair Maloney. Senator Klobuchar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE AMY KLOBUCHAR, 

A U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA 

Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

Greetings, Commissioner Hall. It is good to be here again. 

I want to, first of all, focus on this unemployment number. It is 

clearly some improvement, and it is a step in the right direction, 

but I still believe that Americans of all stripes, especially the middle class, continue to struggle in some of the toughest economic 

times that we have seen since the Great Depression. 

I always like to remind people at these hearings of what people 

in our State are saying. Here is a letter we just received the other 

day from a woman named Diane in Minneapolis. She said: 

I have been unemployed for more than a year, and all my unemployment benefits have expired. I have a masters degree, 25 years 

of experience, and as of today I have submitted more than 288 applications for jobs, made countless telephone calls, did all the appropriate networking, and went to every job fair that came to town, 

and I cannot get a job. Any influence you can bring will be greatly 

appreciated by me and the millions of people like me. 

7 

While parts of our economy are clearly stabilizing with the Dow 

Jones over 10,000 again, it is clear that other parts of the economy 

are still struggling. We need to make sure that all Americans, not 

just the folks who happen to work on Wall Street, feel that we are 

digging ourselves out of the hole. 

And I am glad that the President held his job summit yesterday, 

and I’m hopeful that, as we go ahead, there is going to be a newfound focus on small businesses. 

The number is quite staggering. Over the past 15 years, small 

businesses created 64 percent of net new jobs, nationally, and 

that’s why I’m very interested. 

A group of Senators, including Senator Mark Warner, has suggested that a portion of the TARP money that has come back, that 

has gone to mega-businesses, be devoted to getting the credit market flowing in small businesses again. 

Freeing up this flow of credit, so that our banks can start lending 

to small businesses, will make a big difference. According to a 

Treasury Department report released in mid-November, the 22 

banks that have received the most funding through TARP have cut 

their collective small business loan balances by $10.5 billion over 

the past six months, although I should note that of the top ten 

banks that are the biggest small business lenders, US Bancorps, a 

Minnesota-based bank, was one of two banks that has actually increased its small business lending since April of this year, so that 

there are definitely some banks out there that are doing their part. 

However, at a time when Wall Street, after emerging from its 

struggles on the backs of taxpayers, is set to pay outrageous bonuses again, while unemployment remains uncomfortably high for 

too many Americans, like the woman, Diane, the letter I just read, 

I am forced to ask the question, when is enough, enough, and how 

do we make sure that this money gets out there to continue to generate jobs? 

Part of it is the extension of unemployment that this Congress 

recently authorized, so that we have that safety net in place, the 

healthcare reform we’re doing, but the other part of it is looking 

long-term. 

To me, this means a bigger focus on making things and reducing 

our debt, and less of a focus on this consumption economy and 

some of the spending that has gotten us to where we are. 

So, I believe, if you look at the long-term, the small business job 

generation has got to be a piece of this. It means not just some 

short-term help with credit, but it also means looking at the export 

market. 

Ninety-five percent of the customers right now, for small- and 

medium-sized businesses, are outside of our borders. Thirty percent 

of small businesses say that they would like to export, but they 

simply don’t have the means to do it; they don’t have the department like you’d have at good corporations like we have in Minnesota, like Cargill or 3M, that can have their own internal people 

help them figure out where their new products can be marketed 

across the world. 

The Commerce Department, the Foreign Commercial Service, 

does a very good job. We need to get that out there, we need to 

make sure they have the resources, and really set up a business 

8 

match dot-com, so that these small- and medium-sized businesses, 

at a time when the Dollar is weak, and so that there is a great possibility for them to enter these markets, can really build their export market, as well. 

I don’t think this is pie in the sky, if you look at the numbers 

and how much businesses are helped by just even a one- or twopercent increase in exports, and you look at what some of the countries have done in Europe to promote exports. Fifty-eight percent 

of our exports from our country, are either to Canada or Mexico. 

So, as we look at these unemployment numbers and the good 

work of Commissioner Hall, I think we need to think forward, to 

not just be short-term policies that we’ve worked on with the stimulus and the extension, but some of the long-term thinking of how 

we better position our country, so that we are in the driver’s seat 

again and determining our own destiny in this international economy. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you very much. Congressman Burgess. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MICHAEL C. 

BURGESS, M.D., A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM TEXAS 

Representative Burgess. Thank you, Madam Chair. Along 

with the rest of the Committee, this was actually the first month 

since February, when I joined the Committee, that we’ve had a 

number that wasn’t higher than the month before. 

In fact, there was one economist back home in my District, who 

pointed out the fact that ever since I had joined the Committee, the 

unemployment figures went up every month, and perhaps I should 

consider another Committee assignment. 

So I’m grateful that the number has gone down today. I don’t 

know that it’s cause for a great deal of celebration because we’ve 

all heard the talk about the green shoots in the economy in the 

past, and other folks talk about how it’s hard to tell between green 

shoots and the wild weeds that are growing up through the cracks 

of the parking lot that no longer contain cars. 

Last month’s number was troubling, this month’s number is also 

troubling. We are very close to a post-Great Depression high of 10.8 

percent, and the percentages, the numbers, don’t tell the complete 

story. 

Ten percent unemployment means that one out of five Americans 

is unemployed, underemployed, or just plain given up and out of 

work. Ten percent means that one out of nine families can’t make 

the minimum payments on their credit cards. 

Ten percent means that one out of eight mortgages are in default 

or foreclosure. Ten percent means that one out of eight Americans 

is on Food Stamps and more than 120,000 families are filing for 

bankruptcy every month. 

Furthermore, the economic crisis has wiped out more than $5 

trillion in wealth from pensions and savings. This is what’s facing 

our middle class. 

You know, we’ve had Elizabeth Warren before this Committee 

before. I don’t frequently agree with her, but yesterday she wrote 

an article entitled ‘‘America Without a Middle Class,’’ and some of 

her language was very forceful. 

9 

Although I disagreed with her conclusions at the end, she stated, 

and I’m quoting here, ‘‘When various forms of this creative banking 

triggered the economic crisis, the banks went to Washington for a 

handout, and all the while top executives kept their jobs and retained their bonuses even though the tax dollars that supported 

the bailout came largely from the middle class, from people already 

working hard to make ends meet. The beneficiaries of those tax 

dollars are now lobbying Congress to preserve the rules that had 

let those huge banks feast off the middle class’’ end quote. 

