North Carolina Republicans Drastically Cut Benefits For Job Seekers

By Alan Pyke/Think Progress

Life gets tougher as of Sunday for over 400,000 out of work Tarheels as a set of unprecedented cuts to jobless benefits passed by North Carolina Republicans in February take effect. The bill didn’t just shorten the length of state-funded unemployment insurance, as several states have done. It also cut the level of weekly benefit payments, violating a provision of the federal unemployment insurance program and leaving the state ineligible for federal jobless funds.

North Carolina is the first state to be dropped from the national Emergency Unemployment Compensation program, which provides funds for eligible job seekers when they exhaust state-level benefit programs. Seven other states have enacted jobless insurance cuts that will mean their unemployed citizens receive fewer weeks of federal benefits, but North Carolina is the only state to have made itself outright ineligible for the money.

North Carolina’s Republicans said their slashing of jobless benefits will “put North Carolinians back to work.” But that’s not what the evidence says. Multiple research findings indicate that unemployment insurance doesn’t cause a substantial increase in how long someone remains without work. Recipients actually work harder to find a job than non-recipients who are unemployed, as active job seeking is a condition of the benefit.

And economist Larry Katz, whose 1980s research on the subject is frequently cited by the right, says his previous findings about unemployment insurance extending the duration of unemployment don’t apply in the Great Recession. “I strongly favor extensions of UI benefits when the labor market is weak,” Katz told PolitiFact in 2009. Booting job-seekers from the support system does nothing to change the ugly reality that there are still three unemployed people for every job opening. That ratio of job hunters to available jobs is down from nearly 7:1 in mid-2009.

The combined safety net of federal and state unemployment insurance programs kept 2.3 million Americans out of poverty in 2011.

Benefits are already very low without cuts. The maximum weekly benefit in the state had been $535, before taxes, but the average benefit was far lower: $299 per week, pre-tax, according to the Department of Labor. The national average hovers around $300 per week as well.

North Carolina Governor Signs ‘Unprecedented’ Gutting Of Unemployment Insurance

By Travis Waldron/Think Progress

North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory (R) today signed a law that imposes severe cuts to his state’s unemployment insurance program, a change that will also cost jobless workers in the state access to the federal unemployment compensation program.

McCrory’s signature earned him a rebuke from the National Employment Law Project, which said in a release that the law will result in “the most severe cutsto both state and federal unemployment insurance of any state in the nation”:

These heartless cuts, in the state with the fifth-highest jobless rate in the nation, at 9.2 percent, show a shocking disregard for 400,000 unemployed North Carolinians and their families, many of whom will now go from struggling to barely make ends meet to outright struggling to survive. The immediate pain of these cuts will fall on North Carolinians unfortunate enough to lose work through no fault of their own in a weak economy where jobs are scarce. But the entire state will take a hit from the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in spending at local businesses that would’ve boosted the local and state economies.

The law reduces the maximum benefit allowed from $535 a week to $350 while cutting the number of weeks an unemployed worker is eligible for the program from 26 to 20. As a result, 170,000 jobless North Carolinians will also lose access to $780 million in federal unemployment funds. The average unemployed worker in the United States has been off the job for 35 weeks, meaning many jobless workers will now face the prospect of searching for a new job without access to a safety net program.

Republican state senators have touted the law as “re-employment” program, even though research suggests that workers who receive unemployment benefits search harder for jobs than those who don’t. McCrory, meanwhile, praised the fiscal responsibility of the law, which will allow North Carolina to pay back money owed to the federal government a measly three years earlier than it would have under the old program.

Leading Charge to Cut Unemployment Benefits in Half

From the Michigan Democratic Party:

LANSING – The U.S. House of Representatives is set to cut unemployment benefits in half and Michigan GOP Congressman Dave Camp is the mastermind.

H.R. 3630 eliminates more than one year (53 weeks) of unemployment insurance eligibility – leaving just 46 weeks for unemployed workers to collect benefits.

“We’re in the middle of the largest economic crisis since the Great Depression and Dave Camp seems to think it’s a good idea to cut benefits when people need them the most,” Michigan Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer said. “These workers are unemployed through no fault of their own and are searching for jobs to support their families. We can’t take away their safety net. This cut would severely worsen our economy and put millions of families at risk of losing their homes and not being able to put food on the table. That’s unacceptable.”

