Democrats to give jobless benefits another vote

[Dazon50]

WASHINGTON – Millions of people stuck on the jobless rolls would receive an extension of unemployment benefits averaging $309 a week under a Senate bill that appears set to break free of a Republican filibuster.

Democrats have stripped the unemployment insurance measure down to the bare essentials for Tuesday's vote, which is a do-over of a tally taken late last month.

With West Virginia Democrat Carte Goodwin poised to claim the seat of the late Robert Byrd, two Republicans will be needed to vault the measure over the filibuster hurdle. Maine GOP moderates Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are expected to provide the key votes to create a filibuster-breaking tally on a key procedural test.

The measure is expected to pass later Tuesday. The House would take it up Wednesday and then send it to President Barack Obama for his signature.

If all goes as expected, about 2.5 million people will receive jobless benefits retroactively. Instead of being dropped from a federal program that extends benefits for those whose six months of state-paid benefits have run out, millions of others will continue to receive payments.

But first, Obama and his Democratic allies are pressing the issue for maximum political advantage, blaming Republicans for the impasse that halted unemployment checks for people unable to find work as the jobless rate remains close to 10 percent.

Obama launched a fresh salvo Monday, demanding the Senate act on the legislation — after a vote already had been scheduled — and blasting Republicans for the holdup.

"The same people who didn't have any problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars on tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans are now saying we shouldn't offer relief to middle-class Americans," Obama said.

Republicans say they do favor the benefits but are insisting they be paid for with spending cuts elsewhere in the government's $3.7 trillion budget. After initially feeling heat this winter when a lone GOP senator, Jim Bunning of Kentucky, briefly blocked a benefits extension in February, the GOP has grown increasingly comfortable opposing the legislation.

The providing of additional weeks of jobless benefits in the midst of bad times has been regarded as routine, and the latest cycle of additional benefits began in 2008, the last year of George W. Bush's administration.

"For a long time, there has been a tradition under both Democratic and Republican presidents to offer relief to the unemployed," Obama said. "That was certainly the case under my predecessor, when Republicans several times voted to extend emergency unemployment benefits."

But with conservative voters and tea party activists up in arms about the deficit, conservative Republicans have adopted a harder line that has caused three interruptions of jobless benefits.

"What the president isn't telling the American people is that many of us in the Senate are fighting to make sure our children and grandchildren aren't buried under a mountain of debt," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "If we are going to extend unemployment benefits, then let's do it without adding to our record debt."

[teko]

How they voted

Ayes: 60 (Democrat:  55; Republican: 2; Other: 2)**
Nays: 40 (Democrat: 1; Republican: 39)
Abstained: 0 (Democrat: 0; Republican: 0)
Required percentage of 'Aye' votes: 3/5 (60%)
Percentage of 'aye' votes: 60%
Result: Cloture Motion Agreed to
Votes by Senator
Name Voted
Sen. Daniel Akaka [D, HI] Aye
Sen. Lamar Alexander [R, TN] Nay
Sen. John Barrasso [R, WY] Nay
Sen. Max Baucus [D, MT] Aye
Sen. Evan Bayh [D, IN] Aye
Sen. Mark Begich [D, AK] Aye
Sen. Michael Bennet [D, CO] Aye
Sen. Robert Bennett [R, UT] Nay
Sen. Jeff Bingaman [D, NM] Aye
Sen. Christopher Bond [R, MO] Nay
Sen. Barbara Boxer [D, CA] Aye
Sen. Scott Brown [R, MA] Nay
Sen. Sherrod Brown [D, OH] Aye
Sen. Samuel Brownback [R, KS] Nay
Sen. Jim Bunning [R, KY] Nay
Sen. Richard Burr [R, NC] Nay
Sen. Roland Burris [D, IL] Aye
Sen. Maria Cantwell [D, WA] Aye
Sen. Benjamin Cardin [D, MD] Aye
Sen. Thomas Carper [D, DE] Aye
Sen. Robert Casey [D, PA] Aye
Sen. Saxby Chambliss [R, GA] Nay
Sen. Thomas Coburn [R, OK] Nay
Sen. Thad Cochran [R, MS] Nay
Sen. Susan Collins [R, ME] Aye
Sen. Kent Conrad [D, ND] Aye
Sen. Bob Corker [R, TN] Nay
Sen. John Cornyn [R, TX] Nay
Sen. Michael Crapo [R, ID] Nay
Sen. Jim DeMint [R, SC] Nay
Sen. Christopher Dodd [D, CT] Aye
Sen. Byron Dorgan [D, ND] Aye
Sen. Richard Durbin [D, IL] Aye
Sen. John Ensign [R, NV] Nay
Sen. Michael Enzi [R, WY] Nay
Sen. Russell Feingold [D, WI] Aye
Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D, CA] Aye
Sen. Al Franken [D, MN] Aye
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D, NY] Aye
Sen. Lindsey Graham [R, SC] Nay
Sen. Charles Grassley [R, IA] Nay
Sen. Judd Gregg [R, NH] Nay
Sen. Kay Hagan [D, NC] Aye
Sen. Thomas Harkin [D, IA] Aye
Sen. Orrin Hatch [R, UT] Nay
Sen. Kay Hutchison [R, TX] Nay
Sen. James Inhofe [R, OK] Nay
Sen. Daniel Inouye [D, HI] Aye
Sen. John Isakson [R, GA] Nay
Sen. Mike Johanns [R, NE] Nay
Sen. Tim Johnson [D, SD] Aye
Sen. Edward Kaufman [D, DE] Aye
Sen. John Kerry [D, MA] Aye
Sen. Amy Klobuchar [D, MN] Aye
Sen. Herbert Kohl [D, WI] Aye
Sen. Jon Kyl [R, AZ] Nay
Sen. Mary Landrieu [D, LA] Aye
Sen. Frank Lautenberg [D, NJ] Aye
Sen. Patrick Leahy [D, VT] Aye
Sen. George LeMieux [R, FL] Nay
Sen. Carl Levin [D, MI] Aye
Sen. Joseph Lieberman [I, CT] Aye
Sen. Blanche Lincoln [D, AR] Aye
Sen. Richard Lugar [R, IN] Nay
Sen. John McCain [R, AZ] Nay
Sen. Claire McCaskill [D, MO] Aye
Sen. Mitch McConnell [R, KY] Nay
Sen. Robert Menéndez [D, NJ] Aye
Sen. Jeff Merkley [D, OR] Aye
Sen. Barbara Mikulski [D, MD] Aye
Sen. Lisa Murkowski [R, AK] Nay
Sen. Patty Murray [D, WA] Aye
Sen. Ben Nelson [D, NE] Nay
Sen. Bill Nelson [D, FL] Aye
Sen. Mark Pryor [D, AR] Aye
Sen. John Reed [D, RI] Aye
Sen. Harry Reid [D, NV] Aye
Sen. James Risch [R, ID] Nay
Sen. Pat Roberts [R, KS] Nay
Sen. John Rockefeller [D, WV] Aye
Sen. Bernard Sanders [I, VT] Aye
Sen. Charles Schumer [D, NY] Aye
Sen. Jefferson Sessions [R, AL] Nay
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen [D, NH] Aye
Sen. Richard Shelby [R, AL] Nay
Sen. Olympia Snowe [R, ME] Aye
Sen. Arlen Specter [D, PA] Aye
Sen. Debbie Ann Stabenow [D, MI] Aye
Sen. Jon Tester [D, MT] Aye
Sen. John Thune [R, SD] Nay
Sen. Mark Udall [D, CO] Aye
Sen. Tom Udall [D, NM] Aye
Sen. David Vitter [R, LA] Nay
Sen. George Voinovich [R, OH] Nay
Sen. Mark Warner [D, VA] Aye
Sen. Jim Webb [D, VA] Aye
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse [D, RI] Aye
Sen. Roger Wicker [R, MS] Nay
Sen. Ron Wyden [D, OR] Aye

* - Voters marked "No Data" are voters that THOMAS has not associated yet.