She was also right when she said, continuing to quote, ‘‘Pundits 

talk about populist rage, as a way to trivialize the anger and fear 

coursing through the middle class, but they have it wrong. Families 

understand with crystalline clarity, that the rules that they have 

played by, are not the same rules that govern Wall Street,’’ close 

quote. 

So, when we focus on an unemployment rate or maybe we’ll get 

the actual U–6 number, the true unemployment rate, later on this 

morning, it’s hard to think that Congress would willingly do anything more to help the rich or can conceive of enough to really help 

the poor. 

But it is the middle, the large swath with the backbone of our 

society, who are now seeing that if they work hard, they save, they 

fight to educate their children, become the same stewards of their 

families and their communities, that the Federal Government will 

not be there to help them, or, more importantly, the Federal Government shouldn’t be hurting them with omnibus bills and capand-trade bills and healthcare bills, when they need help the most. 

And you’ve got to focus on the next generation. One perspective 

of this ten-percent unemployment number is that it reflects three 

million young adults, all under the age of 30, who cannot find a job, 

kids that have recently graduated from community college, all the 

way up to Harvard Law School. 

If we cannot teach our next generation on how to be gainfully 

employed the moment they finish school, we’ve permanently set 

them back for the rest of their lives. 

As Senator Brownback and Congressman Brady have eloquently 

described the problems facing small business, I have a steady 

stream of people through my office that tell me, well, the conditions 

in Texas are perhaps improving a little bit and they wouldn’t consider adding a job—and I’m not talking about Google or the big insurance companies; I’m talking about a lady that runs a saddle 

making business; I’m talking about a guy that runs an air conditioning compressor remanufacturing business; I’m talking about a 

guy that runs a cardiologist’s office; I’m talking about a guy that 

runs a financial services office. 

They’ve been hammered, and they’re hunkered down. They are 

not going to add jobs, because they look up here at Washington and 

see Congress tinkering in all of these areas where, arguably, we 

don’t belong, and there’s no way they’re going to add to their payroll. 

Well, okay, that’s just one job in a small mom-and-pop financial 

services or a small cardiology shop, but when you extrapolate that 

across the broader economy, I mean, every politician stands up on 

a stump sometime and says that small business is the engine that 

10 

creates jobs well coupled with reduced consumer spending, because 

people, unlike the government, when they don’t have money, 

they’re not anxious to spend money they don’t have, they don’t 

have access to capital, even though we’ve put all this money into 

banks—— 

We’re focusing on Wall Street, and, to some degree, Main Street, 

but, really, we should consider what’s going on on Oak Street and 

Elm Street back home because this is where the job growth will 

occur. 

You know, one of the crazy things is, we’ve got a big highway bill 

that we all know we need to do, and that’s just sitting there. We 

did a huge stimulus bill in February, which didn’t produce the results it was supposed to, but we’re not doing the work on the highway bill, which is one of those things that, arguably, would produce 

some of those infrastructure jobs that are so desperately needed. 

And, unlike the transportation jobs or the infrastructure jobs in 

the stimulus bill, these would be real, long-term projects. We’re 

kind of coming to the end of whatever shot in the arm we got with 

the stimulus, with the small amount of money that was put into 

transportation infrastructure. 

Chair Maloney. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Representative Burgess. Potholes have been filled, and those 

people are being let go. Thank you. I’ll yield back the balance of 

my time. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you. I’d now like to introduce Commissioner Hall. Thank you for being here. 

Dr. Keith Hall is the Commissioner of Labor Statistics for the 

U.S. Department of Labor. The BLS is an independent national 

statistical agency that collects, processes, analyzes, and disseminates essential statistical data to the American public. 

He also served as Chief Economist for the White House Council 

of Economic Advisers. 

Thank you for being here and we look forward to your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF DR. KEITH HALL, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF 

LABOR STATISTICS, WASHINGTON, DC; ACCOMPANIED BY: 

DR. MICHAEL HORRIGAN, COMMISSIONER FOR PRICES AND 

LIVING CONDITIONS, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS; AND 

MR. PHILIP RONES, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF 

LABOR STATISTICS 

Commissioner Hall. Thank you. Madam Chair and Members of 

the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the employment and unemployment data we released this morning. 

The unemployment rate edged down to ten percent in November, 

and non-farm payroll employment was essentially unchanged. Additionally, after revision, the estimates of job loss for September 

and October were smaller than reported last month. 

In November, job losses occurred in construction, manufacturing, 

and information, while employment rose in temporary help services 

and healthcare. 

Construction employment fell by 27,000 over the month, compared with an average monthly decline of 63,000 in the prior six 

months. In recent months, most of the decline has occurred in the 

non-residential components. 

11 

In manufacturing, employment fell by 41,000 in November, about 

in line with the trend over the prior four months. 

There were notable job cuts over the month in machinery, computer and electronic products, and printing. The factory work week 

rose by three-tenths of an hour, and has increased by one full hour 

since May. 

In November, employment in the information industry declined 

by 17,000, with telecommunications accounting for half of the loss. 

Employment in temporary help services rose in November. The 

industry started the year with large job losses, averaging 69,000 

per month through April. 

Recently, the industry has added jobs, with gains averaging 

48,000 per month in October and November. Over the month, employment continued to increase in healthcare, with gains in home 

healthcare and hospitals. Since the recession began, healthcare has 

added 613,000 jobs. 

Turning now to some measures from the Household Survey, the 

unemployment rate edged down from 10.2 to 10.0 percent in November. The rate was 4.9 percent when the recession began in December of 2007. 

There were 15.4 million unemployed persons in November, down 

slightly from the prior month. The number of persons who are unemployed because of job loss declined in November. The number of 

long-term unemployed continued to grow, rising by 293,000 over 

the month, to 5.9 million. 

The employment-to-population ratio held at 58.5 percent. When 

the recession began, it was 62.7 percent. 

Among the employed, the number of persons working part-time 

in November, who would have preferred to work full-time, was little changed at 9.2 million. 

Among those outside the labor force, that is, persons neither 

working nor looking for work, the number of discouraged workers 

in November was 861,000, up from 608,000 a year earlier. 

These individuals are not currently looking for work, because 

they believe no jobs are available to them. 

In summary, non-farm payroll employment was essentially unchanged in November, and the unemployment rate edged down to 

ten percent. 

