The Senate is again battling over a short-term extension of unemployment benefits, right before the two-week spring recess. The real issue at hand is whether Congress should explicitly state where the almost $10 billion per month funds are going to come from, or just go ahead without designating how to pay for the program. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) wants to eliminate additional government spending to pay for the bill. On the other hand, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) believes that the bill needs to be passed immediately, because the recession qualifies this bill as emergency. Currently, federal unemployment benefits start after the state-funded 26 weeks are over. Congress has approved up to 73 additional weeks, which it funds. I can't decide where I stand on this issue; on one hand, we already have enough federal debt, and we don't need any more. But my problem with Coburn's stand is what programs are going to be cut to provide the funding. And on the other hand, I agree with Durbin that the recession does make this issue an emergency, because the jobless rate is staying rather steady at a high level, and to really end the recession, that rate needs to decrease, and this program would help encourage that. So, both sides have valid points.
http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/2010/03/25/senate.jobless.benefits/index.html
No comments:
Post a Comment