As many know, the federal unemployment extensions legislation is set to expire effective 12/31/11 unless Congress acts. This will immediately cut off millions of UI recipients in the beginning of 2012, followed by many more millions between the start of the new year and June 9, 2012.
One would think that politicians - as of 10/25/11 - would have announced or at least formulated their positions on this matter. This reasonable assumption is incorrect. I contacted the Washington, D.C. offices of my two US Senators and two US Congressmen about this one issue simply to ask their stance on this singular concept. I was unable to get a direct response to this very simplistically basic question.
Before calling these offices I had a discussion with a representative of the Bureau of Employment and Training responsible for the weekly reporting of initial unemployment claims. He was very forthcoming and enthusiastic about his job. Well spoken and thoughtful about a variety of issues. He essentially stated that not 100%, but closer to 130% of UI benefits are re-injected into the economy by the multiplier effect.
For example, before speaking to him I had not realized that budget constrained states had agreed to
relax restrictive "insured unemployment" standards to allow the payment of so-called State-Federal Extended Benefits as long as it was 100% federally funded (instead of 50-50). This EB category generally exists before the federal tier 1 to tier 4 extensions kick in.
My premise before speaking with him was a lingering question about what happens to people who receive a lengthy period of UI benefits and then are fortunate enough to get a new job. Only to be followed by a layoff or closing by the new employer. Would they then not be eligible for a new claim due to failure to accumulate enough earnings in their new eligibility period? ( Normally the first 4 of the last 5 completed calendar quarters).
He confirmed that this could be the case, but that states had created an alternative eligibility period to address this. Unfortunately, this would often result in a substantially lower weekly benefit amount - perhaps as low as $50 per week from a previous benefit amount around $300 per week. Hardly enough to live on.
But back to the premise for this piece. It is beyond my ability to comprehend that about nine weeks prior to the cut-off of extended benefits legislation, politicians are unwilling or unable to articulate their positions on this issue. This is basic stuff! I told the congressional staff that I spoke with that this is an issue on which my vote is decided since they are subject to two year terms - unlike my Senators who can relax until 2014 and 2016.
In summary - we now have congressmen/and or senators presumably nationwide who have either not yet established or are unwilling to provide their stance on the unemployment extension matter. A situation which will rear its monstrous head effective 12/31/11. One which will have a profound impact on our 70% consumer driven economy.
We are governed by a" last-minute-itis" group of clowns. Which just goes to show why the Occupy Wall Street/99% demonstrators are the only group who properly perceive our present state. And further exemplifies why trying to pigeon-hole them into one issue convenience is a mistake promoted by the powers-that-be.
I believe that the OWS group should keep their stance as is. Because there are far too many issues to compartmentalize in the manner that the corporate-controlled main street media and elite would prefer.
No comments:
Post a Comment