Roy Blunt: “I, too, share the concerns that, for all the time that the House has dealt with this whole issue of extended…”

“I, too, share the concerns that, for all the time that the House has dealt with this whole issue of extended unemployment benefits going back to 1981, we have never before left this up to the States to decide how this Federal money would be spent. By, in the past, saying that you had to meet the 20-week requirement, at least every State had the same situation that they dealt with. I would also like to point out that this bill is being considered under a procedure known as suspension of the rules. Usually that procedure is used for noncontroversial matters. By putting it under a suspension of the rules, the so-called PAYGO requirement that the majority has talked about and trumpeted as fiscal discipline doesn't. That's a requirement where you pay for these benefits with a bill you bring to the floor. The roughly $10 billion cost of this bill is just being added to the deficit. As we're well aware, a group of Democrats known as the 'Blue Dogs' has been particularly strong in advocating this PAYGO arrangement, yet apparently they're not going to oppose this bill.”