H.R.3404 - Emergency Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2009

To amend the Assistance for Unemployed Workers and Struggling Families Act and the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 to provide for the temporary extension of certain unemployment benefits and the temporary availability of further additional emergency unemployment compensation, and for other purposes. view all titles (3)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To amend the Assistance for Unemployed Workers and Struggling Families Act and the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 to provide for the temporary extension of certain unemployment benefits and the temporary availability of further additional emergency unemployment compensation, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Popular: Emergency Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Emergency Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2009 as introduced.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1621-1650 of 3062 total comments.

  • Comm_reply
    NoGoodOnesLeft 08/28/2009 11:06am

    No, it has been introduced and was on the front page for a little while. Personally, I am in MA so I have been pushing S1647 since that will help MA (and 3 other states) that this bill won’t.

  • Comm_reply
    VLeichsenring 08/28/2009 11:03am

    We are speaking our minds from the privacy of our own homes, on our own computers, on a OpenCongress website about unemployment. Sometimes we get off topic and sometimes we may personally attack another for their comments. That is what happens in a heated debate, but we are not those people who are bringing guns to town hall meetings!

  • Comm_reply
    NoGoodOnesLeft 08/28/2009 11:12am

    I tend to agree with you usually. I think you got sucked in. I have noticed things on here (and 6867) and have my own theories and avoid certain names. Overall, I think we all just want jobs and want to help each other but there is a person(s) who just wants to cause trouble.

  • Comm_reply
    VLeichsenring 08/28/2009 11:21am

    Thanks, I do tend to get heated up with the Flame Baiters.

  • Comm_reply
    NoGoodOnesLeft 08/28/2009 11:27am

    I know. It happened to me, too, when someone suggested someone move. I almost joined in last night but stopped myself. A few times you have posted things and I think “that is just what I was thinking!” LOL.

  • Comm_reply
    VLeichsenring 08/28/2009 12:01pm

    Some of these people like Serendipity and Patriots are the same person. They just create different names.

  • Comm_reply
    NoGoodOnesLeft 08/28/2009 12:25pm

    I know. That is what I meant by “I have my own theories and avoid certain names.” I have no problem with someone using a bunch of different names if they are being legitimate and useful but if they are just trying to make it look like other people are on their side in something stupid then it is kind of dumb and sad.

  • Comm_reply
    ronaand 08/29/2009 5:23am

    sounds good, as long as you fairly ban all off topic conversations
    for example, a few pages back ranting about corporate america and news groups; any discussion on health care; bank policies, etc
    every time i hear about banning ip addresses, it seems certain ones will be targeted

  • dispaced2007 08/28/2009 10:23am

    Someone posted a job opening on Craig’s List at 10:47am with a counter that shows how many people clicked on the title to view job opening details, its 12:21am right now. The counter shows 321 people already viewed the job!

  • Comm_reply
    dispaced2007 08/28/2009 10:27am

    sorry for the typo the counter shows there were 321 people viewing a job opening listing from 10:47am to 12:21pm. Thats not even two hours! Why doesn’t the government look beyond the “UI numbers” and see how challenging it is to find a new job.

  • Comm_reply
    NoGoodOnesLeft 08/28/2009 12:37pm

    Am I the only one who thinks it is rude that companies don’t even send rejection letters anymore? I usually get some kind of acknowledgement (either e-mail or snail mail) that they received my resume/application but then I never hear anything again. It wouldn’t be that hard to send a group e-mail to the rejects saying that they chose someone else. I never know if I am still in the running or not.

  • Comm_reply
    VLeichsenring 08/28/2009 1:00pm

    No you are not the only one! Here is a forum with many people who feel the same way.
    http://www.indeed.com/forum/gen/Career-Advice/Employers-don-t-respond-applicants/t40824

  • HopefromCA 08/28/2009 12:44pm

    Unemployment may be going up on increase in home foreclosures.

