Rep. Levin says Republican bill threatens federal extended unemployment benefits

The will be attached because some republican will re-write the bills and out them together. This way they will make Obama have to choose between vetoing 589 or allowing it to be stolen by the states. He will veto it but the point will be to have him veto a bill that will be called the "recovery and added weeks act". Then they point the finger at the dems and say "see? Your democrat just vetoed extra weeks for the unemployed". No one will think about it enough to realize that the states wouldn't pay this out to the unemployed anyway.

I hope the dems can see this coming because I sure can.


This is exactly what the GOP in NC is doing now. They are trying to make Perdue look like she is against the unemployed and it's working.

I agree! However it can go either way! If they present as separate bills to divert unemployment fund money and kill remaining benefits I cannot imagine A. President signing it.and not vetoing it.
Thats why it could be attached to 589 or amended to include these two bills. This also for a couple of reasons. To bring it out of committee with a monkey wrench in it.
and to allow it to come out of committee with baggage. Otherwise if 589 comes out by itself then 589 could pass. So if the two other bills are separate then 589 could pass and pres. sign off on it but the two bills are separate bills unattached to 589 they know the president MAY veto them. I say this also..... The mystery is even if these two bills go somewhere will the president support with repubs. as he has done on a couple of occasions???
Or will Obama veto them even if they pass??? So It may be better to attach them. Because to risk 589 passing by itself and then the other two bills could be totally killed. Who knows. But even tho the house could pass these two pirate bills the senate could kill by vote. IF dems. are not traitors. So this whole saga could reveal the true democrats support or Obama's...

BTW! Back in Dec. when the tax credits were extended and the president
sided with the repubs. and I am sure they met behind closed doors and came to an agreement and A. if the president supported the tax credits then the repubs. would not fight hard on the unemployment extensions through Jan 2012(the 13mos)... So if the president is serious about the unemployed and the extensions (that only help those still having benefits extensions available to them). And the repubs. stick it to him IF thats IF these two bills passed I couldn't imagine Obama not being furious with that attempt .. to kill remaining extensions and go back on their word. OR OR>>>>> Will the president sign off and go along... Thia is very interesting. I do not want them attached.But the negative with that is .. then 589 may never come out of committee. And if the two bills pass then 589 is dead in committee and then any remaining extensions some may be expecting to be able to get will be stolen for jobs program. and then there will be many, many , many 99er's or out of total benefits. What then!!!!!

DesperateInRI wrote:
It is part of the GOP's job creation plan, introduced yesterday, ‘‘Jobs, Opportunity, Benefits, and Services Act of 2011’’.

Jobs Act my a@@. This is the GOPturds and their "NAZI" agenda. "Stage One of their FINAL Solution" to eliminate ALL social program and simply kill off 20 million people. Funny, people complain but THIS has been their agenda ALL along. They HAVE NOT wavered. Just look at the last two years of making unemployed LOOK like leeches and parasites, undeserving of ANY help. They have NOT changed their minds on this at all.

You now, I'm getting to the point where I can't talk about this stuff anymore without just going totally balistic. These GOP folks are seriously looking to be in danger. Good God, we all know that there are folks living right on the edge, and it won't take much to push them over. I feel that someone is going to get hurt real soon. I happen to live in Gabby's state, she is our rep - we miss her. Guns are not hard to get in many States. These evil folks better watch out.

Hatchs bill would allow states (should they decide to do so), to redirect some of the federal EUC funds to the state unemployment insurance budget rather than raise unemployment taxes on businesses. But that's only if the state chooses to do so. It's not a given, but apparently some states are having difficulties.
http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ContentRecord_id=2eede4c2-a11a-4c9e-aef9-fd6505c74479

Right IF they decide to but you are a fool if you think that republican controlled states wouldn't divert every bit of that money to pay back their "debt" or just steal it if this bill passes.

It's not right that someone who lives in a red state should have less unemployment benefits just because their legislators are republican.


That is why people are up in arms about this, because everyone with common sense knows what will happen.

Blue states are in question too. I know RI will keep the funds. They were already alloted additional money for unemployment benefits. Unlike Oregon who chose to pay and additional 6 weeks, RI kept the money.

lendmeflight2 wrote:Right IF they decide to but you are a fool if you think that republican controlled states wouldn't divert every bit of that money to pay back their "debt" or just steal it if this bill passes.

It's not right that someone who lives in a red state should have less unemployment benefits just because their legislators are republican.


That is why people are up in arms about this, because everyone with common sense knows what will happen.

I think that the party in power in any given state isn't as relevant as the fact that they are beholden to the entire state and to the future of their state. And one can't really fault any representative, regardless of party, for acting in the best interest of their entire constituency. That said, it seems to me that EUC funds shouldn't be used for anything other than the long term unemployed, because that's the original purpose of that particular budgeting effort. In the end I don't think that ones party makes one any more or less concerned for the long term unemployed. The major difference between the parties has been the means for funding EUC, not the legitimacy of the need for it. As a conservative, my biggest beef with Republicans is that a few have tried to associate UI and EUC with welfare. That really burns me for every reason I'm sure you and all unemployed people, especially Republicans, are fully aware.