U.S. Congress - H.R.598 American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009
H.R.598 - American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009
To provide for a portion of the economic recovery package relating to revenue measures, unemployment, and health. view all titles (12)
All Bill Titles
- Short: Health Insurance Assistance for the Unemployed Act of 2009 as reported to house.
- Short: HITECH Act as reported to house.
- Official: To provide for a portion of the economic recovery package relating to revenue measures, unemployment, and health. as introduced.
- Short: Assistance for Unemployed Workers and Struggling Families Act as introduced.
- Short: Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act as introduced.
- Short: Health Insurance Assistance for the Unemployed Act of 2009 as introduced.
- Short: HITECH Act as introduced.
- Short: Assistance for Unemployed Workers and Struggling Families Act as reported to house.
- Short: Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act as reported to house.
- Popular: American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009 as introduced.
- Short: American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009 as introduced.
- Short: American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009 as reported to house.
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.
Vote on This Bill
-
Share This Bill
More Share via Email
Sort By
Comments Feed
Displaying 91-120 of 189 total comments.
NELP NEEDS GET NY ASSEMBLY OFF ITS BUTT TO TRIGGER NEW YORK BECAUSE OUR UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IS ABOUT 7 PERCENT….WOW NOW WE GET ANOTHER 25 BUCKS A WEEK, WHAT AM I GONNA DO WITH ALL THAT CASH :(…THE REAL SAD PART IS WE GET ANOTHER 13 WEEKS CUZ WE MADE TIER II, WHAT AFTER THAT, NOTHING?? I GUESS NOBAMA WANTS US ALL TO GO ON WELFARE.
States need to adopt TUR (total unemployment rate) vrs IUR (insured unemployment rate as the trigger for an EB period.Since this new EB will be paid totally by the feds,it behooves them to get it done(more free money from Fed into their states,if you have a state with a Demo Gov the chances are real good,if you have a state with a Repub Gov that would otherwise qualify…good luck,he may just play politics of anti Obama…
for definitions and history of all this crazy stuff….
http://us.mc515.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage?fid=Inbox&sort=date&order=down&startMid=0&.rand=2138333987&da=0&midIndex=0&f=1&nextMid=1_96908_AJ4nvs4AAJkkSZsyDw3EXD3QtrM&m=1_97488_AMomvs4AAEqvSZszaQAYQGx8tHA,1_96908_AJ4nvs4AAJkkSZsyDw3EXD3QtrM,1_96328_AMcmvs4AANKwSZsJuw4wjg2sQxk,1_95854_AMgmvs4AAAhlSZr9ZAAepBjto2k,1_91922_AMomvs4AAPIOSZmHZgadJzYKCPc,1_80290_AMQmvs4AAWa%2BSZcubQHOx0ywsm8,&mid=1_97488_AMomvs4AAEqvSZszaQAYQGx8tHA&fn=Extended+Benefit+Triggers.doc&pid=2&vs=1&ypa=1
TUR – Total Unemployment Rate – That is an excellent concept. That way the unemployment figures could not be distorted and the true numbers of unemployed would be included.
“TUR – Total Unemployment Rate – That is an excellent concept. That way the unemployment figures could not be distorted and the true numbers of unemployed would be included. "
Yes and it is of course a democratic concept,rebublicons hate it when the real numbers come out.
OK… For the TEXANS out there that are hoping and praying that they trigger EUC Tier 2 benefits soon, the debate continues as to whether or not that will happen soon- or at all, for that matter…
FEDERAL CASH LIKELY IF TEXAS UPGRADES JOBLESS BENEFITS
By L.M. SIXEL
Copyright 2009 Houston Chronicle
Feb. 16, 2009, 10:37PM
The federal stimulus bill expected to be signed today by the
president has $555.7 million on the table for the Texas unemployment system, but only if the state makes it easier for more out-of-work residents to become eligible.
Some business and political leaders are concerned that taking the money would exchange short-term gain for long-term pain.
Advocates for the changes, however, say adopting the new guidelines would modernize the state’s unemployment system, allowing more low-wage workers to collect benefits.
The debate comes at a time when the state’s unemployment trust fund is facing an October deficit of $749.5 million that’s been projected by the Texas Workforce Commission.
“It’s a bad deal,” said Bill Hammond, president of the Texas Association of Business in Austin.
For Texas to get its share of the $7 billion in federal unemployment funds, the Lone Star State would have to change several state laws, which he estimates would cost employers at least $100 million more a year in payroll taxes.
Larry Temple, executive director of the Texas Workforce Commission, said officials will study the pros and cons.
“Part of that analysis will be if, when and how much taxes would have to be raised to continue these expansions once the initial funding is gone,” according to Temple. “As to ‘modernization,’ these are really not new ideas. These very issues have been debated in the Texas Legislature for many years.”
Texas would immediately get one-third of the money if it changes the way it calculates unemployment benefits.
Currently, the state bases benefits on wages paid more than a year before a job loss. The new federal rules would base benefits on more recent work history, according to the National Employment Law Project.
That would make more low-wage workers who cycle in and out of the work force eligible for benefits.
Two of four options
To get the remaining two-thirds, the state would have to choose two out of four options:
• Allow recipients to look for part-time work, which would change the full-time job-search requirement currently in place.
• Speed up benefits to “trailing spouses,” or those who quit because a husband or wife had to move for work. Now the spouse has to wait six weeks to become eligible.
• Pay workers who have already exhausted their unemployment benefits but are attending training programs, something the state doesn’t currently do.
• Pay a weekly stipend to workers who support dependents — again, something the state doesn’t currently do.
Rick Levy, legal director for the Texas AFL-CIO in Austin, said such changes would bring the modern-day workplace to Texas’ rules.
Allison Castle, a spokeswoman for Texas Gov. Rick Perry, said the office hadn’t seen a final copy of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as of Monday.
“We’ll look at it line by line, and we will make a decision on the best interests of Texas,” she said.
Seven years of costs
Levy calculates the extra money from the federal government will cover seven years of the extra cost facing Texas and said it’s money well spent.
“It’s not like we’re running an ATM machine here,” he said. “With the economy in crisis, the one thing we should be doing is paying attention to the people who have lost their jobs and the communities in which they live.”
People spend their benefits at the corner gas station and the grocery store, and that circulates throughout the community, he said. They don’t save it for their kids’ college fund.
U.S. Labor Department data from the second quarter of 2008 showed only 20 percent of out-of-work Texans were eligible to collect benefits. Only South Dakota, at 18 percent, has less on the rolls. The national average is 37 percent.
Others due for change
However, Texas isn’t alone when it comes to having to make changes to get a slice of stimulus pie: The National Employment Law Project said only four states — Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico and New York — would qualify for the full amount as their rules stand today.
Texas House Speaker Pro Tem Craig Eiland, D-Galveston, suggested that Texas might enact reforms just long enough to qualify, then revert to the status quo.
“We could perhaps put that into legislation that’s required to accept the money: We take the money for two years and then it sunsets,” he said.
Any States that are not TUR ..will not be receiving any benefits after April unless states change their law ..Texas is already saying NO to it
What are you going to do after April when EUI runs out?
..I will be living in my car after April and will have $$$ left for gas and food
If you pay the mortgage or rent up to April ..what are you going to do after that if you have no job or income ..Most will be homeless ..At least if you didn’t pay for March or April bills ..you will have that extra $$$ for gas and food ..You can always take a shower at a truck stop (thats what truckers do )to go for a job interview..
That’s my plan after April ..What will yours be
“Any States that are not TUR ..will not be receiving any benefits after April unless states change their law ..Texas is already saying NO to it”
Texas has a Repub Gov and a majority Repub state legislature,the Repubs want Obama to fail,they would rather refuse free money to their own state than try to help the Obama admin pull out of the BUSH DEPRESSION.
WHAT AN IDIOT THE TEXAS GOV IS, I HOPE HE GOES BROKE!