My colleagues and I would now be happy to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Commissioner Hall appears in the 

Submissions for the Record on page 26.] 

Chair Maloney. Thank you. What are the bright spots in this 

month’s jobs report? What good news do you have for the American 

people? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, the first, of course, is that the unemployment rated edged down and the job loss at minus 11,000 was 

essentially unchanged for November. 

I also think that we now get a picture of a prior three months, 

prior to November, that job loss had moderated a fair amount to 

135,000 a month. 

And, looking forward, temporary help added 52,000 jobs. That’s 

a pretty reliable leading indicator, and that has been steadily improving, actually, through the year—through much of the year. 

12 

And then the average weekly hours for manufacturing is also a 

leading indicator. That increased by three-tenths of an hour, and 

has shown steady improvement. 

Chair Maloney. And are there any sectors experiencing more 

job creation than job losses? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, the sectors that had significant job 

gains were the temporary help services, which is typical, after large 

job loss like we’ve had. And we also had job growth in education 

and healthcare, as well. 

Chair Maloney. And are there any indicators that overall job 

losses will continue to slow in coming months? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, I think that a couple of the leading 

indicators, the temporary help and the average work week in manufacturing, are both encouraging, and I think the fact that, in addition to this November number, the prior three months showed 

moderation, I think is a good sign, as well. 

Chair Maloney. So we’re seeing some good signs, for a change? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Chair Maloney. And what is the typical amount of time, after 

job contraction ends, before the labor market starts showing signs 

of recovery? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, if showing signs is a moderation in 

job loss, and I think that is a sign, that can occur just a few 

months after we start to see signs of growth in output. 

It is likely—in the past, it’s been true that strong job growth has 

taken a few months after we get growth in the output side of the 

economy. 

Chair Maloney. Could you speak about how we have recovered 

in the past recessions? Usually, employment has lagged behind economic recovery. Is that true, and would you elaborate on job 

growth coming after positive economic indicators? 

Commissioner Hall. Sure. In past recessions, it’s taken a few 

months for job loss to moderate to where it’s around unchanged or 

very modest job loss. 

In the last recession, it took about four months after the end of 

the recession, for job loss to moderate down to something like 

35,000 a month. In the recession before that, it took about three 

months for job loss to actually get to around unchanged. 

But to actually get strong job gain, in the past two recessions, 

it’s been something like a year and a half after that, before we got 

strong job growth. 

Chair Maloney. A year and a half? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Chair Maloney. Some economists have estimated that it will 

take 10.7 million jobs created, to get us back on the pre-recession 

unemployment rate. 

Assuming that jobs are created at 2.8 million jobs per year, the 

best job creation record of any Administration—and this was 

achieved by former President Clinton—how long would you expect 

it to take us to get us back to full employment? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, without offering an opinion on that 

10.7 million jobs, at that rate, though, it would be about three 

years. 

Chair Maloney. About three years, okay, thank you very much. 

13 

The Chair recognizes Senator Brownback. 

Senator Brownback. Thank you very much, Chairman. 

Commissioner Hall, who hired temporary people? You noted that 

the temporary numbers went up. Who hired the temporary people? 

Do we have those by category; do we have those in any major categories? 

Commissioner Hall. We actually don’t, and that’s in large part 

because a lot of the temporary help companies that specialize in 

this, they actually can’t tell us in what industries the job growth 

occurred, so we actually don’t know that information. 

We know that about occupations, but we don’t know very much 

about what industries they’re being hired in. 

Senator Brownback. That would seem to be an indicator of 

where likely hiring would take place, after they fill the temporary 

job, that they would more likely step up with a full-time job; is that 

correct? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Senator Brownback. I agree with Senator Klobuchar, that, I 

think, in the future, we’ve got to make more things here and rely 

less on our consumer to spend our way into prosperity in this economy. 

Do you see any trends of signs of that in these numbers, in either 

what’s falling or what is starting to create some jobs? 

Commissioner Hall. It’s hard to tell on the employment numbers at this time, what the economy is going to look like when we 

get back to solid economic growth, whether consumer spending will 

go back to quite the level it was before. 

I just don’t think we could say right now. 

Senator Brownback. And you don’t break it out any way like 

that, or you can’t pick that out of the numbers of the data? 

Commissioner Hall. Not really the employment numbers so 

much, no. Obviously, on the output side, if you look at the components of GDP, you can see consumer spending and sort of see how 

that’s behaving. 

But most of these employment numbers are sort of indirect. You 

know, there is the indirect effect of economic growth. 

Senator Brownback. You are trying to determine what a 

‘‘green job’’ is. I believe you’ve—can you provide me with any details on current efforts by BLS to define and measure ‘‘green jobs’’? 

Commissioner Hall. Sure. We have a proposal to work to measure ‘‘green jobs’’ in our 2010 budget, in our Budget proposal from 

the President. We haven’t had the appropriation yet, so our work 

at this point has been research, so far. 

I can tell you that we’re likely to, first, focus on industries where 

there may be ‘‘green employment’’ or ‘‘green output,’’ and then focus 

on occupations within those industries. That’s sort of our rough 

plan and how we’re going to proceed, once we get funding. 

Senator Brownback. Can you tell, in your numbers, where 

there was a policy movement that was made and jobs created, or 

a policy move made and jobs hurt? 

Here, what I’m getting at, is, on the Cash For Clunkers Program, 

there was a lot of discussion about the maintenance of jobs within 

the automobile manufacturing sector, with that. Can you pick that 

up or any of those factors, or monetary policy factors, in any of 

14 

your numbers, that jump out at you or any of the economists at 

BLS? 

Commissioner Hall. No, it’s very hard for us to pick out the 

cause of changes in these numbers, because we’re just sort of 

counting the number of jobs, and, in fact, the establishments that 

we survey, they don’t always know why their business has picked 

up. 

So it’s very hard for us to sort of pull out the effects of policy like 

that, certainly not all of the effects. 

I can tell you one possible exception, and this is the Cash for 

Clunkers. We don’t know what the full effects are. There may be 

much more, but we certainly did see a pick-up in retail sales at 

automobile dealerships when Cash For Clunkers was in place, but 

beyond that, I couldn’t tell you what the effect is. 

Senator Brownback. Thank you, thank you, Chair. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you very much. Congressman Cummings. 

Representative Cummings. Thank you very much. 

Let me make sure I understand this. Since this—when would you 

say this recession began? 

