The essence of the letter says the only way for States to continue paying temporary unemployment compensation benefits without disruption is if a bill is presented to the President for signature no later than Thursday, January 9, the day after tomorrow. We had to resolve the differences between the House and the Senate. The Senate passed a $4.9 billion bill; the House passed a $1 billion bill. We have worked with our colleagues in the House. I think we have been successful. I believe we have been successful in getting them to accept a straight extension of present law. We were originally talking 3 months. After negotiations with the House, I consulted with my colleague and friend from New York and said, let's make it a 5-month extension. So we extended the program all the way through May, and then the phaseout would occur. So there would not be a shutoff date as there was December 28, a much better transition. It was my understanding that colleagues had agreed upon this 5-month extension. The cost of this proposal is estimated to be $7.2, $7.3 billion on a 2002 scoring base.
Don Nickles: “The essence of the letter says the only way for States to continue paying temporary unemployment compensation benefits…”
On the recordJanuary 7, 2003
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the need for a bill to extend temporary unemployment compensation benefits.
Share
More from Don Nickles
Jul 15, 2004
I have a couple comments. Again, I compliment my colleagues, Senator Kennedy and Senator DeWine. They have been steadfast in their advocacy. Senator DeWine is right, he and Senator Kennedy introduced this a long time ago. If I am correct…
Jun 11, 2012
I do not defend 199, period. I think Congress--when you are rewriting the tax code, you should have a uniform corporate rate, not a lower rate for manufacturing.
Apr 21, 2010
Lowering the threshold required for cloture, in my opinion, would be a mistake, because that is a threshold that almost by definition requires bipartisan involvement.





