Blog - With No Republican Support, Democrats Intro Bill to Help Long-Term Unemployed Workers 
OpenCongress Blog
Blog Feed Comments Feed More RSS Feeds
With No Republican Support, Democrats Intro Bill to Help Long-Term Unemployed Workers
February 11, 2011 - by Donny Shaw
Every week, 35,000 unemployed Americans reach the end of their insurance benefits without finding new jobs and join the ranks of a growing group of recession victims known as the “99ers.” According to the Congressional Budget Office, there are at least 1.4 million 99ers right now, and with the unemployment rate expected to stay high for several years, it’s statistically certain that that number will increase dramatically in the coming months.
Given the facts of the situation, some congressional Democrats are pushing legislation to extend the unemployment insurance lifeline to help relieve the hardship these people are facing. On Wednesday, Rep. Barbara Lee [D, CA-9] reintroduced a bill in the new Congress that would add 14 weeks to the current federal unemployment insurance system and provide those benefits retroactively for people who have already exhausted all their benefits. Lee introduced her bill, the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Expansion Act, with 47 co-sponsors — all Democrats — and according to rumors she is already up to 60.
So far, however, no Republicans have signed on, and with the House under Republican control there is little chance of the bill passing without getting at least some Republicans on board. Whether Lee is hoping to move this through the regular committee process or as an amendment to another bill, it can not pass with Democratic support alone. The Republican position on unemployment insurance has long been that they will not supporting extensions unless the costs of the extension are offset. Lee’s bill, however, is not offset and as currently written would be financed by adding to the deficit. The Democrats argue that unemployment benefits pay for themselves in the stimulative effects they produce in a high-unemployment environment (and the evidence suggests that is true), but the Republicans have been unwilling to accept that argument.
When the Democrats controlled both chambers last session, they were able to bypass Republican opposition to extensions by declaring the costs “emergency spending” and using their raw majorities to muscle them through. But the situation with this bill, this year, is starkly different. First (obviously), the Democrats don’t have the numbers in either chamber to push through bills that the Republicans oppose. Second, this is not a simple extension of unemployment benefits like the ones the Democrats passed repeatedly last session. It’s an expansion of benefits — from 99 weeks max. to 113 weeks — which is a harder sell to Republicans who like to argue that unemployment insurance discourages people from finding jobs. Third, the Republicans have upped their offsetting requirements for this session. They won’t accept tax increases as a pay-for, even in the form of closing blatant loopholes that are exploited to provide unfair benefits. They want everything offset with spending cuts. That means Lee the Democrats would have to find another part of the budget to trim, a tall order given all the cutbacks that are already being promoted by the Republicans.
Obviously, Lee is well aware of these challenges. “Extending this emergency lifeline for unemployed workers will be challenging but just because something is difficult to do doesn’t mean you don’t try it," she told Michigan Live. “This issue is too important to millions of unemployed workers to just stand around and do nothing.” Indeed, it is too important of an issue to ignore, and it’s good that Lee is pushing on this. But, remember, introducing a bill is easy. Any member of Congress can introduce any bill they want, but that doesn’t mean it’s any more viable a proposal than before it was introduced. The vast majority of bills die in committee without ever seeing any action. The real work is building a coalition and finding a way in the legislative process to actually push things forward towards becoming law.
Get Blog Updates by Email
Want a simple way to stay on top of what's happening in Congress?
Subscribe to this blog!Send Us a Tip
-
I've been watching a lot of...
Submitted by Robert Schwartzman on Dec 9
-
Proposed Bill HR-2674 Prote...
Submitted by Mary on Jun 16
-
Amendment No. 601 to the Om...
Submitted by Winifred on Mar 3
You can submit a tip anonymously, or attributed to your own name and e-mail, whichever you prefer. Read more about submitting a tip.