Commissioner Hall. It began in December of 2007. 

Representative Cummings. I didn’t hear you. 

Commissioner Hall. I’m sorry. December of 2007, so it’s been 

23 months. 

Representative Cummings. And during that period, what was 

the highest number of jobs lost? 

Commissioner Hall. That’s a good question. 

[Pause.] 

Representative Cummings. And what month was that? 

Commissioner Hall. In January of this year, we lost 741,000 

jobs. 

Representative Cummings. In January of this year? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Representative Cummings. Now, so this month, we lost how 

many? 

Commissioner Hall. Eleven thousand. 

Representative Cummings. Eleven thousand. We went from 

700-and-some thousand in January of this year, to 11,000 this 

month? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Representative Cummings. That’s a major cut. 

Commissioner Hall. Yes, it is. 

Representative Cummings. It’s major now? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Representative Cummings. I mean, people may want to downplay it, they may want to say that it’s no big deal, but it is a big 

deal; would you agree? 

Commissioner Hall. I would agree; this is the smallest monthly 

job loss we’ve had since the recession started. 

Representative Cummings. Since the recession started. 

And let’s go back to this temporary situation. I’ve heard you say, 

from that chair, many times, that one of the things you look at— 

and you said it today—one of the things you look at with regard 

to temporary jobs, is that when you—they basically are an early inVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:03 May 19, 2010 Jkt 055621 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\55806.TXT SHAUN PsN: DPROCT
15 

dicator that we may be moving—a pretty good indicator that we 

may be moving in the right direction, as you see them go up; is 

that right? 

Commissioner Hall. That’s correct. And it was a leading indicator, going into the recession, and it generally, in the past, has 

been a leading indicator, coming out of a recession. 

Representative Cummings. So, going into recession, help me 

with that. Tell me what you’re looking for. 

Commissioner Hall. Sure. Well, for example, in temporary 

help, the temporary help industry started having declining job 

growth, in, I’d say, early 2007 to mid-2007, so it was showing signs 

of a slowing in the labor market in early 2007, before we went into 

the recession in January of 2008—or December of 2007. 

Representative Cummings. You know, teenagers have been 

especially hard-hit during this recession. As the economy recovers, 

are teens going to be the last to be hired, I mean, from what you 

can see, and are we creating a lost generation of youth? 

You know, there was—I read something just recently, that African American youth from 16 to 24 had a jobless rate of over 35 percent. I’d say that that’s—you know, I don’t know how accurate that 

is, but I would say that it’s probably worse than that in many districts. 

I was just wondering, what can you see from your teenage rates? 

I mean, it was young people’s rates, and I don’t know whether you 

break it down, 16 to 24, how you break that down, but however you 

do it, tell me what that situation is. 

Commissioner Hall. Sure. Yeah, the—in all the categories of 

workers, no matter what age, what gender—oh, I’m sorry, no matter what gender or their minority status, their unemployment rates 

are higher than everybody else. 

They’re higher, they’ve gone up more during this recession, they 

generally started higher, as well. 

Representative Cummings. A lot of people—this is a comment 

and not for you to answer—a lot of people want to say that maybe 

it’s education, but there’s been recent research that an African 

American male with a high school diploma and no record, no criminal record whatsoever, is just as—I mean, he—he’s—when it comes 

to employment, he’s level, just about, with a person, a white male 

with a record. 

And then so you and I have talked many times about this whole 

thing of race. It is significant, sadly, in this day and age. 

What is the unemployment for white folks in America? 

Commissioner Hall. The unemployment rate is 9.3 percent. 

Representative Cummings. That’s 9.3 percent? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Representative Cummings. And for African Americans, what 

is it? 

Commissioner Hall. It’s 15.6 percent. 

Representative Cummings. Now, what was it last time for African Americans, the last time, last month? 

Commissioner Hall. Last month, it was 15.7 percent. 

Representative Cummings. So they’ve come down one point. 

And what was white for last time? 

16 

Commissioner Hall. It was 9.5 percent, so it’s come down twotenths. 

Representative Cummings. Okay. And what about Hispanics? 

Commissioner Hall. Hispanics is at 12.7 percent. It’s declined 

by four-tenths of a percent. 

Representative Cummings. I see my time is up. Thank you, 

Madam Chair. 

Chair Maloney. Okay, Congressman Brady. 

Representative Brady. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I think 

we ought to always look for good news with these numbers, and 

there is some today, but I do caution this Congress against any 

kind of end-zone dance just yet on this economy. 

Our GDP growth for the last quarter was just revised downward 

to 2.8 percent; the number of long-term unemployed increased to 

almost six million workers in America, which is very troubling. 

And in our unemployment numbers, we are—America continues 

to be the worst-performing country when it comes to job losses, of 

any of our major competitors. Other countries are stabilizing faster 

and recovering faster than we are, and that’s important as we 

move forward and to keep in perspective. 

I always wonder, you know, is all this government spending 

working? And in the massive effort, while I think we’ve taken our 

eye off the ball on jobs and focused on cap-and-trade and 

healthcare and a number of other distractions, jobs have suffered. 

The stimulus bill, we were told, poured billions of dollars into infrastructure, and we’re told construction and manufacturing would 

see the greatest job gains; they’ve seen among the greatest job 

losses. 

We poured—and the question I have, initially, for you, is, this 

government’s poured billions of dollars into health IT, into telecom 

funding, broadband employment, yet this report today shows 

17,000 job losses in information and telecom. What’s the reason for 

that? 

Commissioner Hall. I don’t know. I can tell you that the 17,000 

decline is about on average over the past twelve months, so it’s 

been a little bit of a trend lately. 

And in the prior six months, it was still about the same, so—— 

Representative Brady. These aren’t one-time job losses; this 

continues to be steady job losses in those areas? 

Commissioner Hall [continuing]. Yes. 

Representative Brady. Okay, can I ask about—I want to be 

real realistic about how long it will take us to dig out of this hole. 

The Wall Street Journal recently calculated that if the number of 

payroll jobs goes at the same rate as it did during the last expansion, that it would take nearly seven years to get back to where 

we were, to regain 7.2 million payroll jobs that have been lost. 

A number of economists, in the same publication, have estimated 

that it will take five to six years before we see a five-percent handle on unemployment again. You just said that it would only take 

three years to get back to full employment. 

That’s a big difference. 

