Biden isn't stepping in to stop 20 GOP-led states from yanking federal unemployment within weeks

Joe Money

Rising Star
Registered
Biden isn't stepping in to stop 20 GOP-led states from yanking federal unemployment within weeks
  • The Biden administration isn't stepping in to prevent the loss of jobless aid in GOP-led states.
  • Around 3.4 million people are set to lose some federal aid starting next month.
  • A White House official told Insider the Biden administration wants to strike a "balance" between workers and employers amid a labor shortage.

At least 20 Republican-led states are terminating federal unemployment aid programs starting in June in an effort to force more people back to work — Texas became the largest one yet on Monday. Some Democrats urged the Biden administration to step in and prevent this from happening, but there's no sign they will.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont called on the administration to keep jobless aid flowing under the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program for millions of gig workers, contractors, and freelancers, set up under a federal rescue package early last year. In a letter to the Labor Department sent on Thursday, Sanders argued the agency had a legal obligation to do so.

The legal fight that Sanders is urging would be a bruising one at a moment Biden is pressing ahead with his $4 trillion economic agenda.

"They have not yet come out with a position that they can enjoin these states, and I know it's a difficult legal and practical consideration for them," Andrew Stettner, a senior fellow and unemployment expert at the left-leaning Century Foundation, told Insider. He said continuing the programs would either require buy-in at the state level, or the White House would have to confront Republican governors.

"They'd really have to clash with these states and it's still unclear their appetite for that clash," he said. Stettner recently projected that 2.1 million people would lose some form of unemployment aid in Republican states.

The largest chunk of that figure are on PUA and another federal program for the long-term unemployed. An estimated 1.3 million people would be deprived of all their jobless aid since they don't qualify for regular state benefits. The remainder would receive the state payouts, but they typically replace only 40% of an individual's past wages.

Biden is taking a hands-off approach on the issue after an unexpectedly dismal jobs report earlier this month. Last week, he underscored the ability of states to reimpose job-seeking requirements that were scrapped early in the pandemic as jobs vanished and unemployment surged. He also stressed that jobless aid was not the main factor keeping people on the sidelines, an argument economists largely agree with as well.

The White House is strongly indicating it's leaving it up to states to decide whether to yank the unemployment aid ahead of its end in early September.

A White House official who spoke to Insider on condition of anonymity cited progress made on distributing vaccines and said the administration expects more workers to reenter the labor force in the next few months. The official said they're attempting to find a middle ground between businesses and the unemployed as the economy recovers.

"We recognize that every state has different conditions on the ground," the official told Insider, adding "the announcements [Biden] made last week are designed to balance the needs of both workers and employers as we work through this unprecedented transition."

On Friday, Press Secretary Jen Psaki said, "I would say that we certainly understand that governors and leaders are going to have to make a decision in regard to unemployment benefits, but what's important to remember and what we remind people of is that, again, we don't see this as a major driver in preventing people from seeking employment and seeking work."

Republicans are urging governors to continue dropping the programs. "Our local job creators should not have to compete with the federal government for workers," House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California wrote in a letter to governors last week.

The White House is doubling down on its proposed spending programs. But it appears unlikely that the $300 federal supplement will be extended after Sept. 6 given the opposition of at least one Democrat, Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia.

 
Honestly I understand completely you want people to work and not depend of free stuff but a part of me is thinking what if I'm best buy ceo right now and I've seen people come into my store and buy 1500 macbooks with UE and other aid, with that gone how many more people gonna not be able to afford stuff?

It's just weird that you're kinda spiting in the face of the same job creators you praise with this one, that's 575 a week in Florida is alot more than many people make a week and they could buy shit they couldn't before so economy looked pretty good for a bit but they get rid of that so back to 275 which is like top ten lowest in America with a economy that greatly depends of hospitality which pays pretty low.

People don't know but Alabama and Arizona actually have lower cost of living than Florida and pays about the same, seems like bad business to me.

