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 1-30 of 3062 total comments.

  • NoGoodOnesLeft 08/01/2009 4:21am

    I support this bill but think it should be amended to a straight out extension for all states. Just because a state’s rate is going up slower doesn’t mean that the long term unemployed are getting jobs. People in all states need help. If the government can help auto makers and banks, they should surely be able to help the unemployed citizens, too.

  • Comm_reply
    MBArry47 08/01/2009 6:45am

    I agree what is good for one should be good for all. A state line should not determine ones needs.

  • Comm_reply
    Jans1116 09/09/2009 1:47am

    Or rights. We should be entiled for all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Comm_reply
    dimi3 08/20/2009 4:02pm

    They also NEED to extend the 65% COBRA reduction from 9 months to 18 months!
    Please write your congressmen!

  • Comm_reply
    Jans1116 09/09/2009 1:46am

    Also, if you are unemployed longer we do not qualify for the Cobra discount. We have been out and hurting longer and we are not getting the full assistance. The media makes it sound like you do get the assistance. I do agree with you. I had an interview finally after a year and a half. MY FIRST ONE! Can you imagine???????

  • Comm_reply
    unemployed_in_nj 09/10/2009 10:37am

    What are people’s opinions on whether or not they think the unemployment extension (if passed) will be retroactive and include those than have ran out of the 20 weeks of EB within the last couple of weeks? Any information out there about this issue. Again, this is hoping and assuming that a bill does get passed at some point. Thank you all. Hang in there.

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 09/10/2009 11:36am

    This info has been posted here before many times, but I’ll repeat it again here:

    The current bills are not retroactive as written, but there appears to be discussion of a possible break-off bill just for those exhaustees that might be written differently, too early to tell.

    BUT as currently written, both bills DO provide 13 additional weeks for EB exhaustees (even if you’re already off benefits), as long as your state is over 8.5% (Senate bill) or 9% (House bill) unemployment rate.

    That is why you will hear from so many on EB about these bills, since so many are currently running out of benefits at this time.

  • Comm_reply
    sheaffer67 09/16/2009 4:22am

    In all honesty, the extension should be enough to take everyone to the end of the year at least. What good does 7 weeks do anyone? Jobs don’t just spring up that fast. I know, I’ve been looking for work for a year now. All a seven week extension does is make you worry alot sooner than need be.

  • Comm_reply
    rapidresearch 09/20/2009 8:15am

    I see that H 3404 states that states with 9% or better unemployment rate would qualify for extended unemployment benefits if passed. S 1647 states 8.5%. My state (Idaho) is at 8.9%. How do these bills conflict with each other? If 1647 passes and not 3404, or if 3404 passes but not 1647?

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 09/21/2009 5:29pm

    rapidresearch—If you are currently running out of Extended Benefits or already have, the bill to watch right now is not either of these two, but rather HR 3548:


    That is the new emergency version of 3404 that will be voted on tomorrow (Tuesday) or at latest Wednesday. There’s heated discussion that’s been going on for weeks over at the link above.

  • Comm_reply
    ITGuy55 09/23/2009 8:12pm


    To get any EUC beyond basic Tier 1 benefits under current law, one must begin receiving them before the end of 2009 or one doesn’t get them at all. The current bill that just passed addresses those whose 33 weeks of EUC is (or is about to be) exhausted, but does not address the people who lost their jobs this year and will not yet be eligible to receive the Tier 2/3 when the current program expires at year’s end.

    Both the Senate version (S 1647) and the older House bill (HR 3404) that are still under consideration include provisions to push back the expiration for one year. I would like to the bill be extended for two or three years at a time, instead of causing uncertainly for millions of people by waiting until the deadline to let people know if they will have money coming in a relatively few weeks from now.

  • Comm_reply
    babydoll123 10/16/2009 11:59am

    i agree with this bill there are no many people that is looking for work and havent found it i been looking for work for a year and some months and no luck i believe that this 4th unemployment will really help those that is really in need and have no money to pay their bills. what are we going to do without jobs and money we didn’t ask for this, this is something that just happen to us

  • unemployed2007 08/01/2009 6:59am

    I support this bill. Also agree that it should include more states and I’m from MI.