QUESTION & ANSWER
THE ECONOMIC RECOVERY BILL’S NEW “EXTENDED BENEFITS” STATE OPTION-
840,000WORKERS MAY QUALIFY FOR AN EXTRA 13 TO 20WEEKS OF JOBLESS
BENEFITS WHEN THEY RUN OUT OF THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY EXTENSION
http://nelp.3cdn.net/8328aaf325a33fe316_64m6b9thw.pdf
Thanks!
http://www.nelp.org/site/support_nelp/
QUESTION & ANSWER
THE ECONOMIC RECOVERY BILL’S NEW “EXTENDED BENEFITS” STATE OPTION-
840,000WORKERS MAY QUALIFY FOR AN EXTRA 13 TO 20WEEKS OF JOBLESS
BENEFITS WHEN THEY RUN OUT OF THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY EXTENSION
What follows is a Q&A explaining a new option available under the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009 which allows high unemployment states to provide up to 13 to 20 weeks of additional extended
benefits to workers who run out of their federal Emergency Unemployment Compensation. The EUC
program currently provides 20 to 33 weeks of benefits to workers who run out of their state unemployment
benefits. If adopted by all the states with unemployment rates exceeding the 6.5 percent threshold, as
many as 840,000 workers would qualify for additional weeks of 100% federally-funded assistance.
1. What is the Federal Extended Benefits (EB) Program and how does it relate to Emergency
Unemployment Compensation?
The “Extended Benefits” (EB) program is a permanent program, started in 1970, that provides 13-20 weeks
of extended unemployment benefits to states experiencing high levels of unemployment, as defined by
certain “triggers.” Because the EB triggers are so restrictive, states rarely qualify for EB even during serious
recessions. Thus, Congress has frequently stepped in to create temporary federal extended benefits
programs, including the Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC) program enacted in July 2009
(providing 20 to 33 weeks of extended benefits, depending on the state’s unemployment rate).
In states that meet the EB program’s requirements, workers are entitled to both EUC and EB consecutively
and states are allowed to choose in which order they pay out benefits. Because EB costs are typically
shared 50/50 between the states and the federal government, all states have chosen to pay EB after
workers have exhausted EUC. EB acts as an additional benefit for workers who still cannot find work after
receiving the EUC extension. However, EB benefits were not likely to be available to most EUC recipients.
2. How did the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) make it possible for more workers
to collect EB after their EUC benefits run out?
The ARRA (Section 2005) made two key temporary changes to the EB program, allowing more workers to
collect benefits under the EB program after their EUC benefits run out.
First, the ARRA temporarily shifts the costs of the EB program entirely to the federal government for the
remainder of 2009 (and phasing out through June 2010), thus removing the requirement that states pay
50% of EB benefits.i
February 16, 2009
Second, the ARRA suspends a federal eligibility rule that prevents many workers who are now collecting
EUC from receiving EB. To qualify for EB under the old rules, a worker had to have filed for state
unemployment benefits within one year of when the state reached the required level of unemployment to
“trigger” on to the EB program.
Now, as a result of the ARRA, EB is available to anyone who exhausts his or her EUC benefits during an
EB high-unemployment period, not just those workers who applied for state unemployment benefits one
year before the EB period began.ii Without this provision, large numbers of workers now collecting EUC
would not qualify for any weeks of EB because they started collecting state unemployment benefits more
than one year ago. Indeed, most workers in high unemployment states are able to collect 59 weeks of
unemployment benefits, including 26 weeks of state benefits and 33 weeks of EUC, which means they first
filed for state benefits more than one year before they would be eligible to receive EB.
3. What is the necessary unemployment rate required for a state to “trigger on” to EB and what
does the state have to do to adopt the trigger?
To qualify for EB under the 1970 federal law, a state must exceed either of the following unemployment
levels, thus allowing the state to “trigger on” to EB benefits:
• Insured Unemployment Rate Trigger: The insured unemployment rate (IUR) is the number of
workers receiving state unemployment benefits in the past 13 weeks divided by the total number of
employed workers. If a state’s insured unemployment rate exceeds 5.0%, EB benefits trigger on.