“We need to be doing everything possible to put people back to work and provide assistance to them while the unemployed are looking for work,” added Brewer. “Republicans don’t seem to be concerned with helping the unemployed or with improving our economy. The only thing they care about is defeating President Obama next year. Congressman Camp and his Republican colleagues should be ashamed of themselves.”

House Republicans May Mandate Drug Testing As Condition Of Continuing Unemployment Benefits

By Marie Diamond/Think Progress

In an effort to drastically reduce the welfare rolls and make it more difficult for struggling families to receive government benefits, GOP governors and legislators have pushed mandatory drug testing laws. Not only do welfare recipients have to pass drug tests before they can collect benefits, they often have to pay for the test themselves, and will only be reimbursed by the state later if they pass.

Now House Republicans are considering making their vote to reauthorize unemployment insurancecontingent on a mandatory drug testing requirement:

The bill by Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) would require unemployment claimants to pass a drug test if they are identified in an initial screening as having a high probability of drug use.

The proposal comes as Congress is mulling a reauthorization of federal jobless benefits for people out of work six months or longer. House Republicans have been drafting legislation, but the details have not been released. [...]

On Thursday morning, [spokesman for Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) Michael] Steel told HuffPost in an email he didn’t know whether the forthcoming unemployment legislation would include Kingston’s drug testing idea. A spokesman for the Republican leader of the House Ways and Means committee, which oversees unemployment insurance, could not confirm details of the bill.

Steel said on Wednesday that Republicans are looking to “reform” unemployment insurance before they will reauthorize benefits that are set to expire at the end of the year.

Despite their unwillingness to raise taxes on millionaires and billionaires, Republicans have been reluctant to extend unemployment insurance and the payroll tax break that middle class families depend on more than ever. President Obama has noted that if Republicans vote no, middle class families will have to pay an additional $1,000 in taxes next year.

Republicans have willfully ignored evidence that drug testing requirements cost more money than they save and welfare recipients actually use drugs less than other groups.

Earlier this year a federal judge halted Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s (R) mandatory drug testing policy on constitutional grounds. Only 2.5 percent of welfare applicants failed the test, which Huffington Post notes is “a far lower rate of illicit drug use than the national average of 8.7 percent.”

Paul Ryan Endorses ‘Unemployment Reform’ That Asks The Jobless To Work More For Less

By Marie Diamond /Think Progress

In an interview yesterday with Fox News’ Chris Wallace, House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) had almost nothing but criticism for President Obama’s jobs plan. “This looks like to me not a very good sign, because it looks like the president wants to move down the class warfare path,” he commented. Ryan did, however, express his support for a program that asks the unemployed to work for no wages while receiving unemployment benefits.

Under the Georgia Works program, Georgians receiving unemployment benefits are matched with employers who provide them with up to eight weeks of training during which they work for free. Instead of being paid by the employer, workers continue to receive their unemployment checks and a $240 stipend to help cover transportation, child care, and other expenses.

According to Ryan, this state program is “something we’re looking at” to replicate on thenational level:

“The Georgia plan sounds pretty interesting,” Ryan told Fox News’ Chris Wallace Sunday. “I think that’s something we are looking at, which is unemployment reform.”

Ryan’s remarks echo House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-VA) support of the idea.

“We stand ready to work with [President Obama] if there is interest in implementing a similar program on the federal level,” Cantor said.

The top weekly unemployment benefit in Georgia is around $330, or a maximum of $2,640 for two months of work.

It’s significant that the Georgia Works model is the only part of Obama’s proposal that Cantor and Ryan — who are against middle class tax cuts and believe raising taxes on millionaires is “class warfare” — endorse. Republicans seem to be aiming for another “reform” of unemployment benefits, much like welfare reform in 1995, that requires the jobless to work more and more for less in less — so little, in fact, that they can end up being used essentially as slave labor by more unscrupulous companies. Republicans in Congress have continually opposed to extending unemployment insurance.