Commissioner Hall. Yeah, I was using some assumptions that 

came from the question. We haven’t done this calculation ourselves. 

17 

Representative Brady. Would you consider them to have been 

fairly rosy assumptions, compared to average expansions after recessions? 

Commissioner Hall. You know, it’s hard to tell. You know, it’s 

hard to know where we’re going to come out with this expansion, 

what sort of job growth we’re going to have. 

Representative Brady. How long—can I ask—it is a big guess, 

and I’m sure it’s a huge range, but based on today’s report, how 

much would household employment have to increase, for us to get 

back to eight percent and then to five percent unemployment, 

would you guess? 

Commissioner Hall. I’d have to think about that a little bit. We 

probably need monthly payroll job growth something in the 115,000 

to 120,000 a month, to—that’s consistent with a holding unemployment rate, so we’d need growth somewhere over that in payroll 

jobs, to start reducing the unemployment rate, over a long-run time 

period. I can tell you that. 

I’m not sure I could do the calculation quick enough. 

Representative Brady. And that works off about 1.4 or 1.5 million jobs a year, regains, 1.5 million, so, if we’ve lost seven, we’re 

talking about four or five, somewhere in that range, if we were to 

gain at that rate consistently? 

Commissioner Hall. Oh, at that rate, that’s correct, although 

that’s a fairly slow rate, but, yes. 

Representative Brady. Okay, all right, thank you, Commissioner. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you. I just would like to respond to my 

good friend and colleague, Congressman Brady, who noted that 

Democrats should not be dancing in the end zone. We certainly are 

not dancing in the end zone. 

The President is taking job creation incredibly seriously, as is 

every member of Congress on both sides of the aisle. But if you 

look at the chart, you have to admit we are trending, under the 

Democratic Administration, in the right direction. 

The last month that former President Bush was in office, we lost 

700,000 jobs, and we have consistently moved in the right direction, to this month, where it is 11,000 jobs. It is a tragedy for every 

American family that has lost a job in the past or in the present, 

but we are trending in the right direction. 

[The chart titled ‘‘Monthly Change in Nonfarm Payrolls’’ appears 

in the Submissions for the Record on page 57.] 

The Chair recognizes Senator Klobuchar. 

Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Maloney. I think that chart is a very good way of looking at this, even 

though we know people are still suffering, to see the changes over 

time. 

I will also note for the record, that the only people dancing in the 

end zone, are the Minnesota Vikings, after Brett Favre has thrown 

these great passes, just in case you guys missed it. [Laughter.] 

Okay, my question, first of all, generally, Commissioner Hall, is 

about why we’re seeing this trend? Could it have anything to do 

with hiring for the holiday season, or do you see it as a broader 

signal of economic recovery? 

18 

Commissioner Hall. It would have to be the latter. Our data 

is seasonally adjusted, so we take into account, the normal seasonal patterns like the holidays, into account in estimating these 

numbers, so this means more than just seasonal. 

Senator Klobuchar. So you actually anticipate, when the holidays are coming up, that you’re going to see some bump-up, and 

you sort of discount that effect? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes, exactly. 

Senator Klobuchar. Okay, well, I didn’t know that. That’s 

good. 

We hear repeatedly that unemployment is one of the last things 

to swing back as part of a recovery. When you look back through 

history, with all the many years you’ve been looking at these figures, how long does it usually take unemployment to catch up with 

the other economic indicators, like, as we know we’ve seen increase 

in GDP and other things? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, that’s actually going to be one of the 

debates, I suppose, but the last two recessions, it took a long time. 

Focusing on the payroll jobs, for example, the last recession, it took 

39 months for payroll jobs’ level to get back to the pre-recession 

level. 

In the prior recession, it took around 24 months. Those are the 

two so-called ‘‘jobless recoveries.’’ 

Senator Klobuchar. For the jobless recovery, then, what years 

were those? 

Commissioner Hall. 2001, and, then, before that, it was the 

1991. 

Senator Klobuchar. So, in 2001, it took 39 months? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Senator Klobuchar. And in 1991, it took how long? 

Commissioner Hall. Twenty-four months. 

Senator Klobuchar. Twenty-four months? And then do you 

have those figures of when other economic indicators improved before the job numbers went up, or a general sense of it? 

Commissioner Hall. Yeah, yeah, I mean, my count down there 

was from the official end of the recession, and that, typically, when 

the National Bureau of Economic Research—that’s the independent 

group that declares a recession over—they typically will pick the 

end of a recession when the output numbers start to show growth 

and steady growth, and so I would say the number I gave you was 

pretty accurate delay from the time some of the other data showed 

improvement, to when the jobs data got back to—— 

Senator Klobuchar. Oh, so you’re saying there’s, like, a 39- 

month delay? 

Commissioner Hall [continuing]. Yeah. Now, this is not—this 

delay is not before we see improvement in the labor market; this 

is before we see enough—— 

Senator Klobuchar. Where it’s back to where it was? 

Commissioner Hall [continuing]. Yeah, exactly, that the job 

level is back to where it was. 

Senator Klobuchar. Okay, so that’s why you wouldn’t be surprised that it’s taking some time to get back to where we were before this all started? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes, absolutely. 

19 

Senator Klobuchar. Okay. As you know, we discussed that the 

President held a jobs forum yesterday, with more than 100 CEOs 

and small business owners, business leaders, mayors, academics, to 

figure out what we should be doing here in Washington, beyond 

what’s already been done to get the job market going again. 

Do you have any sense of what’s worked best in the past for creating jobs? 

Commissioner Hall. I don’t. I wouldn’t want to offer an opinion 

on that. 

Senator Klobuchar. Oh, that’s right, I forgot that you don’t 

offer opinions. 

I have some ideas that I expressed in my opening statement. One 

of the things that I talked about, in addition to getting some of this 

amount of this TARP money out, in addition to a large amount 

going to deficit reduction, to also go to small business credit. 

Do you have a sense of what’s happened in the past in terms of 

the statistics for U.S. exports and how that has led to significant 

job creation? 

Commissioner Hall. Yeah, I think, certainly, U.S. exports can 

be a significant stimulus. I’d have to say, from past experience, 

that U.S. exports rely, in large part, on growth outside the U.S. 

And if you sort of look at the economic growth in some of our 

major trading partners, that would give you a pretty good idea of 

how exports will pick up and what kind of stimulus that may be. 

