Emergency Unemployment Benefits Fillibustered Again by GOP

[yizuman]

The GOP strategy of obstruction is working beautifully

As you know, I've been arguing here that the GOP strategy of obstruction is paying off for Republicans -- big time. The public is blaming Democrats, not Republicans, for the government dysfunction that has resulted from Republican obstructionist tactics, because Dems are in charge.

Now we have the clearest illustration of this phenomenon yet, courtesy of the internals of the new Washington Post poll.

Here's the rub: The most visible example of GOP obstruction yet has been the blockade of an extension of unemployment benefits. The poll shows the public overwhelmingly supports this extension -- and it also shows the public is deeply frustrated with the workings of Federal government. Yet despite these two facts, Republicans are now leading in the generic Congressional matchup.

Here's the poll's finding on unemployment benefits:

Because of the economic downturn, Congress has extended the period in which people can receive unemployment benefits, and is considering doing so again. Supporters say this will help those who can't find work. Opponents say this adds too much to the federal budget deficit. Do you think Congress should or should not approve another extension of unemployment benefits?

Should 62

Should not 36

That's not even close. What's more, the public is deeply unhappy with the Federal government's performance, with an astonishing 64 percent saying they're dissatisfied or angry about it.

Yet Republicans are not paying any price for this. While the poll shows the GOP is not trusted on the economy, Republicans have edged ahead in the generic ballot matchup, 47-46. Anti-incumbent sentiment is soaring -- only one-fourth say they're inclined to re-elected their Representative -- which will also help Republicans. And a majority, 51 percent, support GOP control of Congress so it can act as a "check" on Obama's policies.

This clearly demonstrates that people have not connected GOP obstructionism with one of its most visible results: The prevention of the extended of unemployment benefits that a sizable majority says it wants.

Bottom line: The GOP tactics are working brilliantly in political terms. Dems are bearing the brunt of the blame for government dysfunction. I'm not sure it could be clearer than this.

Source: The Plum Line - The GOP strategy of obstruction is working beautifully

Well, do you think that playing games with Obama that they hate so much that putting us millions of unemployed in the middle of it all is considered fair?

This is so BS.

Now I am worried about how I am gonna find food and medicine for my wife.

Yiz

 

[Foxrac]

I hate fillbuster policy but they seems helpful in some cases.

GOP and Dem are stupid.

 

[diehardbiker]

That is why I believe US government needs serious revamp. They are so dysfunctional.

 

[yizuman]

That is why I believe US government needs serious revamp. They are so dysfunctional.

Amen to that. We need to get rid of both parties and ban them for life. Then replace them with a new party system that will be for the people and not the other way around.

JFK says this backasswards, "ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country."

See? They want us to serve the country by voting for them into office so they can later fark us over.

*sighs*

Yiz

 

[Foxrac]

Amen to that. We need to get rid of both parties and ban them for life. Then replace them with a new party system that will be for the people and not the other way around.

JFK says this backasswards, "ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country."

See? They want us to serve the country by voting for them into office so they can later fark us over.

*sighs*

Yiz

You can rid of fillbuster policy on some of limited bills and reform the congress by pass the constitutional amendment, I believe so.

 

[diehardbiker]

Uncle Sam has broke its own laws too many times.

 

[TXgolfer]

I am very happy they blocked it. I am totally against further extensions.

 

[TXgolfer]

JFK says this backasswards, "ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country."

That may be the greastest thing ever said by ANY President. It is about personal accountability and building a strong nation....... not a strong government.

 

[yizuman]

I am very happy they blocked it. I am totally against further extensions.

Sounds like you want my wife to croak w/o her medicine that I will no longer be able to afford.

Yiz

 

[TXgolfer]

Sounds like you want my wife to croak w/o her medicine that I will no longer be able to afford.

Yiz

Not at all.

I believe this......

Cleveland believed in keeping government expenditure at the minimum required to carry out essential constitutional functions. “When a man in office lays out a dollar in extravagance,” declared Cleveland, “he acts immorally by the people.”3 He fought to lower tariffs, which the Republicans had hoisted to punishing levels, and to hold back the flood of phony pensions that congressmen were awarding in order to buy votes and to placate the Grand Army of the Republic, the most powerful political pressure group of the late nineteenth century.

It should have surprised no one, therefore, when Cleveland vetoed the Texas Seed Bill early in 1887. This legislation appropriated $10,000—a trifling sum even in those days—to allow the Commissioner of Agriculture to purchase seed grain for distribution to farmers in certain counties of Texas that had suffered from drought.4 The president’s veto message read in part as follows:

I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution; and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadily resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the Government, the Government should not support the people.5

Cleveland went on to point out that “the friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied on to relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune,” and indeed that “individual aid has to some extent already been extended to the sufferers mentioned in this bill.” Further, he suggested that if members of Congress really wanted to send seed to the suffering Texans, the congressmen might personally carry out this charitable transfer by using the seed routinely provided to all members for distribution to their constituents (at an expense of $100,000 in that fiscal year).6

 

[yizuman]

Don't Play Politics with Unemployment Benefits

By: Former Congressman Ronnie Shows (D-MS), a member of the conservative Blue Dog Coalition when he served in Congress.

Anyone following me on the Huffington Post knows that finding ways to reduce the national deficit is one of my recurring themes. Like many current and former Blue Dogs, I believe that if we don't get our national debt under control there will be disastrous consequences. But rumblings on Capitol Hill from Republicans (and even a few Democrats) about not extending federal unemployment benefits is bad politics because it will anger many Americans and have little impact on reducing our debt.

While there are undoubtedly some bad apples taking advantage of their unemployment benefits, most unemployed people are productive and valuable members of our society who are down on their luck. These folks have worked hard, paid their taxes and now need their government to help them through a rough patch.

Unemployment benefits also help those beyond the people who are receiving them. Unemployment checks are used to pay bills and buy necessities like food and clothes. The ripple effect of millions of Americans not being able to pay bills or spend money in their communities is enormous and would have negative impacts on all Americans, whether they have jobs or not.

One very distressing aspect of the debate over extending unemployment benefits is that many conservative members of Congress are using their reluctance to support the extension as an example of their willingness to get tough on runaway spending. In other words, they are trying to send a political message by being stingy. I have some bad news for Republicans: This line of thinking is bad politics because many Americans have hard-working family members or close friends who have lost their jobs during this recession through no fault of their own and rely on unemployment benefits to make ends meet. People will not appreciate out-of-touch Congressmen looking to score political points by jeopardizing the well-being of their friends and family.

The fact is, reducing our national debt is not going to be as easy as curtailing some benefits here and there. Unemployment benefits are only a drop in the bucket. To have real impact on the deficit, the government is going to have to find ways to cut spending dramatically while developing policies to help the private sector grow. This means that both parties will have to take hard votes and make difficult decisions about cutting programs...everything must be on the table.

Lastly, the conservative assertion that keeping people on unemployment benefits for too long gives them incentive to not go back to work might have some merit during an economic boom, but not during a recession. Americans are prideful people and do not want handouts. They would much rather earn the money that puts the food on their tables and clothes their families. But today, many good folks have no choice but to take the government's assistance, because there are too few job opportunities. Unemployment benefits should be about helping people get back on their feet, not about scoring political points.

Source: Ronnie Shows: Don't Play Politics with Unemployment Benefits

I have to agree with that, this is gonna hurt both sides from my point of view. They may make people be mad at the Demos for not maintaining control of Congress since they are in fact the Majority, but otoh, the Repubs is hurting themselves, even from amongst the conservatives who cannot blame the demise of those who are unemployed with no fault of their own (just like my situation).

So it's not fair to put millions of people in the middle of this political game just so these Repubs can score some points against the party that they hate.

There has to be a better way around that problem. Putting the unemployed at risk of losing their homes, out of food and utilities being shut off because they can't pay their bills is not the right answer.

Yiz

 

[netrox]

"Cleveland went on to point out that “the friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied on to relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune,” and indeed that “individual aid has to some extent already been extended to the sufferers mentioned in this bill.” "

It doesn't happen for many people. Many died broke and without insurance.

 

[Foxrac]

"Cleveland went on to point out that “the friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied on to relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune,” and indeed that “individual aid has to some extent already been extended to the sufferers mentioned in this bill.” "

It doesn't happen for many people. Many died broke and without insurance.

I disagree with Cleveland as well.

 

[yizuman]

I disagree with the Repubs using millions of unemployed people as pawns for their political games against the opposition.

Yiz

 

[darkdog]

It's worth mentioning that some Republicans wanted to extend unemployment benefits using unspent money from the stimulus and the Democrats refused. They only want to pass them by expanding the deficit.

Sounds like you want my wife to croak w/o her medicine that I will no longer be able to afford.

Yiz

I hate it when people like you say stupid stuff like this. Nobody wants your wife to die. Stop it.

 

[Secretblend]

Seems like I remember reading that the Founding Fathers did not intend for "parties" to be in control like it is now. It was orginally supposed to be individals running government, not parties. Would be nice to go back to how it was intended in first place and only have to follow what their voters wanted them to do instead of what leaders of the party wants to do.

 

[Tousi]

Seems like I remember reading that the Founding Fathers did not intend for "parties" to be in control like it is now. It was orginally supposed to be individals running government, not parties. Would be nice to go back to how it was intended in first place and only have to follow what their voters wanted them to do instead of what leaders of the party wants to do.

Yeah, first things first; take all the lobbyists out to the wood shed and......then throw all the lawyers, save a few good ones, to the bottom of the ocean.

 

[yizuman]

It's worth mentioning that some Republicans wanted to extend unemployment benefits using unspent money from the stimulus and the Democrats refused. They only want to pass them by expanding the deficit.


I hate it when people like you say stupid stuff like this. Nobody wants your wife to die. Stop it.

Well, it seems that there is no after thought on the effects on the people.

They seem to care less what happens to us when they're playing political games against a party that they hate with a passion.

It's like two parents arguing at each other over money and it puts their kids in the middle of it and they show no regards to the effects that it is having with their children.

Yiz

 

[darkdog]

Well, it seems that there is no after thought on the effects on the people.

They seem to care less what happens to us when they're playing political games against a party that they hate with a passion.

It's like two parents arguing at each other over money and it puts their kids in the middle of it and they show no regards to the effects that it is having with their children.

Yiz

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps there are real reasons to oppose extending federal unemployment benefits for years and years and years? Off the top of my head, I can think of several reasons that don't involve being apathetic to your wife's fate. Also, the fact is, Republicans would have given enough support if the money had come out of the stimulus, but the Democrats didn't want to do that because they wanted their pork. If the Democrats had been willing to compromise on that issue instead of demanding we expand the deficit even further, then things could have worked out the way you wanted.

Instead of considering those things or getting the facts straight, you just go for cheap emotionalism and accuse anyone wary of expanding the welfare state of wanting to kill your wife. That's a pretty serious accusation and before you use it, you better be damn sure it's true. After all, these are the people paying the bills to keep your wife alive. A little respect might be warranted.

 

[posts from hell]

Yiz - You already know my feelings about this.

I would suggest one thing: Move to Europe where they will take care of your wife, and you can go and work if you wish.