Under this requirement, which automatically applies to all states under the EB law, the state’s
insured unemployment rate must also be on the rise. A state can only trigger on to EB if the
current IUR is 20% higher than it was during the same period in both of the prior two years.
• Optional Total Unemployment Rate Trigger: States can also trigger on to EB benefits if the total
unemployment rate (TUR)—the standard unemployment rate published by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics every month—exceeds 6.5% over a three-month period. Like the IUR requirement, the
TUR has to be increasing, but only by 10% over each of the past two years. If the state exceeds
the 6.5% TUR, workers are entitled to an extra 13 weeks of EB. If the state exceeds 8.0%
unemployment, workers are entitled to 20 weeks of EB. In contrast to the IUR trigger, the TUR
trigger only applies to those states that have passed a law adopting the more generous EB option.
Currently, only eleven states have adopted the optional TUR trigger rule to access EB (Table 1).
4. Which states currently qualify for EB benefits and which states could qualify if they changed
their state laws to take advantage of the new ARRA provisions?
Nine states and Puerto Rico currently qualify for EB, either using the IUR formula (Idaho, Michigan,
Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico) or the optional TUR formula (Connecticut, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode
Island, Washington), and another two states—Wisconsin (IUR) and New Jersey (TUR)—are likely trigger
on to EB shortly under current rules. As a result, about 319,000 workers will qualify for EB when their EUC
benefits expire (Table 2).
It is far more difficult for a state to trigger on under the IUR rule than the TUR because the IUR requires a
large percentage of unemployed workers to actually be collecting benefits, which is not the case in many
states. Indeed, another 15 states could now trigger on to EB using the TUR option if they adopt the
required EB law.
As of February 15th, these states include Arizona (qualifying for 13 weeks of EB), California (qualifying for
20 weeks), District of Columbia (20 weeks), Florida (13 weeks), Georgia (13 weeks), Illinois (13 weeks),
Indiana (13 weeks), Indiana (13 weeks), Kentucky (13 weeks), Mississippi (13 weeks), Missouri (13
weeks), Nevada (20 weeks), Ohio (13 weeks), South Carolina (20 weeks), Tennessee (13 weeks) and the
Virgin Islands (13 weeks). If all these states adopted the optional TUR trigger, another 518,000 workers
would qualify for EB after exhausting their EUC benefits, or a total of over 800,000 when combined with
those workers in states that have already adopted the optional EB trigger (Table 2).
5. How can states take advantage of the new EB rules without being required to spend state
dollars?
These states (and others whose unemployment rates exceed 6.5% over the next several months) can
adopt the optional EB trigger without incurring any additional costs for workers beginning EB benefit
periods this year. This will enable workers who will exhaust their EUC to receive 100% federal-funded EB
benefits. If states are especially concerned about the long-term financial impact of the EB trigger, they can
also sunset the legislation in 2010 as 100% EB funding will only be eligible for workers and their families
who exhaust EUC in 2009.
However, it is vital for the states to act quickly to take up the EB option. Large numbers of workers who
qualified for the full 33-week extension of EUC benefits will begin running out of benefits in March and April
2009. By moving expeditiously to pass the required state legislation, states can ensure that these workers
do not reach the end of their emergency unemployment benefits in the depths of an extremely difficult job
market. Attached is model legislation for states to enact the optional EB trigger formula.
6. Where can workers find out whether their state qualifies for EB under the different “trigger”
formulas in order to collect EB after running out of EUC benefits?
On a weekly basis, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) provides on update of which states have reached
the required unemployment level to trigger on to EB. The most recent notice is summarized in Table 1, and
the weekly DOL notice can be found at http://ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/claims_arch.asp by selecting
extended benefits trigger notice.