GOP could easily lose Florida if they fuck around, I understand cacs wanna feel they better than the average negro but when they living in poverty with no food to eat they gonna flip on the GOP dudes eventually.
 
A part of me gets it......

Y'all mfkrs crying an protesting over this?!....

Aight bet, let the governors tank their state economies......

Oh but after you do......don't come asking for federal money to help you recover.....

The money was offered proactively and you guys rejected it....good luck getting re-elected.
 
Fuck your topic

So you don't care about this at all: "Around 3.4 million people are set to lose some federal aid starting next month."

Especially considering that unemployment in general, and covid-related unemployment especially, has a disproportionate effect on Black Americans?

Laid Off More, Hired Less: Black Workers in the COVID-19 Recession

 
The pandemic was a pause for some people to have a chance to get their shit together for a higher paying job.

These fucktard governors want to appear to be enacting legislation for their donors and supporters EMPLOYEES to get back to their underpaid, minimum wage jobs by removing the safety net to look for a job that pays a living wage.

Instead of taking the fed money the republican states will look to slam the coffin shut on millions.
 
The pandemic was a pause for some people to have a chance to get their shit together for a higher paying job.

These fucktard governors want to appear to be enacting legislation for their donors and supporters EMPLOYEES to get back to their underpaid, minimum wage jobs by removing the safety net to look for a job that pays a living wage.

Instead of taking the fed money the republican states will look to slam the coffin shut on millions.


Bruh McDonald's is hiring "upto" $13/hr to start in some parts around here.....

Mfkrs are assistant managers at wally world and not making that much....

The majority of repubs only care about the citizen recipients of welfare.....they fail to realize that big companies like Wally world, Mickey D's....etc greatly benefit from welfare as well.

They get to pay their employees minimum wage, thereby maximizing their profits and then skirt around paying the taxes that benefit welfare which helps to offset the poor wages they offer.......

All the while keeping out of the spotlight for the business pratices....

Sounds like a win/win for them
 
Biden isn't stepping in to stop 20 GOP-led states from yanking federal unemployment within weeks
  • The Biden administration isn't stepping in to prevent the loss of jobless aid in GOP-led states.
  • Around 3.4 million people are set to lose some federal aid starting next month.
  • A White House official told Insider the Biden administration wants to strike a "balance" between workers and employers amid a labor shortage.

At least 20 Republican-led states are terminating federal unemployment aid programs starting in June in an effort to force more people back to work — Texas became the largest one yet on Monday. Some Democrats urged the Biden administration to step in and prevent this from happening, but there's no sign they will.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont called on the administration to keep jobless aid flowing under the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program for millions of gig workers, contractors, and freelancers, set up under a federal rescue package early last year. In a letter to the Labor Department sent on Thursday, Sanders argued the agency had a legal obligation to do so.

The legal fight that Sanders is urging would be a bruising one at a moment Biden is pressing ahead with his $4 trillion economic agenda.

"They have not yet come out with a position that they can enjoin these states, and I know it's a difficult legal and practical consideration for them," Andrew Stettner, a senior fellow and unemployment expert at the left-leaning Century Foundation, told Insider. He said continuing the programs would either require buy-in at the state level, or the White House would have to confront Republican governors.

"They'd really have to clash with these states and it's still unclear their appetite for that clash," he said. Stettner recently projected that 2.1 million people would lose some form of unemployment aid in Republican states.

The largest chunk of that figure are on PUA and another federal program for the long-term unemployed. An estimated 1.3 million people would be deprived of all their jobless aid since they don't qualify for regular state benefits. The remainder would receive the state payouts, but they typically replace only 40% of an individual's past wages.

Biden is taking a hands-off approach on the issue after an unexpectedly dismal jobs report earlier this month. Last week, he underscored the ability of states to reimpose job-seeking requirements that were scrapped early in the pandemic as jobs vanished and unemployment surged. He also stressed that jobless aid was not the main factor keeping people on the sidelines, an argument economists largely agree with as well.

