I think some people are playing political games. I understand some people are interested in passing a unanimous consent agreement on unemployment compensation. I heard the request. It was to provide a 13-week extension of unemployment compensation. That is not what this bill does. I don't know how many times I have to say it on the floor. The bill provides for a 26-week extension, not a 13-week, a 26-week extension. There is a big difference. I believe I heard the sponsors say it changes the trigger--it does change the trigger. It is not a clean extension because it changes the trigger so that more States are eligible for long-term extension. This bill has a 26-week Federal unemployment compensation extension on top of the State 26 weeks, and an additional 7 weeks for those States that have the highest unemployment compensation. That would be a total of 52 weeks--59 weeks, in some States; 52 weeks for all States, 59 weeks for some States. It also has a section that says we should not count people who might be employed. It is a crummy bill.
Don Nickles: “I think some people are playing political games. I understand some people are interested in passing a unanimous consent…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the details and implications of a bill related to unemployment compensation.
Share
More from Don Nickles
Last month we celebrated National Adoption Month. In 2003, Americans opened their hearts and homes to over 20,000 orphaned children born overseas. In order to adopt these children the families had to submit extensive paperwork and work…
The Senate is special for a couple of reasons, but amongst legislative bodies, it is really special because unlike the House and unlike most parliament procedures, members of the Senate have unlimited debate and unlimited opportunities to…
I need to know a little bit more about the amendment. The tax credit goes to the employers. Is there any guarantee that money, the tax credit--let's say $20,000 for the service man or woman-- goes to the service man or woman. How do we…
I am not sure it is written that way. I am not sure it is a requirement that an employer has to give the money immediately to a service man or woman. I suspect that is your intent. I don't believe that is the way the amendment is written…