  • johnj2010 08/01/2009 7:16am

    Well said from above post- I live in CT, We are having trouble getting the last 7 weeks of eb as is. Maybe a Republican can help us out- (Yeah Right)

  • Comm_reply
    abaratar 08/01/2009 8:32am

    It would be nice if they would extend unemployment based on the standards of the last administration which was to extend unemployment based on a rate of 6.5% or higher. It would also have been really nice if they would have allowed the republican amendment in the stimulus to make it so that income tax does not have to be payed on unemployment benefits. The sad thing is the people in Washington are just as pathetic as you, the reason we have to pay income tax on unemployment is because the proposal to eliminate income taxes on unemployment came from a republican and you know they can not let a republican measure pass.

  • Comm_reply
    Jans1116 09/09/2009 1:51am

    I think you need to look at what was the wish of the last administration. They did not want to extend it the first time. It was because of election they did at all and they are the reason that much was cut from the bill in the first place. Provisions for certain ages that could not find positions because of age, were eliminated and many other items were cut. They did not want to pass the very first extension at all. You need to read old posts on the last bill from day one!

  • Comm_reply
    abaratar 08/01/2009 8:44am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Grow up or go play with your dolls this is an adult forum.

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

    I have to ask, who are you talking to?

  • Comm_reply
    unemployed2007 08/01/2009 12:41pm

    I was wondering too?

  • Comm_reply
    bninfl 08/15/2009 9:53am

    if you guys didn’t know who we was talking to you really need to read the posts before his… i can clearly see who he was talking to – that damn guy with his head buried in the sand that keeps blaming everything on republicans when the democrats are in control TODAY.

  • Comm_reply
    FLarlene 08/15/2009 10:53am

    Bninfl, I have read your posts on the last 2 pages. Is there really a need to swear? Is there?

    Also, I invite you watch the PBS documentary Frontline, Inside the Meltdown. It’s on You Tube.

    And why on God’s green earth are you accepting Obama’s and the Democrats social program of Unemployment Benefits??????????

  • need2know 08/01/2009 8:10am

    I totally concur with all the unemployed in every state across the country. This has been the hardest time in my life that I have had difficulty locating another job at my age. Over 20 years experience, always teaching the younger sect, yet unsuccessful at becoming employed again. No one was prepared for the layoffs, and no one wants to hire at other companies. What should we do in order to continue living? Even public assistance frowns upon us. We want to work, and accomplish survival, but since we cannot get anyone to hire us right now, we NEED an extension in EVERY STATE!

  • Comm_reply
    bl5 08/01/2009 12:10pm

    Very well said!

  • Comm_reply
    Jans1116 09/09/2009 1:57am

    Oh Yes! I AM IN THE SAME PLACE AS YOU! I have a few more years than you. They use you to train them and dump you!

  • unemployed2007 08/01/2009 8:41am

    51 Views of this bill this morning. I’m going to twitter about it..hopefully gain some traffic to move it up on homepage.

  • NoGoodOnesLeft 08/01/2009 12:29pm

    Can someone please tell me when corporations became more important than people? Did I blink and miss it?

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 08/01/2009 12:59pm

    Started in the ‘80s. I know that’s a mantra of mine, but it did, spurred on by a mantra called Reaganomics. So many grew up taking it all as a matter of course, just the way businesses were supposed to be run, and now it’s come to its ultimate ugly result.

  • ronaand 08/01/2009 1:46pm

    corporations/business has always been more important in this country
    during the depression the wealthy continued to make money
    50’s had the military industrial complex
    kennedy/johnson before the advent of more sophisticated technology (let’s watch the vietnam war during dinner) tried to get a country back for (alleged) mob related sugar businiesses
    u.s. trade policies with japan in the mid- 1960’s through the collapse of the japanese economy, and continuing with the chinese
    (can’t buy u.s. debt if you don’t stitch nike shoes)
    why blame reagan – he was, all in all, just another brick in the wall

  • Comm_reply
    nancym 08/01/2009 1:57pm

    Yes, you’re right. Maybe I should have just said that it became chic for the population in general to view all that as business as usual as it escalated the rights of corporations over the rights of individual citizens. All that stuff went on before the ‘80s, but corporate raiders were never popular heroes like they increasingly became around the ’80s. Since I’m old enough to remember the earlier decades, I was very aware of the shift in popular culture.

    And while it went on earlier of course, it started to become out of style to rage against it, until more recently as the veil of illusion has started to slip. That trend toward corporate power has had several decades to seep into the media structure, popular culture, political culture, and of course our tax code. It will take a lot to unwind it to some vague semblance of fairness.

  • MBArry47 08/01/2009 6:24pm

    NYT Prolonged Aid To Unemployed Is Running Out.

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