The White House is strongly indicating it's leaving it up to states to decide whether to yank the unemployment aid ahead of its end in early September.

A White House official who spoke to Insider on condition of anonymity cited progress made on distributing vaccines and said the administration expects more workers to reenter the labor force in the next few months. The official said they're attempting to find a middle ground between businesses and the unemployed as the economy recovers.

"We recognize that every state has different conditions on the ground," the official told Insider, adding "the announcements [Biden] made last week are designed to balance the needs of both workers and employers as we work through this unprecedented transition."

On Friday, Press Secretary Jen Psaki said, "I would say that we certainly understand that governors and leaders are going to have to make a decision in regard to unemployment benefits, but what's important to remember and what we remind people of is that, again, we don't see this as a major driver in preventing people from seeking employment and seeking work."

Republicans are urging governors to continue dropping the programs. "Our local job creators should not have to compete with the federal government for workers," House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California wrote in a letter to governors last week.

The White House is doubling down on its proposed spending programs. But it appears unlikely that the $300 federal supplement will be extended after Sept. 6 given the opposition of at least one Democrat, Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia.

"The Labor Department generally can’t force GOP leaders to pay the federal stimulus benefits under a national unemployment system that gives states broad latitude to implement their own systems as they see fit, the people said. Nor can federal agencies circumvent Republicans by administering unemployment checks on their own or through cooperating agencies in other states, according to those familiar with its thinking.
Even if the Labor Department had the authority, the agency probably would face significant legal, logistical and technological hurdles in distributing the aid swiftly — a complex task involving a web of technology and personnel that has flummoxed many state agencies despite decades of experience.


The Labor Department’s analysis probably will disappoint lawmakers including Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who over the past week have called on the Biden administration to ensure those who are out of work don’t face further financial hardship.

Labor advocates similarly had pushed the federal government to take action, stressing that it has the legal obligation and ability to continue administering some of the benefits because of the wording in the stimulus law, known as the Cares Act, that authorized some of them.


Instead, federal officials believe that any solution must come from Congress, where Republicans this month have introduced ill-fated legislation to cancel the expanded unemployment benefits nationally. The political obstacles for now mean there is perhaps no recourse for the approximately 3.6 million Americans nationwide who stand to see their checks slashed this summer, according to a Washington Post analysis of recent claims data.


The White House, for its part, maintains that the unemployment stimulus aid has not contributed to a crunch in hiring. Recent economic data appears to support the Biden administration’s position: If seven of 28 unemployed individuals received job offers they would normally accept, one of them may choose to turn it down because of the additional $300 in weekly unemployment payments authorized under the stimulus, according to a new analysis of from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

The paper said it could result in a “small but likely noticeable” effect on both workers’ behavior — and “employers’ perception of worker availability” — in early 2021.

For unemployed workers like Fry of Arkansas, it’s a difficult period. A self-described independent voter, she said she was hoping that Sanders or the federal government would find a way around the GOP moves to cut federal aid. She said the cuts would make life needlessly difficult for Americans like her and do little to get her work up and running again."
 
And therein lies the problem.

People are so adamant to take sides and demonize the other team that they'll throw you under the bus the moment you start to criticize or question your own.

Personally, I think that Joe Biden is a much better president than Trump was, but that doesn't mean he's beyond reproach. Not even close.
No one is above reproach. Yet lets look at the title of the thread. It implies that Biden can do something and isn't doing anything.
Now are we suppose to take that at face value or are we supposed search for the facts?
The op has an agenda and he's blinded by that agenda and can't be trusted to be objective at all.
 
Last edited:
Are you suggesting an executive order? That's not really going to be a long-term solution, is it?
No, the president cannot simply order state and local officials to change their policies

"Here we have issues that fall under the headings of both federalism and separation of powers. Let’s start with federalism.

Most readers will appreciate this already, but it needs to be said: Our constitutional order has a federal structure, meaning that (a) federal powers are supreme, yes, but limited in scope and (b) the state governments are independent entities, not mere subordinate layers under and within the federal government (that is, the federal-state relationship is not similar to the way that counties and cities are subordinate layers under the state governments).