While there are some positive aspects to the program — training that teaches important skills increase the chances that the unemployed will find jobs — companies benefit disproportionately from two months of free labor while the government picks up the tab for the very modest stipend. From participants’ perspective, the stipend just covers the expenses necessary to get to work, so there is no net financial gain (at least in the short term).

Numbers from the Georgia Department of Labor reveal that there is little to recommend about the program. Between 2003 and 2010, only 16.4 percent of people that participated in the program were hired by the company that trained them during or at the end of the training period. As of late August, there were only 19 trainees enrolled in Georgia Works.

Romney: Jobless Americans Have To Bear Burden Of Budget Cuts Because Corporations Need A Tax Cut

By Travis Waldron/Think Progress

A member of the local Rotary Club stood yesterday to ask former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) a question weighing on the minds of millions of jobless Americans: At a time when corporations are sitting on record amounts of cash, why are the Americans who can least afford it being asked to shoulder the burden of trillions of dollars in potential budget cuts?

But Romney dodged the question, ignoring the plight of the poor and unemployed, and instead launched into a speech about how American jobs were being outsourced to developing countries with cheap labor and miniscule tax rates because the U.S. has made itself unattractive to major corporations. Instead of sticking up for Americans who are facing cuts to the safety net programs they desperately need, Romney took the opportunity to proclaim that America’s problems could be fixed if it gave corporations yet another tax cut:

QUESTIONER: We obviously need cuts to the budget…but many of the recipients of those programs are Americans whose jobs have gone places where labor is cheap. So corporate profits remain high and in some cases higher than ever. Is it fair to ask those Americans to shoulder reductions in favor of businesses and corporations who have sent those jobs overseas?

ROMNEY: [...] We need to make ourselves the most attractive place in the world for entrepreneurs and pioneers and businesses, just like it was when the Founders created this country. How do you do that? One, you make sure our employer tax rates aren’t the highest in the world. Right now they’re tied with Japan as the highest in the world. They’re about 10 points higher than the corporate tax rates in many of the countries in Europe.

Watch it:

Not only did Romney seemingly ignore the concerns raised by the question, his answer perpetuated the false idea that American corporations are subject to the highest tax rate in the world. In reality, those corporations pay an effective rate that is among the lowest in the industrialized world. Some of the nation’s largest businesses, in fact, had effective tax rates that were actually negative.

Meanwhile, the GOP continues to support cutting funding from programs that help the jobless and the poor. But for Romney, that’s easily justifiable: corporations, already earning record profits, need a tax break to go along.

Deficit Fraud Romney: Jobless Benefits Are Too Expensive, But The Bush Tax Cuts Increase Revenue

By Pat Garofalo Yesterday, the Senate approved the tax deal that President Obama negotiated with Congressional Republicans by an 83-15 vote. The legislation now moves to the House, where Democrats are saying that they might tinker with the estate tax cut that Republicans are insisting upon.

But it isn’t only on the left that opposition to the deal exists. A few House Republicans have disparaged the deal for including too few tax cuts and too much help for the jobless. In a USA Today op-ed today, former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-MA) — who is consistently mentioned amongst GOP 2012 hopefuls — came to the same conclusion, saying that a two-year extension of all of the Bush tax cuts is too short, while a one-year extension of unemployment benefits is too expensive:

One thing is certain: While we cannot rebuild our flawed system [unemployment insurance system] overnight, we are surely not required to borrow the funds to pay for it. In spending $56.5 billion to extend benefits, the deal is sacrificing the bedrock Republican principle that new expenditures be paid for with offsetting budget cuts.

Romney also criticizes the deal’s payroll tax reduction for adding to the deficit. But then, in order to get around the fact that he favors permanent extension of the entire Bush tax cut package (at a cost of $4 trillion over the next decade), Romney asserts that such an extension will actually increase revenues:

In many cases, lowering taxes can actually increase government revenues. If new businesses, new investments and new hiring are spurred by the prospects of better after-tax returns, the taxes paid by these new or growing businesses and employees can more than make up for the lower rates of taxation.

As The Wonk Room explained, when it comes to the Bush tax cuts, revenue surely did not increase. Romney is simply twisting himself in circles to justify his opposition to the tax deal on fiscal responsibility grounds, while simultaneously advocating for a full extension of the Bush tax cuts, no matter their effect on the deficit.