Senator Klobuchar. So you’re saying there’s clearly a connection between more buying power in some of these other countries, 

and then we do better with our exports? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Senator Klobuchar. And so the fact that we’re suddenly seeing 

some of these other countries that have been developing countries, 

starting to put more money, basically, into consumers’ hands, that 

we’re starting to see some increase in their living standards, that 

you could—from there, could be the possibility that you’d see the 

open markets for more opportunities for exports? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Senator Klobuchar. All right. Could you look back in time for 

me—and you don’t have to do it right now, obviously—to see if you 

can see some connection between the unemployment in our markets and times when we’ve had this opportunity arise, either because of the weak Dollar or increasing markets for exports? 

Because, again, as I said in my opening, there’s just this startling number, if you could even increase it by one or two percent, 

and we’ve got 95 percent of our potential customers outside of the 

United States’ borders, with small and medium businesses having 

so little access to that, with increasing access within the last few 

years. I just see that as part of the improvement. 

I’ve seen it firsthand in our agricultural community in Minnesota. You know, we could—I could eat as much bacon as I want 

on TV to show that pork doesn’t have H1N1, but what really helps, 

is when China finally opens its markets to our pork. 

All right, thank you very much, Commissioner. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes 

Congressman Burgess. 

20 

Representative Burgess. Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner Hall, let me ask you a couple of questions that I know you 

can’t answer. 

You said that the recession started in December of 2007, correct? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Representative Burgess. George Bush was the President. Who 

was the Speaker of the House in December of 2007? 

Commissioner Hall. The same as now. 

Representative Burgess. And that would be Nancy Pelosi? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Representative Burgess. And she had been Speaker for a year 

at that time, and at that point we had come from an economy that 

was in relative expansion to an economy that was coming into decline. 

Now, has that been the same Speaker of the House since 2007 

to the present time? 

Commissioner Hall. Yes. 

Representative Burgess. Do you think that Congress really 

has an effect in creating or eliminating jobs in this country? Be 

careful I’m asking you for an opinion. 

Commissioner Hall. Yeah, yeah, and I was going to—I was just 

about ready to dodge it. [Laughter.] 

Representative Burgess. Well, and that is—of course, you 

don’t have to answer the question because we’ve got people all over 

the federal district today talking about how Congress is going to 

create jobs, how the White House is going to create or save jobs, 

but, really, it’s small business that creates jobs. 

We have the White House Summit going on and they’ve got all 

the big actors, they’ve got the Googles and the big folks down there, 

but as I said in my opening statement it’s Elm Street and Oak 

Street. 

I think Senator Klobuchar has an excellent point. I have difficulty with some of the trade agreements that we’ve done in the 

past, but now it’s been a year since we’ve done a trade agreement. 

Is that a good thing or a bad thing in a country that’s trying to 

recover from a recession and reduce unemployment? 

Commissioner Hall. Well, I can give you a generic answer, and 

the generic answer is, of course, is, lots of times, exports can be a 

real source of growth and stimulus for an economy. 

Representative Burgess. And, again, I’d just emphasize that 

it’s been a year since we’ve done any sort of trade agreement, and 

some agreements, like Columbia, have been languishing since they 

were passed by—or introduced in the last Congress, and we’ve been 

blocked by the Speaker of the House, from having a vote on that. 

Now, we could argue the rightness or wrongness of that, or 

whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing, but we can’t argue, because it can’t come up for a vote, so we can’t debate it on the floor. 

And to the extent that Congress does bear some responsibility for 

the loss of jobs or the lack of job creation, I think that’s one of the 

things that has to be considered. 

And we all know from—I’ve got to be careful here, because, of 

course, I’d be asking you to offer an opinion and I know I must not 

do that, but we look at previous times where the White House has 

made a difference in job creation in this country, and, in my brief 

21 

lifetime, that was when President Kennedy reduced the marginal 

tax rates and when President Reagan did the same thing in the 

1980s. 

And, after both of those activities, we saw substantial job growth. 

In 2003, shortly after I arrived in Congress, we had some other tax 

policy instituted, at a time where the economy was in a recession 

and job growth was lagging, and it was a result of that tax policy, 

three months later, after it was signed into law in July of 2003, 

where we began to see substantial job creation. 

I just wonder if we shouldn’t be looking at those things that have 

worked in the past. 

Now, interestingly enough, we had a stimulus bill that passed in 

February. And the stimulus bill had in it, as part of the stimulus 

bill, there was—we’re going to invest in infrastructure, we’re going 

to create shovel-ready jobs or go to shovel-ready jobs around the 

country, February is a good time to do that, because the construction season is going to be starting in the northern part of the country in just a few months time, but out of that $787 billion stimulus 

bill, my state of Texas received $2 billion for infrastructure 

projects. 

It seems like a fairly weak effort, but probably more importantly, 

the GAO report that has just come out states that the Federal 

Highway Administration is the best agency to fulfill job creation. 

Now, in the stimulus bill, the whole Federal Highway Adminis- tration only got $27 billion, and, as I pointed out, Texas got $2 billion, but also, because we have not done the highway bill reauthorization, we are having to rescind money back to the Highway Trust 

Fund in Texas. Texas had to send back $787 million in long-term 

funding, which put projects that were, indeed, shovel-ready a year 

ago, has put them now off the docket. They’re not even being considered. 

So, does it make sense to provide a stimulus of $2 billion to Texas, but then take $787 million away in what otherwise should 

have been stable highway funding? 

[No response.] 

Representative Burgess. That’s actually a yes or no question. 

Commissioner Hall. Oh. 

Representative Burgess. Does it make sense? [Laughter.] 

Not really an opinion, but I guess it could be regarded as an 

opinion, and you may want to dodge it, but does it make sense? 

Chair Maloney. The gentleman’s time has expired, but Commissioner Hall may answer his question. 

Commissioner Hall. I’m not an expert in that, so I’ll dodge 

that. 

Representative Burgess. The answer is, no, it doesn’t make 

sense. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Chair Maloney. Thank you. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

While some of my good friends and colleagues would like to find 

a negative spin to these numbers today, people on Main Street and 

the markets have found that today’s news is nothing but good. The 

Dow Jones opened up over 100 points; the Dollar surged, the price 

of oil fell, and, most importantly, this chart shows that in January, 

the last month that President Bush was in office, we were losing 

700,000 jobs. 

