As usual the GOP expected way too much to doing what should be done. They only would accept an extension with egregious strings attached-that it should be 'paid for' and that it should be the start of 'structural reforms' of the UI system.
"Democrats remain focused on either passing a three-month extension of benefits that would not be paid for, or a longer-term bill that is paid for. Most Republicans prefer a paid-for three-month extension that allow debate and consideration of larger structural changes to the U.S. unemployment program."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/unemployment-benefits-update-102165.html#ixzz2qQCFEEBw
"Democrats remain focused on either passing a three-month extension of benefits that would not be paid for, or a longer-term bill that is paid for. Most Republicans prefer a paid-for three-month extension that allow debate and consideration of larger structural changes to the U.S. unemployment program."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/unemployment-benefits-update-102165.html#ixzz2qQCFEEBw
What kind of 'structural reforms' do you think they might have in mind? Sumner always tries to act like he's beyond narrow partisanship but which party do you think would agree with him here?
"The entire unemployment system should be gradually replaced with personal UI accounts, grandfathering in those in the old system. When people retire any unused funds in their UI accounts could be used for retirement, or for bequests."
I mean if you agree with this policy which party would make it law tomorrow if only they had the votes? Greg Sargent provides some perspective-this was what the GOP wanted to do. Kill it but shielding Repubilcans from blame for killing it.
"Today, Republicans successfully filibustered a version of the unemployment insurance extension, and UI is now in limbo. Republicans tossed out a host of procedural objections in the process. No surprise: the game plan all along has been to sink the extension while deflecting blame from Republicans by casting it as a casualty of inside-the-Beltway bickering."
As he suggests, this should play to a larger context argument the Dems are making for the 2014 election races on the welfare state and the GOP's scorched earth determination to destroy it. Meanwhile, 70,000 real people lose their benefits every week
"Benefits lapsed for 1.3 million workers on Dec. 28, thanks to congressional inaction. Each week since the lapse, another 70,000 laid off workers reach the end of their state benefits, which in most cases last six months, and find that the federal benefits that previously helped millions of workers won't be helping them. Lawmakers knew about the looming deadline for a whole year but did nothing until it was too late.
Marcia Carroll of Staunton, Va., is one the people whose benefits stopped last month. She said she'd lost her job as a warehouse materials handler in July. Since losing her unemployment insurance, she's already begun missing payments.
"Today I got three cancellation notices: my car insurance, my cable bill, my light bill," Carroll, 43, said in a phone interview Monday. "I don't have a fancy house, I don't have no credit card bills. [When I had the benefits] I could pay what I needed to pay. When you go from $340 a week to zero a week you eat a lot of peanut butter."
"Carroll said she's applied for warehouse jobs, retail jobs and temp jobs, and companies have either told her she's overqualified or not called back at all. Between filling out online applications this week, she's been watching Congress on C-SPAN.
"None of them care about the working person," she said, calling the congressional debate "a little pissing contest."
What's Ms. Carroll talking about? I mean Sumner cares a lot about her. Let her eat QEIII-or NGDPLT.
No comments:
Post a Comment