News Feed

Bookmark & Share

  • Bookmark & Share

Print

BISHOP STATEMENT SUPPORTING UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE EXTENSION

Today, Congressman Tim Bishop a statement on the House Floor to call for an emergency extension of Federal Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits. Bishop supports UI extension as an appropriate effort to support millions of American families whose breadwinners have lost their jobs through no fault of their own and as an effective economic stimulus during the recovery. A January 2010 report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), "Policies for Increasing Economic Growth and Employment in 2010 and 2011," estimates that each dollar spent on emergency UI benefits increases GDP by up to $1.90 per year.

Bishop also questioned the sincerity of his colleagues who claim to oppose the $12 billion UI extension on fiscal grounds while supporting a tax cut for the wealthy that will add $700 billion to the deficit over 10 years. The January CBO report estimated that reducing income tax rates in 2011 would yield only 10 to 40 cents in additional GDP per dollar lost in revenue. Reducing tax rates was rated at the bottom of 14 policy options examined by CBO in terms of economic stimulus, while extending UI is rated at the top.

Bishop’s statement is below:

"Madame Speaker: Starting tomorrow – 31,000 of my constituents, 400,000 New Yorkers and 2 million Americans will begin to lose their unemployment benefits.

Before Thanksgiving, 143 Republicans and 11 Democrats voted against extending unemployment insurance. With that vote they said the unemployed mother, or the husband who lost his job to outsourcing, are the ones who should shoulder the burden of reducing the national debt.

In the same breath, Republicans call on Congress to pass a tax break for the wealthiest Americans – adding hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficit.

Republicans say we can’t afford unemployment benefits, but they are alone in their logic: Economists widely agree that extending unemployment benefits does far more to stimulate economic growth than tax breaks for millionaires.

How does this square with our values as Americans? How does this square with simple economics? It doesn’t – plain and simple.

Madame Speaker, as we enter the winter season – when home heating, gas and other basic living costs will rise, I ask my colleagues to help those American families who are most in need, not those wealthiest who need it the least."