22 

Every job lost is a tragedy, but under the Bush Administration— 

the Obama Administration, we’ve been trending in the right direction, and, this month, we only lost 11,000 jobs. It’s 11,000 jobs too 

many, and the Administration has responded with the Congress in 

passing the American Recovery Reinvestment Act, which has jumpstarted productivity, the extension of unemployment insurance that 

has given hope to American workers that are still looking for jobs, 

aid to states that has maintained public and private programs for 

some of the neediest Americans, and we are starting a series of 

hearings on job creation ideas, working with the President and others, and we look forward to working with the American people to 

get this economy moving even more in the right direction, and we 

will not stop until we have created a job opportunity for everyone 

who wants to go to work. 

I thank you, Commissioner Hall, for your hard work, and thank 

my colleagues for being here today. I look forward to seeing you 

next week on Thursday. The meeting is adjourned. 

Representative Brady. Madam Chairman? I was just going to 

say, I hope you have great holidays, and, Commissioner, we appreciate—although we tend to torture you each month when you come 

here, we do appreciate very much, the information you provide. 

We hope you and the whole BLS have a great holiday season. 

Commissioner Hall. Thank you. 

[Whereupon, at 10:41 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(23) 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

24 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CAROLYN MALONEY, CHAIR, JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE

For the first time since the recession began two years ago, the labor market has 

stabilized. 

Employment remained steady in November, and the unemployment rate ticked 

down to 10 percent. 

The current Administration took office less than eleven months ago. The economy 

was in the midst of the worst crisis since the Great Depression. 

In fact, Council of Economic Advisers Chair Christina Romer testified to the Joint 

Economic Committee that the shocks we endured in this ‘‘Great Recession’’ were actually worse than those of the Great Depression. 

Less than a year ago, job losses were growing more and more severe. Last November, the economy shed 600,000 jobs. Losses increased until January, when they hit 

a post-Great Depression record of 741,000 jobs lost, the last month that President 

Bush was in office. 

But we turned a corner. Job losses have steadily fallen for the last six months. 

And today, we’ve learned that the labor market remained stable in November. The 

trend is heading in the right direction. 

There is no escaping the cruel math of recoveries. The recovery of the job market 

lags behind the recovery of the broader economy. Businesses must have more customers before they add employees. 

However, thanks to the Recovery Act, we are seeing signs of growth. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that at least 600,000 additional workers were employed in the third quarter of 2009 because of the stimulus. We are ontrack to create or save at least 3.5 million jobs over the life of the Recovery Act. 

Average weekly hours are climbing, with indications that the manufacturing sector is driving that upward trend. Average hourly earnings are up, too. 

And, job creation in the temporary help sector is a leading indicator of progress 

in the labor market. Since July, temporary help services has added 117,000 jobs— 

86,000 in November alone. 

Although the labor market appears to be stabilizing, too many Americans remain 

out of work. More than 15 million workers are unemployed. 

At the Joint Economic Committee, we estimate that well over 4 million Americans 

have seen their employment-sponsored health insurance coverage evaporate because 

of losing a job. In the longer term, the passage of comprehensive health insurance 

reform will help assure that a lost job no longer means lost access to affordable, 

quality health insurance coverage. In the meantime, we must insure that a jobs crisis does not turn into a health care crisis for more families. 

The COBRA benefits program allows laid-off employees to remain insured by purchasing continued coverage from their employer’s health insurance plan. Many outof-work families were able to purchase affordable health insurance coverage thanks 

to temporary COBRA premium support included in the Recovery Act. But that support expired this week, and many unemployed families will see their premiums skyrocket. Congress should now extend COBRA support to help struggling families. 

Today’s jobs report makes it clear—we are making progress, but the road to recovery will be long, and it will not be easy. While we have brought the economy back 

from the brink, we are not yet where we need to be in terms of job creation. The 

mission is to create high-quality private-sector jobs. 

Yesterday, President Obama convened a Jobs Summit where small- and mediumsized businesses, major employers, academics, and working men and women 

brainstormed ideas for putting Americans back to work. 

In the last year, Congress has enacted policies that support struggling families 

and encourage job creation. The $700 billion Recovery Act included a tax cut for 95 

percent of American families and created jobs while investing in clean energy technologies, infrastructure, and education. 

Just last month, we extended the $8,000 first-time homebuyers credit that will 

spur construction jobs. We extended a host of safety net programs that will help 

struggling families weather the economic storm. 

We extended the net operating loss carry-back provision that will help small businesses hire new employees. And we are boosting funding for small business loans 

via the Small Business Administration. 

Congress is continuing to work on new policies that will jump-start job creation. 

Putting unemployed Americans to work rebuilding our nation’s crumbling infrastructure is an investment in our future. Other potential policies include targeted 

tax credits for job creation and additional investments in education, health care, and 

energy independence. 

In the coming months, the Joint Economic Committee will be holding hearings to 

learn about job creation ideas from America’s best and brightest. I encourage you 

25 

all to attend next Thursday’s hearing with Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph 

Stiglitz, who will be kicking off job creation. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KEVIN BRADY, SENIOR HOUSE REPUBLICAN, JOINT

ECONOMIC COMMITTEE

I am pleased to join in welcoming Dr. Hall before the Committee this morning. 

Today’s employment report again is bad news for American workers. During November, 11,000 payroll jobs were lost. The unemployment rate edged down to 10 

percent. 

The lack of job creation has caused an unemployment crisis for our country. Even 

if the National Bureau of Economic Research eventually determines that a recovery 

began this fall, it remains a jobless, or even worse, a ‘‘job loss’’ recovery. And that’s 

no recovery for American workers and their families. 

Instead of ‘‘focusing like a laser beam’’ on the unemployment crisis, President 

Obama and congressional Democrats have spent most of this year promoting misguided initiatives to address other, less pressing issues. For example, even though 

the ‘‘climate-gate’’ scandal has compromised the integrity of studies frequently cited 

to prove man-made global warming, President Obama and congressional Democrats 

continue to press for a ‘‘cap and trade’’ scheme that would boost U.S. energy prices, 

slow economic growth, and put American manufacturers and their workers at a 

competitive disadvantage globally. 

Acknowledging both the strengths and weaknesses of our health care system, 

Americans sensibly want to fix what’s wrong step-by-step and leave what’s right 

alone. Ignoring this common-sense approach, President Obama and congressional 

Democrats are pushing for a complete overhaul of the health care system that would 

simultaneously boost taxes, limit choice, increase costs, and add to future federal 

budget deficits once accounting gimmicks are stripped away. 