Model Legislation to Implement State Extended Benefit Triggers
US DOL Unemployment Insurance Program Letter 45-92
(2) There is a State “on” indicator for a week if—
(A) (i) the rate of insured unemployment under this Act for the period consisting of such week and the
immediately preceding twelve weeks equaled or exceeded 120 percent of the average of such rates for the
corresponding 13-week period ending in each of the preceding calendar years, and
(ii) equaled or exceeded 5 percent; or
(B) the rate of insured unemployment under this Act for the period consisting of such week and the
immediately preceding twelve weeks equaled or exceeded 6 percent, regardless of the rate of insured
unemployment in the two previous years; or
© with respect to benefits for weeks of unemployment beginning after January 1, 2009
(i) the average rate of total unemployment (seasonally adjusted), as determined by the United
States Secretary of Labor, for the period consisting of the most recent 3 months for which data for all States
are published before the close of such week equals or exceeds 6.5 percent, and
(ii) the average rate of total unemployment in the State (seasonally adjusted), as determined by
the United States Secretary of Labor, for the 3-month period referred to in clause (i), equals or exceeds 110
percent of such average for either or both of the corresponding 3-month periods ending in the 2 preceding
calendar years.
(3) There is a State “off” indicator for a week only if, for the period consisting of such week and the
immediately preceding twelve weeks, none of the options specified in paragraph (2) result in an “on”
indicator.
…. (3)(A) Effective with respect to weeks beginning in a high unemployment period, paragraph (1) shall
be applied by substituting
(i) “eighty percent” for “fifty percent” in subparagraph (A),
(ii) “twenty” for “thirteen” in subparagraph (B), and
(iii) “forty-six” for “thirty-nine” in subparagraph ©
(B) For purposes of subparagraph (A), the term “high unemployment period” means any period during
which an extended benefit period would be in effect if subsection (a) (2) © were applied by substituting “8
percent” for “6.5 percent”.
i The ARRA specifies that the federal government will pay 100% EB through to June 2010 as long as such workers begin in
2009.
ii Section 2005 (b) (1) and (2)
Table 1
TUR Trigger
Option Exists in
Law
3-Month TUR,
Seasonally Adjusted
Qualifies for EB If
State Adopts
Optional TUR
Trigger (# Weeks)
Alabama 6.1
Alaska X TUR X 7.3
Arizona 6.5 X (13)
Arkansas 5.7
California 8.7 X (20)
Colorado 5.9
Connecticut X TUR X 6.8
Delaware 5.7
District of Columbia 8.0 X (20)
Florida 7.5 X (13)
Georgia 7.5 X (13)
Hawaii 5.0
Idaho X IUR 5.8
Illinois 7.4 X (13)
Indiana 7.3 X (13)
Iowa 4.4
Kansas X 5.0
Kentucky 7.2 X (13)
Louisiana 5.6
Maine 6.3
Maryland 5.3
Massachusetts 6.1
Michigan X IUR 9.8
Minnesota 6.4
Mississippi 7.4 X (13)
Missouri 6.8 X (13)
Montana 5.0
Nebraska 3.8
Nevada 8.3 X (20)
New Hampshire X 4.3
New Jersey # TUR X 6.4
New Mexico X 4.5
New York 6.2
North Carolina X TUR X 7.9
North Dakota 3.4
Ohio 7.4 X (13)
Oklahoma 4.6
Oregon** X TUR X 8.1
Pennsylvania X IUR 6.2
Puerto Rico X IUR 12.7
Rhode Island** X TUR X 9.5
South Carolina 8.6 X (20)
South Dakota 3.5
Tennessee 7.3 X (13)
Texas 5.8
Utah 3.9
Vermont X 5.7
Virgin Islands 6.8 X (13)
Virginia 4.8
Washington X TUR X 6.6
West Virginia 4.7
Wisconsin # IUR 5.7
Wyoming 3.3
IUR: 5
TUR: 7
Note: TUR reflects average seasonally adjusted TUR for 3 month period ending December 2008.
IUR reflects 13-week period ending January 24, 2009.