    Home foreclosures: The housing bubble peaked in July 2005. One half of Americans now holding mortgages will be unable to pay them in 2011. One household in every 355 homes received a foreclosure-related notice in July. The Fed pays banks to keep their money with the Fed. Lending that money seems not as safe. Real estate is unlikely to rise, making it also unlikely that lenders will want to continue any mortgages whose value has dropped 20 to 40% even though many need to be re-set. States having the highest foreclosure rates are Nevada, California, Arizona, Florida, Utah, Idaho, Georgia, Illinois, Colorado and Oregon.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/lilley/floy10.1.html

  • hretagirl 08/28/2009 2:45pm

    I will but it is hard when he babbles on and on just about every other post…..

  • jjfinect 08/28/2009 2:57pm

    Does anyone know what the new bill in congress will do for a state like Connecticut? Are we going to be cut off from any new extensions because the numbers were messed with so we wouldn’t get the extra 7 weeks?

    or is there a possibility that they will give states with unemployment rates just below 8%(even though we are above) some type of extension???

    We have no jobs here like the rest of America.

    Thanks so much!

  • spencir 08/28/2009 4:49pm

    the bill will be passed

    new news

    A reminder to everyone reading this thread — at this stage we are all interpreting the proposed laws from our own perspectives. Nothing stated in this thread about eligibility or start dates has been finalized.

    For example, the draft of HR 3404 states its purpose as:
    “the temporary extension of certain unemployment benefits and the temporary availability of further additional emergency unemployment compensation, and for other purposes.”

    There is no specific mention of EB, no specific direction that the further extension would be simply more weeks added to EB, no statement of the eligibility criteria for the new extension, and therefore no specific statement about whether the new extension — which is not referred to in the draft as an extension to EB, but rather as additional emergency unemployment compensation (EUC) — would be retroactive for those who have exhausted their previous extensions.

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 08/29/2009 12:27am

    spencir—

    For Pete’s sake, I’m sorry, but the one who seems most confused about 3404 is you! I’m starting to wonder if you’ve read earlier comments here and especially my comments on Aug 24.

    It’s true this bill may change and is not the final bill, but I don’t think there is any confusion by now for anyone who’s read this particular forum and the actual bill or summary. We are not reading anything from our “own perspective.”

    Your “quote” of “the draft” is not at all from the bill or its detailed summary. What you have quoted is a temporary few sentences that OC has entered in the absence of an official summary, which they haven’t acquired yet from Congress while its in recess.

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 08/29/2009 12:28am

    I’ll re-post an earlier comment and set of links for 3404 in next post. Please stop misleading the forum and apparently yourself about this when you appear to be confused about the “summary.”

    I don’t remember if you said what state you are in. Regarding HR 3404, THAT is the biggest concern you should be having right now, since if you are not in a state over 9% (HR 3404) or 8.5% (Senate bill), then your state could be left out in the cold.

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 08/29/2009 12:29am

    (repost from Aug 24)

    There really shouldn’t be too much controversy or conjecture about what’s in this bill, since it’s posted online. I posted this link over on 6867 when it was first announced, but I thought OC would have a summary posted here by now. (Must be some kind of procedural thing that they have to get from the House and can’t get til recess is over, I guess.) The bill is posted on Rep. McDermott’s own site, and the best summary of what it’s about is at the bottom of this page:

    http://www.house.gov/mcdermott/pr090730.shtml

    He posts the actual text of his bill there in PDF, if you want to wade through the jargon, even though it’s only 9 pages long.

    (excerpt from the summary):

    “The legislation also would provide an additional 13 weeks of EUC benefits in States with a three-month average total unemployment rate of at least 9 percent or an insured unemployment rate of at least 6 percent.”