Recent Posts
- Endless Blockade for the Senate ... January 25, 2013
- One Year Ago We Killed SOPA -- H... January 18, 2013
- Senate Democrats Looking to End ... January 08, 2013
- Welcome the 113th U.S. Congress:... January 03, 2013
- Secretive Conference Committee F... December 20, 2012
Archives
See All ArchivesBlogroll
- A plain blog about politics
- The Baseline Scenario
- Capital Eye
- The Caucus
- CBO Director's Blog
- Congress Matters
- The Corner
- CREW Blog
- Crooks and Liars
- Jamie Dupree
- Election Law Blog
- FDL News Desk
- Glenn Greenwald
- Hot Air
- Irregular Times
- Little Sis
- Naked Capitalism
- The Moderate Voice
- OMB Watch
- Open House Project
- Party Time
- Plum Line
- Political Animal
- Political Wire
- ProPublica
- Real Clear Politics
- RedState
- Secrecy News
- Sunlight Foundation Blog
- Talking Points Memo
- techPresident
- 2chambers
- Unanimous Consent
- The Weekly Standard
Sort By
Comments
Displaying 1-30 of 138 total comments.
Pay for it or don’t even bother. I’m not saying that I believe that it should be paid for b/c I understand the premise of why it shouldn’t be but it’s just a waste of time to put forward something that will 100% end in defeat. There is no way that this makes it through the House let alone the Senate without being paid for.
If you really want it to pass then pay for it and make Republicans take a stand on the topic instead of the deficit. Otherwise it’s just the same recycled arguments
Statistics are that UI simulates the economy at a rate of $1.61+ for each dollar spent. This will be spent immediately for it IS an immediate need! To those of you who think we do not want jobs… you have no clue how wrong your thinking is or what the majority of the 99ers are going through. We are going hungry, losing the roofs over our heads, needing medical help and unable to even afford a doctor’s visit. Simply buying over-the-counter medicines are even above what some of us can afford. We want jobs! We want out lives back! We want America to be strong and succesful again! We want to produce as we once did, but we need the support of our country to survive this fall just as OUR COUNTRY has helped poeple in OTHER countries, to survive when they were in such dire need. We are Americans for God’s sake!!! We are human beings who have fallen and we are asking for our fellow human beings to help us revive our dream. OUR AMERICAN DREAM. This is NOT too much to ask. I thank you Rep LEE!
Spam Comment
When the line, “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” is mentioned by both sides in debates over UI, it doesn’t mean anyone, working or not, has a right to a house, or food, or health care or anything except a right to life, a right to liberty (being truly free, i.e. small government), or a PURSUIT of happiness. I’m not saying it should or shouldn’t be paid for, but how can those on UI afford $30 for internet when they can’t afford $30 for OTC drugs, or to put $30 more towards a mortgage. It is near impossible to afford kids and a home on minimum wage (if it’s possible at all), but does that mean when you’re on UI you live like you always have? NO, it means you sacrifice, no cable/satellite, no internet, no cell phones, no eating out, etc. It’s not comforting, but it does extend a check from the government. When we have 113 weeks of unemployment, will we then hear calls for 125 weeks? Where does it end?
@fakk2 it should end once the unemployment rate is at normal again…you are talking about human beings here…I’ve never seen this much whining when it comes to people on WELFARE…women having baby after baby, living in better houses in the suburbs w/section 8 vouchers(with their boyfriends) then some people that have to work, free child care, WIC and food stamps…. people like you kill me….but only a reality check with make people like you open their eyes because please believe the longer this economy goes down the drain the better chance you will loose your job as well…no demand no supply!
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
Your an idiot seriously… hey dumb nuts, THEY ARE TAX PAYERS ALSO! So its not ok to help the poor, but your Mr. Tax payer don’t mind spending your money on helping OTHER countries poor? OTHER countries problems? place a TRILLION dollars on the national deficit? thats cool right!