What follows from this? The federal government cannot commandeer the machinery of the state governments (or, by extension, of local governments). That is, the federal government cannot coerce the states into taking actions to suit federal policy preference. See, e.g., New York v. United States and Printz v. United States. And so, the federal government cannot compel state and local officials to promulgate different rules on social distancing and the like."
 
No one is above reproach. Yet lets look at the title of the thread. It implies that Biden can do something and isn't doing anything.
Now are we suppose to take that at face value or are we supposed search for t3h facts?
The op has an agenda and he's blinded by that agenda and can't be objective at all.
Why hasn’t Biden done anything to empower the so-called black community like he said he would? Why has he done several things to empower other groups? Why aren’t the people that said they would hold Biden accountable doing it?
 
Why hasn’t Biden done anything to empower the so-called black community like he said he would? Why has he done several things to empower other groups? Why aren’t the people that said they would hold Biden accountable doing it?
Deflection duly noted.
3977220474.gif
 
Honestly I understand completely you want people to work and not depend of free stuff but a part of me is thinking what if I'm best buy ceo right now and I've seen people come into my store and buy 1500 macbooks with UE and other aid, with that gone how many more people gonna not be able to afford stuff?

It's just weird that you're kinda spiting in the face of the same job creators you praise with this one, that's 575 a week in Florida is alot more than many people make a week and they could buy shit they couldn't before so economy looked pretty good for a bit but they get rid of that so back to 275 which is like top ten lowest in America with a economy that greatly depends of hospitality which pays pretty low.

People don't know but Alabama and Arizona actually have lower cost of living than Florida and pays about the same, seems like bad business to me.

GOP could easily lose Florida if they fuck around, I understand cacs wanna feel they better than the average negro but when they living in poverty with no food to eat they gonna flip on the GOP dudes eventually.
Its federal money too. These states are stupid the sales tax and the local henefits could easily benefit from this but repugs can t govern well.
 
Its federal money too. These states are stupid the sales tax and the local henefits could easily benefit from this but repugs can t govern well.
You think they care about all that? :lol:

I'm not saying the move they're making is right or wrong (haven't really dug into it).
The republican base is full of nitwits who are always willing to cut off their nose to spite their face. These govenors aren't going to win reelection by being "socialist, communist, liberals", etc....
 
Last edited:
No one is above reproach. Yet lets look at the title of the thread. It implies that Biden can do something and isn't doing anything.
Now are we suppose to take that at face value or are we supposed search for the facts?
The op has an agenda and he's blinded by that agenda and can't be trusted to be objective at all.

Yes he does imply this, but I'm not going to throw him or anyone else under the bus over it. Biden isn't my daddy, my girlfriend, or a long lost dying relative with a Swiss bank account. He's also been in politics far longer than I've been alive so I'm sure he can take that kind of implication on the chin and keep pushing.

It's very possible, maybe even likely, that the OP is wrong or misinformed. However, as a man with an opinion he's allowed to be wrong. It doesn't say anything about his character or intentions.

We've come to a point in our society where disagreeing isn't enough. You have to treat the person you disagree with as an enemy otherwise you might as well be cosigning them.

A few years ago a Facebook group that I was a part of posted a meme which suggested that Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh had been accepting bribes. I did the research and realized that this was extremely unlikely. After pointing this out and laying out my research all of my replies were some variation of "get Trump's dick out of your throat."

If someone had questioned my research, poked holes in it, or even completely debunked it I could respect that. But instead, the general rule behind social media (including bgol) is that you either shut up, cosign, or get branded as the enemy. It's become a lot more about showing allegiance than discussing ideas.
 
Last edited:
Yes he does imply this, but I'm not going to throw him out or anyone else under the bus over it. Biden isn't my daddy, my girlfriend, or a long lost dying relative with a Swiss bank account. He's also been in politics far longer than I've been alive so I'm sure he can take that kind of implication on the chin and keep pushing.