** Because of incomplete data, party breakdown visualizations may be inaccurate by one or two votes.

[flmagi]

Teko, That's right.
We're talking unemployment here, not long term welfare recipients. People on unemployment worked before and paid into the system! Some people worked all their lives, paying into the system and never had to use unemployment before. They deserve it now, when they need it.

[teko]

Besides, this money has been paid in. So why should the unemployed suffer. Where did that money go that was paid in?

[teko]

CUT,,,, the TAX CUTs for the rich and WHA LA! Employment benefits paid for and a huge gob of chunk change to boot!  Or partof that 200mil coming from big corporations to the republican campaign fund in the form of donations to keep them on the side of big business would go a huge way as well.

[flmagi]

I don't think there is anyone in America (with half a brain), that would disagree with the fact, we need to get the debt under control and paid off. Of course we do. What the Republicans can't seem to wrap there heads around, is that while they want to sit around, collecting their very plush paychecks, discussing cut backs, other people are in trouble! A lot of people, threw no fault of their own are unemployed, can't find jobs, living day to day and counting the change at the bottom of their purses to feed their kids.
It just seems so easy for some of those who "have" to dismiss the urgency of those that "do not have". These are people of shallow minds and small hearts.
But like I've said before, wait til November, when all the republicans supposedly get voted into office. All will be well with the world then. They're gonna come with their bags of miracles, everyone will have jobs, no health problems and all the oil in the Gulf will disappear. Yeah November!

[Dazon50]

Senate Clears Way For Extension Of Jobless Benefits

July 20, 2010

A bill to restore unemployment benefits to millions who have been out of work for more than six months has cleared a Senate hurdle.

The 60-40 vote came moments after Carte Goodwin, a successor to West Virginia Democrat Robert Byrd, was sworn in. Goodwin was the crucial 60th senator to defeat a Republican filibuster that has led to a lapse in benefits for 2.5 million people.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid thanked Goodwin for his vote.

"I know he's glad that his first vote in the United States Senate was for this urgent, important national issue," Reid said.

It would cost the Treasury nearly $34 billion to extend unemployment insurance until the end of November for the millions of Americans who've been out of work more than half a year. Because that would add to the deficit, all but two Senate Republicans opposed the measure, along with one Democrat. That left the majority party one vote short of the 60 needed to break the GOP filibuster — until Goodwin was sworn in.

Republican leader Mitch McConnell, for his part, said it was wrong to add billions to the deficit by extending the jobless benefits.
Politics

Jobless Benefits End, Senate Exits, History Repeats

"If Republicans have done anything wrong in this debate, it was to underestimate how committed Democrats are to spending money we don't have," he said.

A battle has raged for months over whether jobless benefits should be financed with additional federal debt as Democrats want, or through cuts to other government programs as most Republicans insist.

After a final Senate vote, the House will take up the bill Wednesday. President Obama is likely to sign it into law by week's end.

Democrats stripped the unemployment insurance measure down to the bare essentials for the vote, which is a do-over of a tally taken late last month.

The measure would reauthorize the extended benefits program through the end of November, providing payments to millions of people who've been out of work for six months or more. Maximum benefits in some states are far higher than the $309 a week nationwide average payment. In Massachusetts, the top benefit is $943 a week; in Mississippi, it is $235.

Obama and his Democratic allies blamed Republicans for the impasse that halted unemployment checks for people unable to find work as the jobless rate remains close to 10 percent.

Obama launched a fresh salvo Monday, blasting Republicans for the holdup.

"The same people who didn't have any problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars on tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans are now saying we shouldn't offer relief to middle-class Americans," Obama said.

Republicans said they do favor the benefits but had insisted they be paid for with spending cuts elsewhere in the government's $3.7 trillion budget. After initially feeling heat this winter when a lone GOP senator, Jim Bunning of Kentucky, briefly blocked a benefits extension in February, the GOP has grown increasingly comfortable opposing the legislation.