S C U M B A G
YOur the kinda of PRICK that their child asks them for something and you are fucking RICH and you turn to your 9 YEAR OLD child and say " you want that, get a job "! YOU know there is a place for people like you…
Spam Comment
Dudes, you just DESCRIBED the PAST life of EVERY 99er out there, and guess what? THEY ARE HOMELESS NOW… We are not talking about people that squandered money, they saved, they had retirement plans! they were SECURE! look at them now… YOU could be next, your cushy life in a blink of an eye could turn into you looking for a relative to stay with AFTER you sold all your worldly goods. These 99’ers did not become 99’ers over night, it was a transitional period. FIRST the sold everything to survive, when they had nothing left to sell, thats when the real fun began. YOU shouldn’t be so quick to judge them or me, God has a way of making people LIVE their words and actions…
Spam Comment
You are correct. 99 weeks to 113 to 125 to 150 and on and on. I no longer have my career, but took an hourly job when I could have continued on unemployment. I read the blogs with many of the 99er’s crying about how over qualified they were for these jobs. Well….guess what? After 3 years they are no longer qualified for squat!(with the exception of the their new lobbing skills… )
The unemployed are probably eating better than I am, because I see them checking out of the supermarkets with carts filled while swiping the red/white & blue food stamp card. Looks just like a credit card. They qualify for medicaid while I am
uninsured, they qualify for welfare and many other government programs.
China OWNS us…. we are headed for inflation, but we should borrow more money
for one more extended entitlement?
Being on unemployment doesn’t qualify you for medicaid – you have to make less than $400 a month for a family of 6 to qualify for family medicaid in Missouri, although children can qualify with more income, adults won’t. Jumping through the hoops to get food stamps only to be told that you make $.75 cents too much to qualify for any help, or trying to stretch $63 a month to feed a family because you are part of a couple who both have minimum wage jobs is no picnic either. Ifully agree that those on unemployment, or reduced income for any reason, should cut expense and take whatever they can to get by and keep looking in the mean time. However, there are time when that just doesn’t happen. Those of you who haven’t had to experience what you seem to think is easy should give up your checkbooks and credit cards and try it for awhile!
Spam Comment
Something you need to take into account is that now days internet access is a necessity. Have you looked at the Employment section of a news paper lately? They are practically non existent. I live in Baltimore and where the employment sectio in the sunday paper used to be 2 full fat sections, now it’s only one or two pages in a section with other ads. You really do need the internet to look for a job. Plus people with school age kids need it so their kids can do their school work. Unemployed people have sacrificed greatly, by losing their way of life, their feeling useful, feeling like they are contributing. It’s rough out their and the older you are the worse it is, no one wants to pay and experienced person what they are worth.
I am a seamstress by profession, I have made everything from kids cloths and toys to wedding gowns and formal attire to draperies and accessories, I can redo the interior of a car or a boat then make an awning for your house or a party tent for your back yard. Over 30 years experience and do you know what they are paying someone like me now? Minimum wage. WHen I first entered the job market you could get a job in a sewing factory when minimum wage was 3 or 4 bucks an hour, but we had a piece rate where you could actually make a much higher rate, that’s gone now along with all the jobs Do you realize most of your clothing is made in Viet Nam, Thailand, china. Our industries need to come back home, we need to make this happen so that the jobs are here for OUR citizens. In the maentime we need to help the unemployed, to keep food n the table for their kids, shelter, you know those things we all need to survive.
Dwcstmdznr, I’m curious about something. Since you didn’t save for hard times over the last 30 years when time was good, or if you did you didn’t manage it well, not counting how you ever planned to retire, will charging businesses more taxes to pay for employees they no longer have bring back the jobs?
Wouldn’t it make more sense to instead create a program that put the unemployed to work for minimum wage building infrastructure in our communities, while also providing food and housing assistance? The WPA program of the 30’s and 40’s did just that. Instead of paying for people to submit an application once every 4 weeks, shouldn’t we put them to work doing something that is greatly needed to help sustain our communities? We could take the entire defense budget and pay for 16 million unemployed to work for 3 years @ 7.25/hr. Or we could limit it to 6 million unemployed for 27 weeks or longer and provide food and housing assistance w/ min wage also. Wouldn’t this be preferable?
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
Just curious, and I’m sure this comment may be removed eventually, but are you mentally stable?
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
Yeah, I’m someone who believes we should limit the federal government to what’s in the constitution, have a republic (rule of law) instead of a democracy (mob rule), and return to states’ rights. Don’t misunderstand, I do believe in a central power base to rule the government, but that central power base should be the good will of the people, not the government itself. I think people should be self-sufficient and not expect anyone else to help them out in any way. After all, life, even when things are good, is hard.
Spam Comment
Spam Comment
Spam Comment