Print

Schakowsky Statement Explaining "No" vote on ABLE Act

December 4, 2014

“I was a strong supporter and cosponsor of H.R. 647, the Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act of 2014. Unfortunately, when H.R. 647 was brought to the House floor, it added new provisions to fund its $2 billion, 10-year cost through provisions that I could not support – specifically, cuts in Medicare and Social Security.  I was urged by organizations like AARP and physician groups like the AMA to reject this approach, and I agree with them that it is a dangerous precedent to set.

We can and must find savings in Medicare and Social Security – but those savings should be used to strengthen and improve Medicare and Social Security benefits.  Nearly 9 million disabled workers receive Social Security benefits, and over 9 million non-elderly persons with disabilities receive health coverage through Medicare.  They have an interest in making sure that we do not use Social Security and Medicare to fund other programs – as important as they may be.   

On a day when we voted to provide $45 billion in tax breaks – most for corporations—without paying for them, I believe we could have found a better solution for funding the ABLE Act. 

A provision was added to the ABLE Act when it came to the floor to add language regarding Certified Professional Employer Organizations – provisions that were not considered in committee or part of the original bill.  Labor expressed serious concern about this language, including this from the Teamsters Union:”

[Wednesday], the House [voted] on H.R. 647, the ABLE Act. While the goals of the legislation are laudable, the Teamsters Union opposes the Certified Professional Employer Organizations legislation included in the bill. We have serious concerns regarding the impact of this aspect of the bill on worker rights, including collective bargaining and organizing, and worker protections.

Faced with the need to address income inequality and the need for more good paying, permanent jobs, we are also concerned that this proposal will encourage employers to shed permanent workers in favor of a “disposable” workforce, and to use temporary workers rather than creating good paying, full-time jobs for workers.

  • Office Locations

    Office Name Location Image Map URL
    Washington DC 2229 Rayburn House Office
    Washington, DC 20515
    Phone: (202) 333-4455
    Fax: (202) 333-5522    		 http://goo.gl/maps/rqq9i
    Haverhill Office
    Serving Haverhill County
    1234 East. Courthouse
    Haverhill, CA 35602
    Phone: (202) 333-4455
    Fax: (202) 333-5522    		 http://goo.gl/maps/BCEEO
    South Office
    10 Welcome Street
    Tuesdays & Thursdays
    9:00 AM- 11:00 AM    		 http://goo.gl/maps/lodfk
           
           

  • HIDDEN_WEBSITE_VARIABLES

    How to use: Insert <span class="EXACT_VALUE_LABEL_AS_ENTERED_BELOW">&nbsp;</span> where you'd like the value to be populated.

    Non-breaking space within span tags - &nbsp; - is required for WYSIWYG.

    Label
    (no spaces or special characters)

    Value

    		 Comments (optional)
    repName John Smith  
    helpWithFedAgencyAddress Haverhill District Office
    1234 S. Courthouse
    Haverhill, CA 35602    		  
    district 21st District of California  
    academyUSCitizenDate July 1, 2012  
    academyAgeDate July 1, 2012  
    academyApplicationDueDate October 20, 2012  
    repStateABBR AZ  
    repDistrict 1  
    repState Arizona  
    repDistrictText 1st  
    repPhoto  
    SponsoredBills Sponsored Bills  
    CoSponsoredBills Co-Sponsored Bills