Unemployment Extension 2014: Should The 99 Weeks Group Receive Benefits And Retroactive Pay?

The fight over the 2014 unemployment extension bill has been mostly waged by politicians, but even among the unemployed there seems to be disagreement on at least one issue: Should the people who have already reached 99 weeks in unemployment benefits continue to be supported within a new unemployment extension bill?

In a related report by The Inquisitr, as the number of jobless effected by this situation passed the three million mark a new White House petition asks President Obama to call John Boehner about unemployment insurance. Now Senators Dean Heller and Jack Reed are working on a new unemployment extension bill for the Senate but they’re also claiming that it’s politically impossible to provide retroactive benefits.

Reports claim that the group most effected by the lack of an unemployment extension bill is the extreme long term unemployed since it’s claimed people in that demographic are having a much more difficult time finding jobs in comparison to the short term unemployed. For example, according to the AARP, unemployed individuals 55 and over have been out of work for nearly a year.

But even among our readers at The Inquisitr I have noticed some believe that those who reached the 99 weeks maximum of the original unemployment extension should not be given further unemployment benefits. There seems to be a belief that the 99 weeks group is largely comprised of rich people in the one percent income group. But if there are long term unemployed statistics to support this belief, I have not seen them yet.

What we do have are statistics gathered by Gallup on the mental health of those who have been unemployed for 52 weeks or more. When asked if they are being treated for depression, the rate of people saying yes about doubles when you go from only several weeks to the 52 weeks group, which stands at 19 percent. Based upon these results, Gallup believes this group needs the help offered by the 2014 unemployment extension:

“The loss of hope that can accompany long-term unemployment may be detrimental not only to job seekers’ quality of life, but also to their ability to find good jobs. The likelihood of unemployed Americans to agree that they will find a job within the next four weeks falls sharply the longer they are unemployed — from about seven in 10 among those unemployed for five weeks or less, to fewer than three in 10 among those who have been jobless for a year or more. This marked drop in optimism may affect job seekers’ motivation, increasing the risk that they will drop out of the labor force altogether…. The idea that extended unemployment causes workers’ skill to atrophy is a common concern, but the effects of joblessness on candidates’ health may be just as damaging to their ability to find — and, just as importantly, hang on to — a good job.”

In addition, while the long term unemployed statistics released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics do not say anything about the 99 weeks group, they do point out one silver lining in the dark cloud:

“The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was essentially unchanged at 3.4 million in May. These individuals accounted for 34.6 percent of the unemployed. Over the past 12 months, the number of long-term unemployed has declined by 979,000.”

Do you believe the 99 weeks group should not be part of the new 2014 unemployment extension bill in the Senate? If so, why?