I applaud President Obama for finally turning to our most pressing domestic challenge—the unemployment crisis—by hosting a jobs summit, but I have to wonder 

what concrete results will come of the discussions. 

In January, two of President Obama’s top economists forecast that if the Congress 

were to enact the Obama stimulus bill, then the unemployment rate would remain 

at or below 8.0 percent during 2009. This is the relevant standard against which 

to measure the performance of the stimulus legislation. Unfortunately, since President Obama signed the stimulus bill into law on February 17th, the unemployment 

rate has increased far above 8 percent. 

Administration officials continue to make extravagant, statistically dubious claims 

about how many jobs the stimulus plan has allegedly created or saved. The press 

examined the reports on which the Administration based its jobs claims and 

indentified many jobs that have no connection to the stimulus or were counted multiple times. Some cases of misreporting are so ludicrous that the Administration’s 

jobs claims have become the butt of jokes. 

In contrast to the Administration’s difficult-to-substantiate claims, Bureau of 

Labor Statistics employment data show that the United States has suffered a net 

loss of 2.9 million payroll jobs since President Obama signed the stimulus bill into 

law. 

If President Obama really wants to create millions of new jobs, there is a lot that 

Republicans and Democrats can do together to reduce the unemployment rate. We 

know what works. We can take cues from Democratic President John F. Kennedy 

and Republican President Ronald Reagan, each of whom launched a decade-long 

economic boom that created millions of jobs. 

First, we must control the growth of federal spending to bring down federal budget deficits, scaling back or delaying costly new initiatives. 

Second, we must stop all tax increases on American families and businesses as 

long as the unemployment crisis persists. 

Third, we must reduce the tax burden on new business investment. Business investment is very responsive to changes in the tax burden placed on it. Most importantly, business investment creates new and frequently better jobs. 

We could reduce the tax burden on business investment in several ways—Kennedy instituted a 7 percent investment tax credit, while Reagan accelerated tax depreciation. We also should reduce our high corporate income tax rate. 

I am encouraged that President Obama has finally acknowledged the unemployment crisis. I hope that we can learn from history and finally do what will actually 

boost growth and create jobs. 

Dr. Hall, I look forward to hearing your testimony. 

26 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KEITH HALL, COMMISSIONER, BUREAU OF LABOR

STATISTICS

Madam Chair and Members of the Committee: 

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the employment and unemployment data 

we released this morning. 

The unemployment rate edged down to 10.0 percent in November, and nonfarm 

payroll employment was essentially unchanged (¥11,000). Additionally, after revision, the estimates of job loss for September and October were smaller than reported 

last month. In November, job losses occurred in construction, manufacturing, and 

information, while employment rose in temporary help services and health care. 

Construction employment fell by 27,000 over the month, compared with an average monthly decline of 63,000 in the prior 6 months. In recent months, most of the 

decline has occurred in the nonresidential components. In manufacturing, employment fell by 41,000 in November, about in line with the trend over the prior 4 

months. There were notable job cuts over the month in machinery, computer and 

electronic products, and printing. The factory workweek rose by 0.3 hour and has 

increased by one full hour since May. In November, employment in the information 

industry declined by 17,000, with telecommunications accounting for half of the loss. 

Employment in temporary help services rose in November. The industry started 

the year with large job losses, averaging 69,000 per month through April. Recently, 

the industry has added jobs, with gains averaging 48,000 per month in October and 

November. 

Over the month, employment continued to increase in health care, with gains in 

home health care and hospitals. Since the recession began, health care has added 

613,000 jobs. 

Average hourly earnings of production and nonsupervisory workers in the private 

sector were up by 1 cent in November to $18.74. Over the past 12 months, average 

hourly earnings have risen by 2.2 percent. From October 2008 to October 2009, the 

Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) declined by 0.4 percent. 

Turning now to some measures from our household survey, the unemployment 

rate edged down from 10.2 to 10.0 percent in November. The rate was 4.9 percent 

when the recession began in December 2007. There were 15.4 million unemployed 

persons in November, down slightly from the prior month. 

The number of persons who were unemployed because of job loss declined in November. The number of long-term unemployed continued to grow, rising by 293,000 

over the month to 5.9 million. 

The employment-population ratio held at 58.5 percent. When the recession began, 

it was 62.7 percent. Among the employed, the number of persons working part time 

in November who would have preferred full-time work was little changed at 9.2 million. 

Among those outside the labor force—that is, persons neither working nor looking 

for work—the number of discouraged workers in November was 861,000, up from 

608,000 a year earlier. These individuals are not currently looking for work because 

they believe no jobs are available for them. 

In summary, nonfarm payroll employment was essentially unchanged in November, and the unemployment rate edged down to 10.0 percent. 

My colleagues and I now would be glad to answer your questions. 

27 


Insert offset folio 1 here 55806.001
28 


Insert offset folio 2 here 55806.002
29 


Insert offset folio 3 here 55806.003
30 


Insert offset folio 4 here 55806.004
31 


Insert offset folio 5 here 55806.005
32 


Insert offset folio 6 here 55806.006
33 


Insert offset folio 7 here 55806.007
34 


Insert offset folio 8 here 55806.008
35 


Insert offset folio 9 here 55806.009
36 


Insert offset folio 10 here 55806.010
37 


Insert offset folio 11 here 55806.011
38 


Insert offset folio 12 here 55806.012
39 


Insert offset folio 13 here 55806.013
40 


Insert offset folio 14 here 55806.014
41 


Insert offset folio 15 here 55806.015
42 


Insert offset folio 16 here 55806.016
43 


Insert offset folio 17 here 55806.017
44 


Insert offset folio 18 here 55806.018
45 


Insert offset folio 19 here 55806.019
46 


Insert offset folio 20 here 55806.020
47 


Insert offset folio 21 here 55806.021
48 


Insert offset folio 22 here 55806.022
49 


Insert offset folio 23 here 55806.023
50 


Insert offset folio 24 here 55806.024
51 


Insert offset folio 25 here 55806.025
52 


Insert offset folio 26 here 55806.026
53 


Insert offset folio 27 here 55806.027
54 


Insert offset folio 28 here 55806.028
55 


Insert offset folio 29 here 55806.029
56 


Insert offset folio 30 here 55806.030
57 

Æ 


Insert offset folio 31 here 55806.031