The Costs of Paying for Unemployment Insurance

WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 17: U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) (3rd R) talks to reporters after a vote December 17, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. The Senate has passed a cloture vote to clear the way for a final vote of the Ryan-Murray Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013.   
National Journal
Fawn Johnson
Jan. 6, 2014, 4:28 p.m.

Re­pub­lic­ans are throw­ing a wrench in­to the de­bate over un­em­ploy­ment be­ne­fits by in­sist­ing that spend­ing cuts off­set any ex­ten­sion of fed­er­al aid for the long-term job­less.

It’s a con­ver­sa­tion shift that makes Demo­crats nervous. Once you start bat­tling over how to pay for something, le­gis­lat­ive talks be­come a new ball game. Passing the bill is no longer a brute battle of polit­ic­al wills. It’s a trad­ing match.

A bill to provide a three-month ex­ten­sion of un­em­ploy­ment be­ne­fits for people who have been out of work for more than six months has been sched­uled for a vote Tues­day, after harsh weath­er pre­ven­ted more than a dozen sen­at­ors from mak­ing it to the Cap­it­ol on Monday even­ing. The meas­ure needs 60 votes to move for­ward, and it’s a high hurdle. The pro­vi­sion car­ries a cost of $6.4 bil­lion over 10 years, and con­ser­vat­ives aren’t will­ing to go there.

That didn’t stop Demo­crats from scold­ing them. “What are you go­ing to tell the 1,600 people in Hager­stown, Mary­land, and those across the coun­try, who are des­per­ately look­ing for work? What are you go­ing to tell them?” de­man­ded Sen. Jack Reed, the Rhode Is­land Demo­crat who sponsored the un­em­ploy­ment bill with Re­pub­lic­an Sen. Dean Heller of Nevada.

Re­pub­lic­ans are, however, will­ing to dis­cuss ex­tend­ing un­em­ploy­ment be­ne­fits if they don’t bur­den fed­er­al cof­fers. Even Sen. Rand Paul of Ken­tucky said Sunday that he is open to ex­tend­ing un­em­ploy­ment in­sur­ance as long as it is paid for. House Speak­er John Boehner told the White House a month ago that he would go along with an un­em­ploy­ment ex­ten­sion if it was off­set. Boehner also wants an un­em­ploy­ment bill to in­clude oth­er pro­vi­sions to cre­ate jobs (and, he notes, the House has passed a bundle of them).

The Re­pub­lic­ans’ de­mands are com­plic­at­ing the un­em­ploy­ment is­sue for Demo­crats, who ar­gue that ex­ten­ded un­em­ploy­ment be­ne­fits have been in ex­ist­ence since the late 1950s and have gen­er­ally not been off­set since 1972. The ex­cep­tions to that rule were in 2009, 2011, and 2012, when the ex­ten­sions were part of lar­ger le­gis­lat­ive pack­ages that in­cluded tax off­sets. For ex­ample, the 2009 un­em­ploy­ment ex­ten­sion was part of the Work­er, Homeown­er­ship, and Busi­ness As­sist­ance Act.

For Demo­crats, set­ting a pre­ced­ent that fed­er­al long-term un­em­ploy­ment be­ne­fits must be paid for opens up a can of trouble. It means that the be­ne­fits are no longer driv­en by eco­nom­ic and em­ploy­ment con­di­tions but by the con­di­tion of the fed­er­al budget. Gen­er­ally, tight-em­ploy­ment eco­nom­ies trans­late to tight budgets, which means it be­comes in­fin­itely harder for law­makers to ap­prove ad­di­tion­al be­ne­fits.

“Quite frankly, I thought it was a mis­take when we off­set it be­fore. It should not be off­set,” said Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., who over­saw the un­em­ploy­ment-com­pens­a­tion pro­gram when he was in the House.

Cardin also ar­gues, cor­rectly, that ex­ten­ded un­em­ploy­ment be­ne­fits give a short-term boost to the eco­nomy of about 0.2 per­cent of GDP — not enough to off­set the cost, but it is something.

Demo­crats have not com­pletely closed the door on off­sets, which con­fuses the mat­ter. Rep. Sander Lev­in, D-Mich., the rank­ing mem­ber on the House Ways and Means Com­mit­tee, and Rep. Chris Van Hol­len, D-Md., rank­ing mem­ber on the Budget Com­mit­tee, offered late last year to off­set a short-term un­em­ploy­ment ex­ten­sion us­ing rev­en­ues raised from the farm bill, but there is no sign that their pro­pos­al will come up again this year.

House Demo­crats now are pre­par­ing to pres­sure — or per­haps shame — Re­pub­lic­ans in­to think­ing they have to sup­port an ex­ten­sion without an ac­com­pa­ny­ing spend­ing cut, aides say. Ways and Means Demo­crats are work­ing on an un­em­ploy­ment “counter” that will show a run­ning tally of the num­ber of job­less people who have ex­hausted their be­ne­fits. (It’s run­ning at about 7 per second.)

And the pres­sure tac­tics are work­ing. Sev­er­al Re­pub­lic­ans in both the House and the Sen­ate have called for some type of ne­go­ti­ation to al­low an un­em­ploy­ment ex­ten­sion to con­tin­ue. They just don’t want to give away the ex­ten­sion for free, which is ex­actly what Demo­crats are re­quest­ing.

Budget hawks, however, can be just as stub­born as lib­er­als. They note that even if ex­ten­ded un­em­ploy­ment be­ne­fits passed muster as emer­gency spend­ing in 2008, when the eco­nomy was col­lapsing, it’s been more than five years since then. It’s hard to ar­gue that it’s an emer­gency now.

“If the state [un­em­ploy­ment] fund goes in­to de­fi­cit, they can bor­row in the short term, but they’ve got to pay it back. Ul­ti­mately there has to be a bal­ance. They have to make tough de­cisions,” said Chris Ed­wards, the CATO In­sti­tute’s dir­ect­or of tax-policy stud­ies. “I think it’s a good idea. It en­sures re­spons­ib­il­ity.”

Mi­chael Cata­lini con­trib­uted

What We're Following See More »
BACKING OUT ON BERNIE
Trump Won’t Debate Sanders After All
1 hours ago
THE LATEST

Trump, in a statement: “Based on the fact that the Democratic nominating process is totally rigged and Crooked Hillary Clinton and Deborah Wasserman Schultz will not allow Bernie Sanders to win, and now that I am the presumptive Republican nominee, it seems inappropriate that I would debate the second place finisher. ... I will wait to debate the first place finisher in the Democratic Party, probably Crooked Hillary Clinton, or whoever it may be.”

TAKATA RECALLS COULD TAKE YEARS TO COMPLETE
Airbag Recalls Target 12 Million Automobiles
4 hours ago
THE LATEST

"The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration identified on Friday the makes and models of 12 million cars and motorcycles that have been recalled because of defective air bag inflators made by Japanese supplier Takata. The action includes 4.3 million Chryslers; 4.5 million Hondas; 1.6 million Toyotas; 731,000 Mazdas; 402,000 Nissans; 383,000 Subarus; 38,000 Mitsubishis; and 2,800 Ferraris. ... Analysts have said it could take years for all of the air bags to be replaced. Some have questioned whether Takata can survive the latest blow."

Source:
INVESTIGATION LEADS TO LEAKER’S RESIGNATION
Secret Service Disciplines 41 Agents Over Chaffetz Leak
4 hours ago
THE LATEST

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson says 41 Secret Service agents have been disciplined in the fallout of an investigation over the agency's leak of personnel files. The leaker, who has resigned, released records showing that Oversight and Government Reform Chair Jason Chaffetz—who was leading an investigation of Secret Service security lapses—had applied for a job at the agency years before. The punishments include reprimands and suspension without pay. "Like many others I was appalled by the episode reflected in the Inspector General’s report, which brought real discredit to the Secret Service," said Johnson.

Source:
#NEVERTRUMP’S LONELY LEADER
Romney Talks Cost of His Futile Anti-Trump Fight
6 hours ago
THE LATEST

Mitt Romney spoke in an interview with the Wall Street Journal about his decision to challenge Donald Trump. “Friends warned me, ‘Don’t speak out, stay out of the fray,’ because criticizing Mr. Trump will only help him by giving him someone else to attack. They were right. I became his next target, and the incoming attacks have been constant and brutal.” Still, "I wanted my grandkids to see that I simply couldn’t ignore what Mr. Trump was saying and doing, which revealed a character and temperament unfit for the leader of the free world.”

Source:
CONGRESS DIVIDED ON DEBT CRISIS PLAN
Puerto Rico Relief Stalled on the Hill
6 hours ago
THE LATEST

"A bill to help Puerto Rico handle its $70 billion debt crisis is facing an uncertain future in the Senate. No Senate Democrats have endorsed a bill backed by House Speaker Paul Ryan and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, while some are actively fighting it. ... On the Republican side, senators say they’re hopeful to pass a bill but don’t know if they can support the current legislation — which is expected to win House approval given its backing from leaders in that chamber."

Source:
×