The providing of additional weeks of jobless benefits in the midst of bad times has been regarded as routine, and the latest cycle of additional benefits began in 2008, the last year of George W. Bush's administration.

"For a long time, there has been a tradition under both Democratic and Republican presidents to offer relief to the unemployed," Obama said. "That was certainly the case under my predecessor, when Republicans several times voted to extend emergency unemployment benefits."

But with conservative voters and Tea Party activists up in arms about the deficit, conservative Republicans have adopted a harder line that has caused three interruptions of jobless benefits.

"What the president isn't telling the American people is that many of us in the Senate are fighting to make sure our children and grandchildren aren't buried under a mountain of debt," said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). "If we are going to extend unemployment benefits, then let's do it without adding to our record debt."

[teko]

The tax cuts for the rich is what started this ball rolling. It is due to fall off in December? yet the republican party is screaming no! And in the same breath denying the unemployment benefits to the millions without because of the outsourcing of jobs etc, and calling those same unemployed lazy while they do it. These unemployed people have paid for this benefit out of their paychecks and to say no is totally unacceptable. Reversing the tax cut for the rich will put approximately 1 trillion dollars back into the economy. But these people out of work because there job disappeared, or was outsourced can go from making their 15 bucks an hour to a 7 per hour job (which they would if they could find one). But that is okay with the republicans.

Yes the benefits were passed today, and only 2, count em 2 republicans voted for it. I say no recess until this problem has been solved, period.

[Barb135]

Hi Mike - haven't seen you in a while.  Hope all is well.

I didn't have time to read the whole article, but it sounds like the extension went through as the Dems wanted - no spending cuts.  I'm grateful that the unemployed will get the help they need to help support their families.  I also wish that someone/anyone/everyone would have agreed to some kind of cuts because you are right -- the middle class, who must bear the brunt of everything is disappearing.  When we are gone, then what??

We all know they aren't going to get rid of the tax cuts for the rich; I really don't think either party would agree to that even though there's been a lot rhetoric about it.

I have mixed feelings about the war now.  I've never been a quitter (the fact that I'm still mod of this group bears that out......lol), so part of me says we need to stay and finish what was started; the other part says that because the govt has already announced withdrawal dates, we've already lost, so why not cut the losses and get out now. I'm sure I will get creamed for that from both sides, but it's true.  

At any rate - the unemployment benefit extension passed!!!

[mikesimon]

Unemployment benefits must be paid for with spending cuts.
War? No on that one.
Huge tax cuts for the rich? Nope, not a chance because of the trickle down theory. Most of us know how that worked out for the average citizen. A declining middle class - maybe a disappearing middle class would be a better description - and an increasing huge  disparity between the super-rich and the average person.

[Barb135]

At some point, they have to take a stand on the budget issues; I'm just not convinced that unemployment was the issue to stand on, with too many people depending on benefits to feed their families.  Those who lost their jobs through no fault of their own, should not be punished for the sake of some political grandstanding.  

The article said:  "Obama launched a fresh salvo Monday, demanding the Senate act on the legislation — after a vote already had been scheduled — and blasting Republicans for the holdup."    The key here is "AFTER A VOTE ALREADY HAD BEEN SCHEDULED" - looks like Obama is doing his own share of grandstanding!!  

It's not about making Obama look bad -- he does enough of that all by himself; this is about whether or not the politicians are going to stand behind the unemployed who so desperately need help.  

[teko]

So what it all boils down to is politics as usual. They cannot have anything to do with Obama looking good. They can deny the unemployment benefits which will really hurt all of us with the domino effect it will have on the econemy but they still want to give those tax cuts to the rich who dont need them nor ever asked for them and which went a long way to getting us where we are today.

I hope they get them passed today.

[flmagi]

"Republicans say they do favor the benefits but are insisting they be paid for with spending cuts elsewhere in the government's $3.7 trillion budget."

I don't necessarily disagree with this, but where/what exactly are the Republicans suggesting cutting?  
Have they put any proposals out there?
Are the cuts they may have proposed (if they have) going to effect only the poor, seniors, medically challenged or unemployed?