HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Unemployment Insurance To...

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 06:21 AM

Unemployment Insurance To Be Extended, $30 Billion Cost Won't Be Offset

One of the remaining sticking points holding up a fiscal cliff deal appears to have been resolved, as negotiators have decided to extend unemployment benefits without offsetting the cost.

A source familiar with negotiations told The Huffington Post that lawmakers would treat the provision as "an emergency measure that shouldn't be paid for." A Senate Democratic and Republican source each confirmed the plan.

What that means is that the $30 billion pricetag for a year-long extension will simply be added to the deficit. Republicans have in the past objected to reauthorizing federal unemployment compensation because of its impact on the deficit, though in recessions since World War II Congress has generally added extra weeks of benefits without paying for them.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/31/unemployment-insurance-extended_n_2389634.html

6 replies, 994 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Unemployment Insurance To Be Extended, $30 Billion Cost Won't Be Offset (Original post)
UCmeNdc Jan 2013 OP
Gargoyle22 Jan 2013 #1
lunatica Jan 2013 #2
geek tragedy Jan 2013 #3
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2013 #5
Igel Jan 2013 #6
Sunlei Jan 2013 #4

Response to UCmeNdc (Original post)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 08:10 AM

1. Why is this seen as something the Dems "got" from this deal?

Isn't this something for constituents of politicians from both parties? So this is "given" to Dems as part of the negotiation (when it shoiuld not have been up for negotation anyway) and now Dems must concede on spending cuts? That's twisted.

How about if we just extend unemployment benefits for people who voted for Democrats?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gargoyle22 (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 09:07 AM

2. What?

The Republicans, especially the likes of Cantor, Paul Ryan and that loathsome McConnell were adamant that any spending for things like unemployment, financial aid to victims of natural disasters, etc. be offset by cuts to social programs. That's no longer the case.

What makes you so bitter about that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gargoyle22 (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 09:08 AM

3. Because the Republicans' lack of decency is greater than the public's willingness

to punish them for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 01:01 PM

5. Nice! +1!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gargoyle22 (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 02:37 PM

6. Because it was supposed to be a "deficit reduction" package.

It wipes out almost half of the spending cuts that were postponed.

And, oddly, while usually we speak of "offsetting" spending increases a notable speech yesterday talked about "offsetting" spending reductions. A novel idea, if ever I heard one. Mildly incoherent, too (giving the benefit of the doubt).

UI extensions were usually also "emergency." This is a classic Congressional emergency. They knew the date they would expire the second they passed the last authorization bill. They watched the unemployment rate. And yet, at the last minute, they're surprised. Either they're the least informed people in the country or they make particularly dull-witted turnips look like geniuses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UCmeNdc (Original post)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 12:49 PM

4. good, that means 2 million Americans will not be cut off Jan 1 2013.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread