Is Your Senator Fighting Jobless Benefits?

Flickr/<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/notionscapital/4258319634/">Mike Licht, Notion Capital.com</a>

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


By week’s end, 2.5 million out of work Americans will lose their unemployment benefits. Thanks in large part to the filibustering of the Republican caucus, a bill to extend those benefits couldn’t make it out of the Senate. Led by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Senate Republicans repeatedly voted against extending jobless benefits, saying they wouldn’t support the measure because it adds to the deficit. That’s true: New support for the unemployed is deemed “emergency” funding, and that cost is indeed tacked onto the deficit. Another fact: This practice of categorizing jobless benefits as “emergency” funds is longstanding in Congress, something both Democrats and Republicans have done for decades. As Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), a leading voice unemployment support, recently put it, “15 million people unemployed is an emergency. [Republicans’ stance] is the most cynical, political position I have ever seen.”

It’s a position a vast majority of Americans don’t agree with, either. A Washington Post poll today reported that 62 percent of Americans think Congress should “approve another extension of unemployment benefits.” Seventy percent of respondents in a June Hart Research poll (pdf) say it’s too early to cut back on “benefits and health coverage for workers who lost their jobs.” And a December 2009 CNN poll found that 74 percent of people support creating more jobs even if it increases the deficit.

The GOP’s position also ignores the grim economic situation in many states, and the benefits of extending jobless relief. According to data released today by the National Employment Law Project, 16 states have 10 percent or higher unemployment (the national rate is 9.5 percent). Meanwhile, members of Congress from 15 of those states voted against extending benefits. Like Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.), whose home state is plagued by foreclosures, a stagnant economy, and a 14 percent jobless rate—the highest in the country. Ensign’s “no” vote means 30,800 Nevadans will lose their benefits by the end of this week, and the state will thereby lose out on $105 million in stimulus.

Joining Ensign are Alabama senators Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby (10.8 percent unemployment back home), Tennessee senators Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker (10.4 percent), and Georgia senators Jonny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss (10.2 percent). All told, the opposition by these six lawmakers, and the dozen or so House members from the same states who voted “no” (though the House passed its jobs bill), has cut off 209,600 people from extended benefits and cost $28.2 million in lost stimulus.

Right now, the likelihood of passing jobless benefits looks bleak in the Senate, with intransigent Republicans refusing to back down. They’ve been joined in opposition by Nebraska’s Democratic Senator Ben Nelson, too, who’s blocking the bill and has said that the jobless crisis isn’t that big of a deal. “At some point, it ceases to be an emergency,” he told reporters. Try telling that to the 2.5 million people whose safety net disappears on Friday.

For your reading pleasure, here’s a state-by-state breakdown of all the lawmakers in Congress who’ve voted against jobless benefits and the loss—in jobs and stimulus—to their states stemming from that vote.

 

Nelp Unemployment Chart

IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE SCREWED WITHOUT TRUMP:

"It's that we're screwed with or without him if we can't show the public that what we do matters for the long term," writes Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein as she kicks off our drive to raise $350,000 in donations from readers by July 17.

This is a big one for us. It's our first time asking for an outpouring of support since screams of FAKE NEWS and so much of what Trump stood for made everything we do so visceral. Like most newsrooms, we face incredibly hard budget realities, and it's unnerving needing to raise big money when traffic is down.

So, as we ask you to consider supporting our team's journalism, we thought we'd slow down and check in about where Mother Jones is and where we're going after the chaotic last several years. This comparatively slow moment is also an urgent one for Mother Jones: You can read more in "Slow News Is Good News," and if you're able to, please support our team's hard-hitting journalism and help us reach our big $350,000 goal with a donation today.

payment methods

IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE SCREWED WITHOUT TRUMP:

"It's that we're screwed with or without him if we can't show the public that what we do matters for the long term," writes Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein as she kicks off our drive to raise $350,000 in donations from readers by July 17.

This is a big one for us. So, as we ask you to consider supporting our team's journalism, we thought we'd slow down and check in about where Mother Jones is and where we're going after the chaotic last several years. This comparatively slow moment is also an urgent one for Mother Jones: You can read more in "Slow News Is Good News," and if you're able to, please support our team's hard-hitting journalism and help us reach our big $350,000 goal with a donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate