Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jim Bunning Repeatedly Blocks Unemployment Benefits Extension, Tells Dem 'Tough Shit'

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Jim Bunning Repeatedly Blocks Unemployment Benefits Extension, Tells Dem 'Tough Shit'

    Updated below: The Senate has now recessed for the weekend without taking action.

    Jim Bunning, a Republican from Kentucky, is single-handedly blocking Senate action needed to prevent an estimated 1.2 million American workers from prematurely losing their unemployment benefits next month.

    As Democratic senators asked again and again for unanimous consent for a vote on a 30-day extension Thursday night, Bunning refused to go along.

    And when Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) begged him to drop his objection, Politico reports, Bunning replied: "Tough shit."

    Bunning says he doesn't oppose extending benefits -- he just doesn't want the money that's required added to the deficit. He proposes paying for the 30-day extension with stimulus funds. The Senate's GOP leadership did not support him in his objections.

    And at one point during the debate, which dragged on till nearly midnight, Bunning complained of missing a basketball game.

    "I have missed the Kentucky-South Carolina game that started at 9:00," he said,
    "and it's the only redeeming chance we had to beat South Carolina since they're the only team that has beat Kentucky this year.

    The unemployment rate in Kentucky is 10.7 percent.

    The stakes are enormous: provisions of last year's stimulus bill that allow extra weeks of unemployment benefits and COBRA health coverage are set to expire on Feb. 28. State workforce agencies have already sent out letters informing recipients that they'll be ineligible for extra "tiers" of benefits starting next month. The National Employment Law Project estimates that 1.2 million people will prematurely lose benefits in March.

    Judy Conti, a lobbyist for the NELP, said that even when Bunning is eventually thwarted and the extension is passed, state governments will still have to deal with the extra administrative costs of shutting down and restarting the extended benefits programs.

    "Once the program is retroactively reauthorized, the federal government is going to send the same amount of money, but his own state government is going to have to spend even more money," Conti said.

    "What happened last night was an absolute disgrace. There is a time and a place a purpose for debate on deficit reduction, but you don't make your stand on the back of the unemployed. It is ill-informed, counter productive and just cruel."

    Daily Kos produced a video of Bunning's obstruction:




    UPDATE 12:00 PM -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) made a last-minute attempt on Friday morning to get Bunning to let the Senate move forward with extending benefits.

    "We talk a lot in the Senate about procedure. Our debate sometimes relates only to procedure. And often that's appropriate," Reid said. "And, as we know, sometimes these procedural rules we have in the Senate are complex. But the issue before us today is not something that's arcane, very ritualistic or complex. It's very simple. And it's clear -- clear that it's going to be a lot more noticeable by people Monday morning, because it's going to affect the lives of thousands of Americans and their livelihoods.

    "By Monday morning tens of thousands of Nevadans and more than one million Americans who rely on unemployment insurance and health benefits will simply lose them."

    (The National Employment Law Project estimates that 1.2 million people will lose their benefits over the course of March, not at all once on Monday.)

    Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) took the floor after Reid to stick up for Bunning. He noted that there is broad bipartisan support for extending benefits, but said Bunning was right to take a stand against adding $10 billion to the deficit. He also pointed out that the jobs bill that Reid scrapped two weeks ago, crafted by Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.), contained an extension of UI and COBRA.

    "I admire the courage of the junior senator from Kentucky," he said. "Somebody has to stand up finally and say, 'No more inter-generational theft!'"

    And with that, the Senate adjourned for the weekend.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_477910.html

  • #2
    you think the republicans care for the unemployed? They would cancel unemployment benefits all together if they could get away it.

    The same unemployed who cant afford the cobra payments and have probably lost their health insurance.


    Keep sticking sticking up for them right wingers.

    Comment


    • #3
      When Clinton was President one of the best things he did to balance the budget was welfare reform.

      Tough choices have to be made.
      NBA is a joke

      Comment


      • #4
        The funny thing is Bunning's State of Kentucky hasn't gotten better its actually worse so they need the unemployment. And as another senator points out that unemployment money goes right back into the public as they spend it on things they have to have.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by BettorsChat View Post
          The funny thing is Bunning's State of Kentucky hasn't gotten better its actually worse so they need the unemployment. And as another senator points out that unemployment money goes right back into the public as they spend it on things they have to have.
          Doesnt matter to him. He has his great government benefits including health care, stipends, cars, expenses. They will be in the unemployment lines still voting for him though.

