Nancy L. Johnson: “I do not understand why my colleagues think going home having extended unemployment 13 weeks is help. Why is it not…”

“I do not understand why my colleagues think going home having extended unemployment 13 weeks is help. Why is it not better to go home and have extended unemployment 13 weeks, put in an automatic trigger so unemployed people cannot be held hostage by the other body if the recession lasts? Why is it not better to go home and provide health benefits for those who are unemployed? The first time in our entire history that we have ever said to the unemployed that health security is just as important as income security when you are unemployed. Why is it that Members think, and I have had Members say to me, well, the New York aid, we will do that later. Do they not understand the other body is not capable of doing it later? They would have done it if they could have done it. Why did they not add it into the extension? It is very important. What about the extenders? My colleagues have all voted for extenders many times. Do Members not care that the welfare-to-work tax credit is going to expire? Do Members not care that the work-opportunities tax credit that helps people coming off of welfare, to get employed, to stay employed, prisoners coming out of prison to get employed and stay employed, are Members not thinking that consistent predictable tax policy protects jobs, reduces the number of unemployed?”