It's very possible, maybe even likely, that the OP is wrong or misinformed. However, as a man with an opinion he's allowed to be wrong. It doesn't say anything about his character or intentions.

We've come to a point in our society where disagreeing isn't enough. You have to treat the person you disagree with as an enemy otherwise you might as well be cosigning them.

A few years ago a Facebook group that I was a part of posted a meme which suggested that Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh had been accepting bribes. I did the research and realized that this was extremely unlikely. After pointing this out and laying out my research all of my replies were some variation of "get Trump's dick out of your throat."

If someone had questioned my research, poked holes in it, or even completely debunked it I could respect that. But instead, the general rule behind social media (including bgol) is that you either shut up, cosign, or get branded as the enemy. It's become a lot more about showing allegiance than discussing ideas.
So here the thing. Opinions are like assholes..everybody has one.
Yet the pointi I made is that the op is not objective and he's intentionally not objective. So it's not about whether Biden is your daddy or mines.
I'm pointing out that the op intentionally puts out misleading information and then has a problem if someone searches into the mis/disinformation he provides to come to a better understanding of the facts (not opinion).
Now here you are acting like Capt. Savehoe without realizing the op doesn't like posters to have their own opinion or present the facts. If you do, then you are a list of things all because you won't roll with his misinformation, disinformation, etc....
 
So here the thing. Opinions are like assholes..everybody has one.
Yet the pointi I made is that the op is not objective and he's intentionally not objective. So it's not about whether Biden is your daddy or mines.
I'm pointing out that the op intentionally puts out misleading information and then has a problem if someone searches into the mis/disinformation he provides to come to a better understanding of the facts (not opinion).
Now here you are acting like Capt. Savehoe without realizing the op doesn't like posters to have their own opinion or present the facts. If you do, then you are a list of things all because you won't roll with his misinformation, disinformation, etc....
You are gonna defend biden no matter what
 
So here the thing. Opinions are like assholes..everybody has one.
Yet the pointi I made is that the op is not objective and he's intentionally not objective. So it's not about whether Biden is your daddy or mines.
I'm pointing out that the op intentionally puts out misleading information and then has a problem if someone searches into the mis/disinformation he provides to come to a better understanding of the facts (not opinion).
Now here you are acting like Capt. Savehoe without realizing the op doesn't like posters to have their own opinion or present the facts. If you do, then you are a list of things all because you won't roll with his misinformation, disinformation, etc....

It seems more like he responded to attacks with attacks and points with points. At least on this thread anyway Either way I'm not going to hold his bias against Biden against him because it's possible for a person to be biased and correct at the same time.

In this case I think he's dead wrong, but so what? I've been wrong before too
 
No one is above reproach. Yet lets look at the title of the thread. It implies that Biden can do something and isn't doing anything.
Now are we suppose to take that at face value or are we supposed search for the facts?
The op has an agenda and he's blinded by that agenda and can't be trusted to be objective at all.

The title of the thread is the same as the title of the article as it is written on Business Insider. And the link to said article is contained in the original post. Also, the article directly says that any intervention from Biden would require a political and legal clash with Republicans governors that he unwilling to engage in, even though other Democrats are urging him to.

Miss me with the “agenda” talk when your agenda involves turning a blind to whatever Biden does or does not do until the next election rolls around - when we’re then supposed to March to the polls like blind obedient sheep. :rolleyes2:
 
I got 2 jobs. Get off your lazy asses and get the work. My son is back from college and making 10/hr at dollar general. Jobs are everywhere.

Sounding like a good Republican!

Montana Gov. Gianforte backs decision to cap extended unemployment benefits: Time to ‘get back to work’
 
Sounding like a good Republican!

Montana Gov. Gianforte backs decision to cap extended unemployment benefits: Time to ‘get back to work’
Nah sounds like a hard working man. Fuck the Republicans.
 
Back
Top