          Comment


          • #6
            Another piece of s**t if those 10 % that are u/employed in ky would take thier head out of thier ass next election time bunninng runs and remember his stand (self centered as it is) and made him unemployed .maybe the other jackass' (elected officals) would think for thier voter, and have some compassion for their bad times . Not thier right wing stand

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by BettorsChat View Post
              The funny thing is Bunning's State of Kentucky hasn't gotten better its actually worse so they need the unemployment. And as another senator points out that unemployment money goes right back into the public as they spend it on things they have to have.
              Yeah, kind of the same concept of tax cuts, puts more money into people's pockets, which goes right back into the public as they spend it on the things they have to have.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by musclemann View Post
                Doesnt matter to him. He has his great government benefits including health care, stipends, cars, expenses. They will be in the unemployment lines still voting for him though.
                Don't act like that comment is exclusive to Republicans. That comment fits equally to all politicians. Very few on either side give a shit about the people that elect them.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Even more interesting is the silence of people and the facts. Wasn't there a bi-partisan bill in the Senate ready to pass that would have taken care of this, yet pulled off the floor by Reid? Silence. Didn't Obama want "pay-go" after the State of the U address? But Bunning doesn't want this bill to add to the debt like how pay go is supposed to work. Yet silence. He offers the money should come from "stimulus" funds, but God forbid any shovel ready project () get a few bucks less to pay for these benefits. Silence. Don't let those pesky facts get in the way of any posts!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by harold_bush View Post
                    Yeah, kind of the same concept of tax cuts, puts more money into people's pockets, which goes right back into the public as they spend it on the things they have to have.
                    Yeah, except the top 10% which is the richest people in the USA. They hoard there money.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      if you ran a politcial ad showing bunning turning down the funds in every state in the south and labeled it republicans refuse to help recent unemployed workers in these southern states help with financial and health benefits the voters in these states would show up in droves to vote republican.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by BettorsChat View Post
                        Yeah, except the top 10% which is the richest people in the USA. They hoard there money.
                        And pay what % of the overall tax bill? Demonizing the rich while trying to get "in the club" doesn't make sense to me.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by BettorsChat View Post
                          Yeah, except the top 10% which is the richest people in the USA. They hoard there money.
                          Who makes this economy spin, someone making $20k a year or someone that makes $2 million a year? Which person buys homes, cars, boats, goes on vacations, goes out to eat, etc? Most importantly, it is the evil rich that start companies that employ half this country. A person making $20k contributes almost nothing to making our economy spin.

                          The top 5% of wager earners in this country pay over 50% of the total federal income tax bill. The top 10% pays 65%, and the top 50% of the wage earners pay 96%. That leaves the bottom 50% of this country paying 4%. The top 1% of the country pays more than ten times the amount of federal income taxes as the bottom 50%. These are older figures, but you get the point.

                          That's the whole fallacy of tax cuts for the poor, they don't pay anything to begin with, so how can you cut it? You give tax cuts to the people that actually have money to spend, not the people that can't spend money regardless of what their taxes are.

                          Without wealthy people our economy would collapse.
                          Last edited by harold_bush; 03-01-2010, 03:54 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by harold_bush View Post
                            Who makes this economy spin, someone making $20k a year or someone that makes $2 million a year? Which person buys homes, cars, boats, goes on vacations, goes out to eat, etc? Most importantly, it is the evil rich that start companies that employ half this country. A person making $20k contributes almost nothing to making our economy spin.

                            The top 5% of wager earners in this country pay over 50% of the total federal income tax bill. The top 10% pays 65%, and the top 50% of the wage earners pay 96%. That leaves the bottom 50% of this country paying 4%. The top 1% of the country pays more than ten times the amount of federal income taxes as the bottom 50%. These are older figures, but you get the point.

                            That's the whole fallacy of tax cuts for the poor, they don't pay anything to begin with, so how can you cut it? You give tax cuts to the people that actually have money to spend, not the people that can't spend money regardless of what their taxes are.

                            Without wealthy people our economy would collapse.


                            Here is what warren buffett, the third richest man in the world thinks about your george bush theories............


                            Speaking at a $4,600-a-seat fundraiser in New York who is worth an estimated $52 billion (£26 billion), said: “The 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you’re in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent.”

                            Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent. Mr Buffett told his audience, which included John Mack, the chairman of Morgan Stanley, and Alan Patricof, the founder of the US branch of Apax Partners, that US government policy had accentuated a disparity of wealth that hurt the economy by stifling opportunity and motivation.

                            Somehow you guys dont understand this concept.


                            But without the rich people you talk about no one else would ever become rich.......right

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by musclemann View Post
                              Here is what warren buffett, the third richest man in the world thinks about your george bush theories............


                              Speaking at a $4,600-a-seat fundraiser in New York who is worth an estimated $52 billion (£26 billion), said: “The 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you’re in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent.”

                              Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent. Mr Buffett told his audience, which included John Mack, the chairman of Morgan Stanley, and Alan Patricof, the founder of the US branch of Apax Partners, that US government policy had accentuated a disparity of wealth that hurt the economy by stifling opportunity and motivation.

                              Somehow you guys dont understand this concept.


                              But without the rich people you talk about no one else would ever become rich.......right
                              I don't support the current tax code, but my numbers are correct. 17.7% of $100 million is $17 million a year. 30% of $60,000 is $20,000. Take a lot of those $20k to get to $17 million.

                              I'm a total flat tax/consumption tax guy. You can make the the rate 15% to 18%, and almost everyone pays less in taxes, but you generate an equal or more amount of revenue. You get rid of the IRS as we know it, and one HUGE feature of a consumption tax is bring in all the illegals, many who don't currently pay any taxes. With a consumption tax EVERYONE....legal/illegal.....rich/poor......young/old.....pays the same amount. No loopholes, no tax sheltering, no off shore accounts, no accounting tricks, nothing.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X