Unemployment Extension 2014: House Bill Matches EUC Senate Version, Removes Retroactive Benefits

The 2014 unemployment extension bill in the House of Representatives is a bipartisan effort by multiple Republicans and Democrats who wish to see unemployment benefits extended for the long term unemployed. But Democrat Dan Kildee of Michigan and New Jersey Republican Frank LoBiondo also matched one key component that is unpopular with the unemployed.

In a related report by The Inquisitr, some Democrats say President Obama is putting income inequality on the backburner due to the upcoming 2014 mid-term elections. Some Republican supports claim John Boehner was right to deny the EUC based upon the presumption that taking away benefits caused the jobless to seek work even harder, which in turn dropped the unemployment rate.

The House version matches the Senate version in almost all ways, with the most significant feature being the lack of retroactive payments for people who stopped receiving jobless benefit payments at the end of 2013. Instead, they are focusing on a five-month extension that does not cost nearly as much as the version passed by the Senate earlier this year. The Representatives claim this bill is fully paid for by using “pension smoothing” provisions from the 2012 highway bill and extending customs fees through 2024, but some critics have pointed out this payment plan essentially means they’re borrowing money now in hopes that a future Congress won’t change these plans years hence.

Regardless of the details, LoBiondo believes that both political parties should work together to come up with a plan that will pass all the way through Congress:

“Their stories have motivated my countless conversations with House leadership and concerned colleagues hoping to bridge this divide. I see no reason why a bipartisan solution cannot be found that provides a critical lifeline to those in need without adding to the deficit.”

Kildee says he’s hoping to keep partisan politics from preventing much-needed help for American families:

“I think there’s been some movement within the Republicans on this, so we have done this as a bipartisan bill. We introduced this with four Democrats and four Republicans. The goal is this: Let’s not make this a partisan political question…. That’s really the most significant thing.”

But the biggest obstacle in the House has been John Boehner, who still refers to “job provisions” as a necessity for the 2014 unemployment extension bill in the House. It’s hoped that a new focus on Re-Employment Services programs may pass muster, since it’s intended to help people when they reach their 27th week and 55th week of unemployment benefits. The goal is to provide personalized assessments and referrals that would hopefully help the long term unemployed find work.

Because Boehner has been mostly silent on the issue, advocates of the 2014 EUC bill have turned to incoming House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who is set to replace Eric Cantor. Unfortunately, when Republican Senator Dean Heller spoke to McCarthy the message was clear that he also wanted “job provisions,” but what exactly this means has been vague. In hopes of determining a middle ground, Kildee sent an open letter to McCarthy this past week, which reads in part:

“We have all seen that this body can do great things when we come together and work towards a common goal. It is within all of our interests and our country’s economic interest that we come together now and work on finding a responsible and real solution to this problem. We urge you to seize this opportunity as the new Majority Leader to set a new tone in Congress and show that this body can still accomplish great things and tackle the toughest issues when we work together.”

If the 2014 unemployment extension were to have job provisions, what do you think they should be?