DeMint Opposes Tax Deal Because Of Jobless Benefits: ‘We Can’t Just Keep Paying People To Stay At Home’

By Pat Garofalo

As part of his tax deal with Congressional Republicans, President Obama managed to wring out of the GOP a 13 month extension of unemployment benefits. For months, Republicans have made each extension of benefits a protracted, drawn-out fight, even with unemployment above nine percent and five unemployed job-seekers for every job opening. Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) even stayed on the Senate floor until late in the evening to personally block extending benefits, telling those asking him to relent “tough sh*t.” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said yesterday that the “vast majority” of Republican senators would support the tax deal. But one who has come out with vocal opposition is Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), who takes exception to the fact that the jobless benefits extension is unpaid for. “I don’t think we need to extend unemployment any further without paying for it,” he told conservative talk radio host Hugh Hewitt yesterday. Of course, DeMint has proposed permanently extending all of the Bush tax cuts without paying for a dime of it, adding $4 trillion in deficits over the next ten years alone. But according to DeMint, the problem with unemployment benefits is that they amount to “paying people to stay home,” as he told South Carolina’s News 13: The senator also said extending unemployment benefits that aren’t paid for isn’t helping add new jobs. “We can’t just keep paying people to stay at home,” said DeMint. “We’ve got to create economic activity to allow businesses to grow so they can hire people.” Watch it: As The Wonk Room noted, DeMint is hardly alone amongst his GOP colleagues in perpetuating the myth that jobless benefits encourage people to stay out of work. But research by the San Francisco Federal Reserve has found that workers who qualify for UI benefits stay unemployed just 1.6 weeks longer than those who do not qualify for such benefits. Unemployment benefits are providing a vital lifeline to millions of Americans struggling in a weak economy, but DeMint would cut them off, while lavishing tax breaks on the wealthy. And it seems that DeMint would find some sympathetic ears amongst House Republicans, as a handful of them have said that they will oppose the tax deal because it has too few tax cuts and too much help for the jobless.

Scott Brown Single-Handedly Blocks An Extension Of Unemployment Benefits

By Tanya Somanader Yesterday, the Senate failed to extend unemployment benefits through next year, leaving over 2 million unemployed Americans without crucial aid in the midst of the holiday season. Senate Republicans refused to consider a year-long extension unless the cost is fully paid for. A particularly incensed Sen. Scott Brown delivered a “fiery speech” on the Senate floor last night, lambasting Democrats “for what he considers to be unwarranted diversions.” “We spent seven days on food safety!” Brown scoffed and reassured unemployed workers that “I have complete and total sympathy and understanding” and that “more than anybody here, I want to help.”

However, when Democrats offered him that opportunity, he single-handedly slapped away the chance. Trying to beat the clock, Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) introduced a proposal Monday to extend benefits through 2011 at a cost of $56 billion without offsets. But when Democrats tried to pass the proposal yesterday, Brown blocked the effort, complaining that he’d “just found out” about it:

Hours before beefed-up benefits were set to expire at midnight, Democrats sought to extend them for another year. But they were blocked by Republican Senator Scott Brown, who said Democrats should have taken time to work out a compromise.

“It’s not the way to do business in the United States Senate, and if it is it needs to change,” Brown said. “We just found out today, or late yesterday, that we were even going to talk about this.”

After his objection, Brown offered his own proposal for a year-long extension as long as the Office of Management and Budget finds funds from already approved appropriations to pay for it. But Democrats turned down the plan because, as Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) noted, “we have to deal with the immediate crisis” and “the families that are struggling today.” This, of course, was the governing philosophy of both parties when they passed unemployment extension seven times under the Bush Administration. In fact, before yesterday, Congress went 40 years without allowing extended unemployment benefits to expire when the unemployment rate was above 7.2 percent. The unemployment rate today stands at 9.6 percent.

But, in a video released this morning, Brown defended his opposition, saying he “disagreed” that Congress should “pay for unemployment benefits” by “putting more debt on the credit card.” A curious position considering Brown is more than happy to slap the nation with a $830 billion bill in order to extend the Bush tax cuts for the top two percent of wealthy Americans. In touting the GOP’s absurd logic, Brown and his GOP colleagues champion an extension that provides “virtually no economic stimulus,” while rebuking one that “contribute[s] powerfully to the economic growth that is vital for a healthy budget.”

