House-Senate Conference the Wrong Venue for Major Unemployment Insurance Reform

February 14, 2012 at 12:14 pm

Both parties have agreed for years that the unemployment insurance (UI) system needs reform.  The bipartisan, blue-ribbon Norwood Commission in the mid-1990s called for changes to strengthen the permanent Extended Benefits program, improve the UI system’s solvency, and increase access for low-wage and other disadvantaged workers. Policymakers took a step toward implementing this third goal by including some UI modernization reforms in the 2009 Recovery Act.

But the ongoing House-Senate talks over continuing the temporary federal emergency UI program are the wrong place to negotiate comprehensive changes to a permanent program that has supported jobless workers and the economy for over 75 years.

Congress should enact a quick, clean extension of temporary federal UI benefits, then pursue UI reform through the normal legislative process, giving it the full debate and discussion it deserves.

The President’s budget (see our statement) takes an important step towards UI reform by proposing changes to bolster the system’s long-term fiscal soundness and modernize its financing.  The budget also boosts funding for states to strengthen their reemployment and training services to help the unemployed get back on their feet.

Unfortunately, in their recent proposals to extend federal emergency UI, congressional Republicans have sought only those “reforms” that would deny benefits to unemployed workers and allow states to divert UI funds for purposes other than paying benefits.

UI has played an important role in creating jobs and reducing poverty in the last few years. Congress should consider a range of UI proposals — those from the Norwood Commission, the President, and House Republicans — but should keep in mind that reform should strengthen the UI system, not weaken it.

Print Friendly

More About Hannah Shaw

Hannah Shaw

Hannah Shaw joined the Center in August of 2008. Her work as a research associate centers on income inequality, unemployment insurance, and economic analysis of other federal budget and policy issues.

Full bio | Blog Archive | Research archive at CBPP.org

Your Comment

Comment Policy:

Thank you for joining the conversation about important policy issues. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters and are subject to approval and moderation. We reserve the right to remove comments that:

  • are injurious, defamatory, profane, off-topic or inappropriate;
  • contain personal attacks or racist, sexist, homophobic, or other slurs;
  • solicit and/or advertise for personal blogs and websites or to sell products or services;
  • may infringe the copyright or intellectual property rights of others or other applicable laws or regulations; or
  • are otherwise inconsistent with the goals of this blog.

Posted comments do not necessarily represent the views of the CBPP and do not constitute official endorsement by CBPP. Please note that comments will be approved during the Center's business hours. If you have questions, please contact communications@cbpp.org.




8 − four =

 characters available