Source: US DOL ETA Extended Benefits Trigger Notice, Effective February 8, 2009
http://ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/trigger/2009/trig_021509.html
State Provisions Required to Access Additional 13 to 20 Weeks of Federal
“Extended Benefits”
National Employment Law Project
Total: 12 11 15
EB Triggered ON,
State by Provision*
Total Unemployment Rate (TUR)
February 2009
Table 2
Workers
Exhausting
EUC Benefits
(Jan-June)
Estimated Numbers
Potentially Eligible for
EB After Exhausting
EUC (Jan-June 2009)
Alabama 12,126 0
Alaska 5,011 5,011
Arizona 15,040 15,040
Arkansas 8,339 0
California** 168,505 168,505
Colorado 18,322 0
Connecticut 16,293 16,293
Delaware 4,547 0
District of Columbia** 2,722 2,722
Florida 83,537 83,537
Georgia 40,752 40,752
Hawaii 4,632 0
Idaho 4,784 4,784
Illinois 52,472 52,472
Indiana 27,841 27,841
Iowa 14,424 0
Kansas 11,102 0
Kentucky 10,245 10,245
Louisiana 13,490 0
Maine 3,150 0
Maryland 20,575 0
Massachusetts 27,362 0
Michigan** 65,680 65,680
Minnesota 18,556 0
Mississippi 7,802 7,802
Missouri 15,641 15,641
Montana 3,638 0
Nebraska 5,642 0
Nevada 13,545 13,545
New Hampshire 2,853 0
New Jersey 58,947 58,947
New Mexico 6,924 0
New York 70,616 0
North Carolina 43,866 43,866
North Dakota 1,839 0
Ohio 35,058 35,058
Oklahoma 7,682 0
Oregon** 15,082 15,082
Pennsylvania 62,575 62,575
Puerto Rico 2,511 2,511
Rhode Island** 6,335 6,335
South Carolina** 22,604 22,604
South Dakota 511 0
Tennessee 21,899 21,899
Texas 62,973 0
Utah 5,627 0
Vermont 2,433 0
Virgin Islands 348 348
Virginia 20,467 0
Washington 14,167 14,167
West Virginia 5,176 0
Wisconsin 24,110 24,110
Wyoming 797 0
United States 1,191,175 837,374
States in Bold Need to Enact Legislation to Take Advantage of EB
I think all of us that lost our employment in early 2008 should receive something. I need the another extension as well as mine runs out in April. I live in Michigan and it is VERY bad here. Let’s all hope that something comes our way or we will ALL be in BIG trouble. I hope for the best for everyone.
NY has not yet reached the required rate of unemployment for EB, but may very well do so by May when folks run out of the last extension being provided by the other extended benefits program -EUC.
Andy Stettner
LETTER I RECIEVED FROM NELP TODAY, THERE IS HOPE AFTER ALL!
“NY has not yet reached the required rate of unemployment for EB, but may very well do so by May when folks run out of the last extension being provided by the other extended benefits program -EUC.”
This is a very good point,even states that dont change the state law to trigger EB on the TUR,may verywell reach the required IUR rate at any time,thereby automatically qualifing everone.YES IT MAY BE GOOD NEWS FOR ALL OF US, LOTS OF MORE JOBS WERE LOST FOR THE MONTH OF JAN AND FEB WONT BE ANY BETTER!
www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/18/gop-governors-consider-tu_n_168099.html
handful of Republican governors are considering turning down some money from the federal stimulus package, a move opponents say puts conservative ideology ahead of the needs of constituents struggling with record foreclosures and soaring unemployment…
The Unemployed in these States are going to be in BAD SHAPE
the governors of Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alaska, South Carolina and Idaho h
Barbour spokesman Dan Turner, for example, cited concerns that accepting unemployment money from the stimulus package would force states to pay benefits to people who wouldn’t meet state requirements to receive them
In Idaho, Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter said he wasn’t interested in stimulus money that would expand programs and boost the state’s costs in future years when the federal dollars disappear _ a worry also cited by Jindal and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin
“In Idaho, Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter said he wasn’t interested in stimulus money that would expand programs and boost the state’s costs in future years when the federal dollars disappear _ a worry also cited by Jindal and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin "
Once again the Repukelicons play to the idiot base,any EB trigger laws that are changed can have a “sunset” clause written into them so that they revert back to the old rule as soon as the Fed money ends(jan 1 2010)
This is why repulicons suck,they would much rather play anti-Obama,than help out the poor people of their state,and its not just the poor,many businesses will make xtra money and state sales tax money will go up.They had no problem funding Gee dubyas 6 trillion dollar war in the sand box,but when it comes down to spending money here on jobs or people they call it waste.
DONT TALK ABOUT BUSH’S WAR…OBAMA JUST SENT 17,000 TROOPS INTO AFGANISTAN,EARLIEST PULL OUT WILL BE IN 5 YRS IF THAT, PLUS THE CHIMP WANTS TO SEND ANOTHER 30,000 TO AFGANISTAN, SO GET YER FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE YOU POST SUCH AN IDIOTIC STATEMENT! BUSH ISNT PRESIDENT ANYMORE, SO ITS ALL ON BUTCHER OBAMA’S HEAD NOW!
you called the President a “CHIMP” ?? Whats wrong with you…this is not 1950—-you need to grow up. And to think you called an earlier post “IDIOTIC”…go figure.
OHIO UPDATE..
recovery.ohio.gov/
At this site .go to FAQ and summit your questions If the the State will be going to “TUR” STATE EXTENDED BENEFITS .
We’re Taking Questions
If you have a question which you think is of general interest (i.e. which are not project specific), please ask here.
We will post the answers to the most frequently asked questions of general interest here
Went to the above site and asked that question.
Thanks for the info!
Nelp.org in their 2/15/09 pdf announcement revealed that the long-term unemployed (those laid off early 2008) will be left out in the cold by the stimulus pkge (ARRA). While listing all the benefits that the package provides to recently laid off workers they also state “While ARRA does NOT provide additional emergency benefits to workers who have already received an extension it ensures that employment benefits go to workers who have recently been laid off and will run out of state benefits later in the year..”. I encourage the many of you who are about to lose their benefits entirely to let your story be known. Call the hosts of Air America & tell them that ARRA/Stimulus Pkge is falling short: it’s only providing for the recently unemployed. Keep in mind that once the long-term unemployed lose their benefits entirely, they won’t even be a statistic anymore. I guess that way, the government can say that the unemployed rates have been “reduced”!
Also, does anyone know of any other websites where the unemployed have a forum? Is this really the only one?! (note: the nelp “forum” isn’t really a forum).
http://nelp.3cdn.net/8328aaf325a33fe316_64m6b9thw.pdf
• Extend & increase unemployment insurance benefits. An estimated 17.9 million Americans
experiencing unemployment in 2009 will receive a $25/week increase in their UI benefits under the
ARRA. The Act will also continue the temporary emergency federal benefits program, previously set
to expire in March, through the end of December, enabling more than 3.1 million additional jobless
Americans to receive extended benefits this year. To see state detail of the ARRA’s impact on jobless
benefits, view this NELP fact sheet. While ARRA does not provide additional emergency benefits to
workers who have already received an extension, it ensures that extended benefits go to workers
who have recently been laid off and will run out of regular state benefits later in the year. The ARRA
also ensures that workers exhausting EUC benefits this year will have access to an additional 13-20
weeks of extended benefits under the permanent Extended Benefits (EB) program if they live in a
state that meets certain definitions of high unemployment (10 states already satisfy this
requirement). SO STATES WILL STILL GET EB AFTER THEY FINISH THE EUC BENEFITS IF STATES ARE OVER 6 PERCENT…this is from nelp
I will be exhausting euc in mid april. Does this apply if sc decides to sign up for EB?
Regarding South Carolina:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-mark-sanford21-2009feb21,0,1271768.story
I DONT’ SEE WHY NOT!