This morning, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) called Brown’s vote against 60,000 Massachusetts workers “outrageous” and a “question of national character.” “We need Scott Brown to see and be worried about the people of the Commonwealth who are trying to get groceries on the table while they

continue to look for work,” he said. But, according to his schedule, Brown is busy focusing on his Christmas-themed fundraisers this week

Rep. Shadegg Scoffs At The Fact That Jobless Benefits Are A Benefit To The Economy: ‘No, They’re Not!’

By Pat Garofalo

Unless Congress acts today, unemployment benefits will expire for 2.5 million Americans, with unemployment above nine percent and five unemployed workers competing for every available job opening. If Congress, as expected, does nothing, this will be first time in the last forty years that benefits have expired with unemployment so high.

According to calculations by the Congressional Budget Office, Moody’s Economy, andmyriad other economists, unemployment benefits are the single best way to pump money into the economy and generate economic activity, as the unemployed are very likely to spend all of the benefits they receive (thus moving money into local businesses). But during an interview with MSNBC’s Mike Barnicle today, Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) scoffed at the notion that unemployment benefits help the economy. “Unemployed people hire people? Really? I didn’t know that,” Shadegg jeered:

BARNICLE: What about the fact that unemployment benefits pumped into the economy are an immediate benefit to the economy? Immediate…

SHADEGG: No, they’re not! Unemployed people hire people? Really? I didn’t know that.

BARNICLE: Unemployed people spend money Congressman, ’cause they have no money.

SHADEGG: Aha! So your answer is it’s the spending of money that drives the economy and I don’t think that’s right. It’s the creation of jobs that drives the economy…Actually, the truth is the unemployed will spend as little of that money as they possibly can. Job creators create jobs.

BARNICLE: Have you ever been unemployed? Have you ever been unemployed?

SHADEGG: Yes, I have.

BARNICLE: What did you do with the money? Save it?

Watch it:

At the same time that he was dumping on the unemployed, Shadegg called for extending all of the Bush tax cuts without paying for them, joining a slew of Republicanlawmakers who care more about tax cuts for the very wealthy than unemployed Americans about to lose the last strand of safety net that they have available.

Shadegg never managed to explain why all of the job creators he cites would create any jobs if households aren’t spending money. In that vein, MarketPlace noted today that “when unemployment checks stop, it’s felt right away by businesses like gas stations, apartment operators, and grocery stores.” And as the Center for American Progress’ Heather Boushey and Jordan Eizenga found, “the workers losing benefits have an average weekly benefit of a little over $290 per week, which translates into a total loss of about $2.5 billion dollars in benefits over December. This is equal to about one in seven dollars of the gain in retail sales seen between December 2008 and December 2009.”

As The Wonk Room noted, some economists estimate that allowing benefits to expire could cause economic growth to “fall by one half to nearly 1 percentage point,” as well as throw hundreds of thousands of people into poverty. And while Shadegg joked that he will be unemployed come January since he is retiring from Congress, next year he will be eligible for a federal pension (if he opted for one), as he is turning 62 and served on Capitol Hill for more than five years.

Ben Stein: The Unemployed Are People With ‘Unpleasant Personalities…Who Do Not Know How To Do A Day’s Work’

By Zaid Jilani Today, the Senate extended unemployment benefits for millions of jobless Americans. Despite the terrible shape of the economy, conservatives resisted extending unemployment insurance for weeks for Americans who can’t find work, launching a filibuster to prevent a vote on the benefits.

Writing at the American Spectator yesterday, former Nixon speechwriter and TV personality Ben Stein downplayed the suffering unemployed Americans are experiencing by writing that the people who are unemployed right now are “generally people with poor work habits and poor personalities.” He claims the unemployed are Americans with “unpleasant personalities…who do not know how to do a day’s work“:

The people who have been laid off and cannot find work are generally people with poor work habits and poor personalities. I say “generally” because there are exceptions. But in general, as I survey the ranks of those who are unemployed, I see people who have overbearing and unpleasant personalities and/or who do not know how to do a day’s work. They are people who create either little utility or negative utility on the job. Again, there are powerful exceptions and I know some, but when employers are looking to lay off, they lay off the least productive or the most negative. To assure that a worker is not one of them, he should learn how to work and how to get along — not always easy.