  • Comm_reply
    FLarlene 08/29/2009 2:39am

    Thanks, Nancy for clarifying. I do wish, however, that Congress would pass a bill for states with unemployment at 6 to 7% or higher.
    I’ve been praying the legislative process does not drag this out, and that it is put on the legislative calendar immediately.
    I can’t even call Adam Hasner’s office on this bill, because he has absolutely no input on this bill……

  • spencir 08/28/2009 4:50pm

    For everyone who is confused about the proposed extensions, if you carefully read the proposals HR 3404 can be interpreted as a a 13 week extension of the EB benefits if a state has an unemployment rate over 9%. S 1647 can be interpreted as a 13 week extension of EUC (tier 3) if a state has an unemployment rate of 8.5%. The links for both propsals are below,

  • Comm_reply
    JohnB 08/28/2009 6:07pm

    As it works its way through the house, there may be changes, nothing is for certain yet.

  • johnj2010 08/28/2009 6:17pm

    jjinct

    We need to contact NELP-Dodd,Lieberman,Delauro,Himes & hopefully they help us!!

    Ct Labor really screwed us!!

  • nancym 08/29/2009 12:46am

    If anyone is at all confused by recent comments about what’s in 3404, let me make this crystal clear:

    1) It DOES extend benefits to those who have exhausted EB. Those benefits are 13 weeks in the form of added money to our EUC accounts.

    2) There is NO provision for retroactive payments. If passed, the start date for payments would be the date of enactment.

    3) The bill applies ONLY to those states with unemployment rates over 9% (and IUR rates over 6%, which I think adds in only the state of Pennsylvania).

    4) The bill DOES extend the other PROGRAMS now going on, like the original 20 weeks of EUC, the EB program, and the extra $25 a week, beyond their current cutoff dates, which were around the start of next year for most programs. So the bill is not JUST for the long term unemployed, but for many newly unemployed.

    (See links I previously posted to Rep. McDermott’s site to read the actual bill and detailed summary.)

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 08/29/2009 1:44pm

    Addendum: spencir, and all—sorry if this sequence sounded like a bit of a rant. I admit I was losing patience. We seemed to have already gone over those details already and I didn’t want to see them all mixed up again.

  • RobinSamRyan 08/29/2009 4:57am

    Great News! I found a job finally! After so many interviews, finally someone has hired me and I start on Monday the 31st. What a God send since EB ran out today for me. I claim my final week on Monday and now I have a job so the timing is perfect. Thank God for miracles. The market is still so tight, I hope this job works out for me. I hope everyone else starts seeing more jobs to apply to soon. I know so many are still looking and waiting for a job. I will still support extensions, etc… since I know everyone is still hurting. I had to take a cut in pay, a big cut, but atleast it is a job and will bring in more money than unemployment. I am just grateful to get back to work. I hope others start having better results too. Too bad everyone doesn’t understand how hard this has been and still is for us. Praying for all of you to find work too. Maybe life will get better for me now. I hope so.

  • Comm_reply
    FLarlene 08/29/2009 8:22am

    Wonderful news, RobinSamRyan. The best to you on your new job.
    This wonderful……two Florida bloggers have found jobs in the past week.

    I wish you well, I wish all of us well. God bless all of us in these difficult financial times.

    When frustration takes over, when we are down, let us remember that we are pretty much all in the same position. I understand our frustrations…I have been having a way too long pity party…..as a group let us understand that we are all in this together.

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 08/29/2009 1:31pm

    Congratulations!!! FINALLY we’re starting to see at least a few of us here have some success out there. Wouldn’t it be great (I know I’m dreamin’) if gradually every one of us left this board for a job, and OC could get back to the business of reviewing bills other than unemployment extensions.

    Hope the job works out great for you.

  • Comm_reply
    JohnB 08/29/2009 1:42pm

    Calif had a garage sale, to raise money for the state debt. If only other states would have a sale and use the money to provide jobs, even if they’re only temp jobs.

  • Comm_reply
    JohnB 08/29/2009 1:50pm

    Congradulations on the job. I know the feeling of getting a job just when benefits run out. My first lay off was in 2002 (28 years with the company), one year later, on the same week my benefits ran out, the company called me back and hired me as a temp. I was told it would only be for 3 months, it turned into just over 3 years. Timing is everything.


Vote on This Bill

88% Users Support Bill

671 in favor / 95 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments