Mr. President, I wish to speak briefly about the issue of unemployment insurance benefits. We, the Congress, allowed these benefits to expire 21 days ago. I believe there is a major misperception on the part of some about what the effect…
Mr. President, I wish to speak briefly about the issue of unemployment insurance benefits. We, the Congress, allowed these benefits to expire 21 days ago. I believe there is a major misperception on the part of some about what the effect of this is.
This proposal to extend these benefits is talked about as a so-called extension of unemployment insurance. That suggests that the provision simply provides additional weeks of unemployment compensation payments to people who have used up all their benefits. Understandably, there are people in my State and around the country who say: Wait a minute. At some point you don't want to keep adding more and more weeks of unemployment benefits.
What we need to understand is that is not what we are proposing to do here. What we have been trying to do is not to add more weeks but merely to allow the unemployed to continue drawing the same number of weeks of benefits that they were able to draw prior to the expiration of the program we are trying to extend.
The provision does not provide additional payments to anyone who has exhausted his or her Federal and State benefits before the authorization of this program expired on June 2. It does not extend the number of weeks of benefits under the programs. Rather, it simply allows the programs to continue operating for people who use up the weeks of State-provided unemployment benefits that are available to them.
In plain language, what this provision will do is give a person who lost his or her job last month the same unemployment compensation benefits as someone who lost his or her job a full year ago.
What are we talking about as far as the amount of these benefits? There is an editorial in the New York Times this morning indicating that the average unemployment check is $309 a week. It is not that high in my State. Mr. President, $295 a week is the average. We are not talking about a vast amount of money, particularly if a person is trying to support a family and trying to pay some portion of their bills while they seek another job. People need to understand also that you cannot draw unemployment benefits under the State programs or the Federal programs unless you continue to be actively seeking employment.
In plain language, what this provision would do is give a person who lost his or her job just recently the same opportunity that people who lost their jobs some time ago have had.
The bill we are debating would allow what we call the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program to continue operating. A person who loses his job is eligible to receive up to 26 weeks of benefits through the State unemployment compensation program. When those benefits are exhausted, some States add additional benefits through what they call the extended benefit program, and many do not. Once all the State benefits have been exhausted, the person may be eligible to receive additional benefits through this Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program, which is the subject of our discussion. That program is what we are debating today as part of this extenders package.
Clearly, the date on which a person becomes eligible for the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program depends on when that person lost his or her job.
Moreover, the number of payments for which that person is eligible also depends on when he lost that job because the benefits are paid in a series of four tiers, with each tier lasting a certain number of weeks.
Because this program has been forced to stop operating, people who lost their job recently will not receive as much unemployment compensation or as many weeks of unemployment compensation as people who lost their jobs months ago.
Continuing the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program is simply a matter of fairness to those people if they continue to seek employment.
From the week of June 2--21 days ago when this program expired--until the end of last week, there were right at 4,000 people in my State who had run out of State benefits. Those individuals then would find they did not have the benefit they could have had had they run out of State benefits and lost their jobs a few weeks earlier.
Until the Congress acts, none of these people will be eligible for the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program. An additional 4,600 people who are in one of the lower tiers of the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program will exhaust their tier of benefits and be unable to receive the next tier of benefit. That is roughly 8,000 New Mexicans who will be affected by the expiration of this Federal program.
In my view, the obstruction that has forced this program to stop is not fair to those New Mexicans. It is not fair to many Americans. These are people who worked for companies that were able to hang on to their employees longer than other companies once the recession hit. Cutting the benefits of these individuals is not fair. These individuals are ones who primarily live in States such as my home State of New Mexico where the recession hit hardest a few months later than it had hit in other parts of the country. It is not fair that the people in these States should be eligible for fewer weeks of benefits when they have paid into the unemployment insurance system just like everybody else.
It is easy to find maps on the Internet to show States that are disadvantaged by what the Senate has failed to do. There are animated maps that show how high unemployment spread across the country. It started on the east coast and the west coast. It crept toward the middle of the country. States such as New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, South Dakota, and Colorado, I say to the Presiding Officer, were among the last to be affected by the recession. It is the people of these States who are being disadvantaged because the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program has been allowed to lapse.
I want to be clear that I do not believe this program needs to be continued indefinitely, not least because of the substantial cost involved. When the job market improves, we need to find a way to phase out these costs. In my view, the fair thing to do would be to choose a date and say people who lose their job after that date and begin drawing unemployment benefits after that date will not be eligible to receive the extra weeks of benefits that the Federal Government is adding to what the States are providing.
The economy is much better than it was last year when the country was losing 750,000 jobs every month. The free-fall has stopped. The private sector is once again creating jobs at a very modest level. But the unemployment rate is still at 8.7 percent in my State of New Mexico and at 9.7 nationally. Now is not the time to eliminate the assistance this program has been providing to the many people who have been forced to lose their jobs during this recession.
I urge my colleagues to support the continuation of this Emergency Unemployment Compensation Program until we can find a fairer way to phase it out and terminate these extra Federal benefits.
Mr. President, I yield the floor. I see a colleague seeking recognition.