Of course, saying that the 15 million Americans who are unemployed right now are “generally” people with “poor work habits” is as offensive as it is wrong. The current recession is a global phenomenon caused by the collective bad behavior of the world’s largest financial institutions. Before the recession, the unemployment rate hovered around six percent; it is ludicrious to say that millions of Americans suddenly got lazier and less able to work within the span of a few months.

Unfortunately, Stein is a widely respected voice on the American right who regularly appears on cable news to offer his thoughts on politics and policy. Using the Critical Mention media search engine, ThinkProgress finds that the name “Ben Stein” was mentioned 64 times in major television media networks within the past thirty days alone.

17 senators from states with double-digit jobless rates repeatedly vote to filibuster unemployment benefits.

By Pat Garofalo Since the beginning of the Great Recession, 15 million Americans have lost their jobs. Almost half of them have been out of work for six months or more, and there are currently nearly five workers actively seeking work for every available job. However, the Senate has been unable to extend job benefits because of a Republican filibuster, which has been joined by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE). On three separate occasions, Democrats tried to break the filibuster but were unsuccessful. And while no senator voting to continue the filibuster should be allowed to escape responsibility, many voting to sustain it are from states that have been hit particularly hard by the

unemployment crisis. Here are the 17 senators from states with double-digit unemployment who are willing to leave their constituents without a safety net:

Senator(s)	State	Unemployment Rate	Votes Against Cloture (Out Of Three)
Sens. Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby (R)	Alabama	10.8%	Three each
Sen. George LeMieux (R)	Florida	10.4%	Three
Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson (R)	Georgia	10.2%	Three each
Sen. Richard Lugar (R)	Indiana	10.0%	Three
Sens. Mitch McConnell and Jim Bunning (R)	Kentucky	10.4%	Three each
Sens. Roger Wicker and Thad Cochran (R)	Mississippi	11.4%	Three each
Sen. John Ensign (R)	Nevada	14.0%	Three
Sen. Richard Burr (R)	North Carolina	10.3%	Three
Sen. George Voinivich	Ohio	10.7%	Three
Sen. Lindsey Graham	South Carolina	11.0%	Two (Missed vote on 6/17)
Sen. Jim DeMint	South Carolina	11.0%	Two (Missed vote on 6/30)
Sens. Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander (R)	Tennessee	10.4%	Three each

1.3 million people have lost their benefits this month alone, and this is actually an historic step on the part of the Senate, as “never before has Congress cut off benefits when unemployment was so high.” But perhaps Republicans in the Senate agree with Sharron Angle that unemployed people are simply “spoiled” and “afraid to get a job”?

Coburn: Blocking Unemployment Benefits Is Fine Because It Only Affects A ‘Small Amount Of People’

By Pat Garofalo A few weeks ago, for the second time in two months, Senate Republicans objected to an extension of unemployment benefits. While the last dispute was resolved in time to keep benefits from expiring, as of Monday, hundreds of thousands of unemployed workers are seeing their benefits come to an end. Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) led the GOP obstruction last time (telling the Democrats “tough sh*t” when they asked for unanimous consent to move the extension forward), but this time Sen. Tom “Dr. No” Coburn (R-OK) has stepped up to the plate. And he evidently has no remorse about his actions, as he feels they affect a “relatively small amount of people”: The easiest thing in the world is to pass this bill unpaid for, but consider the millions of Americans whose financial futures would be damaged, versus the relatively small amount of people who will be affected by this delay. Now you tell me which vote takes the most courage. First, Coburn is wrong on the economics. Providing unemployment benefits is one of the most effective steps that a government can take in terms of economic stimulus, and unless the economy starts moving again, long-term deficits (“financial futures”) will never be brought under control. As the National Employment Law Project’s Judy Conti explained, “every economist from every side of the political spectrum will tell you that unemployment benefits are most stimulative when they are not offset. In the history of the unemployment program, we have never offset these programs.” And then there’s the human angle. Because of Coburn and the GOP’s obstruction, more than 200,000 people per week will lose their benefits. About one million are slated to lose their benefits this month. And this is taking place while 44 percent of unemployed Americans (about 6.5 million people) have been unemployed for six months or more. Plus, the same package that Coburn blocked included a renewal of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), while the Northeast United States has been hard-hit by flooding. If you thought this whole sordid episode would prompt some soul-searching among the GOP, you’d be mistaken. They are, instead, circling the wagons around Coburn and trying to blame House Democrats (who objected to their proposed offset) for preventing the extension. In fact, Sen. Jon Kyl’s (R-AZ) takeaway is that the GOP should have lent more support to Bunning when he blocked the extension. “We didn’t give [Bunning] as much help as we probably should have,” Kyl said. “It took an act of courage like Sen. Bunning’s to perhaps jolt people into the awareness of how bad it had really gotten.”

GOP Sen. Kyl: Unemployment Benefits Make People Not Want To Get A Job

By Ryan Grim

A debate on the Senate floor Monday over unemployment compensation crystallized, at least for a moment, the divide between the two parties in Washington.

Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the Republican whip, argued that unemployment benefits dissuade people from job-hunting "because people are being paid even though they're not working."

Unemployment insurance "doesn't create new jobs. In fact, if anything, continuing to pay people unemployment compensation is a disincentive for them to seek new work," Kyl said during debate over whether unemployment insurance and other benefits that expired amid GOP objections Sunday should be extended.

"I'm sure most of them would like work and probably have tried to seek it, but you can't argue that it's a job enhancer. If anything, as I said, it's a disincentive. And the same thing with the COBRA extension and the other extensions here," said Kyl.

Unemployment benefits are generally so small that much of it is often used to pay for COBRA health insurance, even when subsidized. The size of the benefits does not generally cover the cost of living and it would be hard to find a single person who would prefer unemployment to having a job so that they could get subsidized COBRA.

Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), about as far from a populist as can be found in the Democratic Party, appeared surprised at Kyl's claim.

"The Senator from Arizona argues that unemployment insurance is a disincentive to jobs. Nothing could be further from the truth. I don't know anybody who's out of work and is receiving some unemployment insurance believes that that payment is sufficient not to find a job. The payments are so much lower than any salary or wage would be, it's just ridiculous. I might add, there are five unemployed Americans today for every job opening in the economy," said Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee. "People are looking for work. They're not unemployed because of choice."

He added that Kyl's economic argument was flawed, as well. Unemployment benefits do create jobs because the recipients cycle the money through the economy. He cited a Congressional Budget Office analysis that said the Gross Domestic Product grew $1.90 for every dollar the federal government paid out.

Baucus, ever the bipartisan, gave Kyl a chance to take his accusation back.

"I don't know if the senator really meant this, but he certainly strongly implied, in fact, I took him to mean that unemployment insurance is a disincentive for people to look for work," said Baucus.

Kyl asked to clarify. "My colleague quoted me correctly -- almost correctly," he said. "I said, it's not a job creator. If anything, it could be argued that it is a disincentive for work, because people are being paid even though they're not working. I certainly did not say, and would never imply, that the reason people don't have jobs is because they're not looking for them. Now, it is true that a lot of Americans have gotten so tired of looking for jobs or -- or believe that they're not gong to find them, that they have stopped looking."

Still, Kyl concluded by standing by his statement.

"What I said is true and if my colleague could find a source that says it's not true, then please show me. But providing unemployment benefits does not create jobs," he said, though Baucus had already directed him to the CBO analysis.

Kyl could also consult economist Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. "It puts money into people's pockets and they spend almost all of it. That creates jobs," he said.

Thousands Of Federal Workers Are Furloughed Without Pay Today Because Of Sen. Bunning’s Partisanship

By Amanda Terkel Over the weekend, approximately 400,000 laid-off workers may have lost their unemployment benefits, COBRA subsidies to help defray health care costs expired, and loans for small businesses ran out of time — all because of Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY).

Last week, the House passed an extension of these benefits. Bunning, however, blocked the Senate from moving forward over “a dispute over how [the bill] should be funded,” and complained that the Democrats’ insistence on trying to ensure that unemployment benefits not expire had caused him to miss a college basketball game.

Several Republicans have defended Bunning’s destructive tactics, although Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) called on him to move aside. Inhofe pointed out that since the bill also contained transportation funding, an expiration could lead to furloughs of employees of the Federal Highway Administration. Indeed, today, 2,000 federal transportation workers have been furloughed without pay. From a Department of Transportation press release, which lays the blame directly on Bunning:

The action comes as a result of Kentucky Sen. Jim Bunning’s decision to block key legislation that would have extended several critical priorities for middle class families. [...]

Because of the shutdown, federal inspectors will be removed from critical construction projects, forcing work to come to a halt on federal lands. Projects span the country, including the $36 million replacement of the Humpback Bridge on the George Washington Parkway in Virginia, $15 million in bridge construction and stream rehabilitation in Coeur D’Alene, Idaho, and the $8 million resurfacing of the Natchez Trace Parkway in Mississippi. [...]

At the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the furloughs will disrupt safety programs that operate in partnership with the states and advocacy groups, such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP). [...]

Assistance to consumers whose goods are held hostage by rogue moving companies will be unavailable during this period. And work addressing texting while driving for commercial truck and bus drivers, electronic on-board recorders and hours of service will also be suspended.

On Friday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) also pointed out that 1.5 million people may also “be unable to watch local TV stations” beginning today — also because of Bunning’s block on the bill, which includes a “satellite television extension” allowing rural residents to watch local TV stations via satellite. According to MultiChannel news, without the extension, “satellite operators will not be allowed to import distant affiliate TV station signals to viewers who cannot receive a viewable version of their local affiliate.”

Yesterday, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) said that the Senate will most likely pass a temporary extension of the unemployment benefits this week, although a year-long extension may be a tougher sell.

Update The top two Republicans hoping to replace the retiring Bunning applauded his obstructionist tactics.

Bunning Whines About Missing Basketball Game, Tells Dems ‘Tough Sh*t’ On Unemployment Benefits

By Pat Garofalo

Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed an extension of unemployment benefits on a voice vote. The Senate, however, has yet to act on the same measure, as various senators are throwing up procedural roadblocks. On Wednesday night, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) asked for unanimous consent to approve an extension, only to see the motion blocked by Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) over “a dispute over how [the bill] should be funded.”

Late last night, Democrats made repeated attempts to pass the extension by unanimous consent, and Bunning blocked them all. He then complained that the Democrats’ insistence on trying to ensure that unemployment benefits not expire had caused him to miss a college basketball game:

I want to assure the people that have, heh, watched this thing until quarter of twelve — and I have missed the Kentucky-South Carolina game that started at 9 o’clock, and it’s the only redeeming chance we had to beat South Carolina, since they’re the only team that has beat Kentucky this year — all of these things that we have talked about and all the provisions that have been discussed, the unemployment benefits, all these things. If we’d have taken the longer version of the job bill…we wouldn’t have spent three hours plus telling everybody in the United States of America that Senator Bunning doesn’t give a damn about the people that are on unemployment.

(Bunning’s beloved Kentucky Wildcats went on to defeat South Carolina.) Watch it:

At one point, while Sens. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) were asking him to relent, Bunning was overhead blurting out “tough sh*t” as he sat in the back row.

Not only did Bunning’s antics go on all night and ultimately prevent an extension from passing, but other Republicans went to bat for Bunning, arguing that the Democrats should simply respect Bunning’s hold. Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) said, “I believe we’re stooping to a low level. This is not the way the Senate functions. Everybody in the country now knows that the senator from Kentucky has a hold on this bill. … That’s something that we honor in this body.”

“I just don’t think one senator ought to be able to heap this kind of suffering and misfortune on people who are already struggling in this economy,” Durbin said. “This is a wild pitch you are throwing tonight because it is pitch that is hitting somebody in the stands.” 1.1 million workers are scheduled to have their unemployment benefits expire next month, and 5 million will lose their benefits by June.

Update Sen. Durbin tried once more to pass the extension by unanimous consent this morning, and Bunning objected again.