I’m really curious about this whole thing of some Republican Governors not accepting part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 a.k.a: stimulus package:
Jindal to refuse some stimulus money – Alexander Burns – POLITICO.com
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal announced Friday that he will decline stimulus money specifically targeted at expanding state unemployment insurance coverage, becoming the first state executive to officially refuse any part of the federal government’s payout to states.
So, I set out to see what I could find.
First, I downloaded the Act.
Of course they put it in pdf format so it’s really hard to search and there certainly aren’t any hyperlinks.
It would have been nice of these governors to reference the specific section of concern. But alas, politicians don’t do that because they use information as a wedge by hording it and bluring it (all politicians do this, mind you. It pisses the the complete crap out of me.)
Because I’m not a lawyer, and I have other obligations besides slicing and dicing 13mb pdf files filled with legalese, in a quick scan, I think the section they are referring to is:
Division B
TITLE II—ASSISTANCE FOR UNEMPLOYED WORKERS AND STRUGGLING FAMILIES
Sec. 2005. Full Federal funding of extended unemployment compensation for a limited
period.
*********
But I could be totally wrong. I do, however, feel fairly confident that it is somewhere in this Division B, Title II. It is likely in one of these sections somewhere:
Sec. 2000. Short title; table of contents of title.
Subtitle A—Unemployment Insurance
Sec. 2001. Extension of emergency unemployment compensation program.
Sec. 2002. Increase in unemployment compensation benefits.
Sec. 2003. Special transfers for unemployment compensation modernization.
Sec. 2004. Temporary assistance for states with advances.
Sec. 2005. Full Federal funding of extended unemployment compensation for a limited
period.
Sec. 2006. Temporary increase in extended unemployment benefits under the Railroad
Unemployment Insurance Act.
Subtitle B—Assistance for Vulnerable Individuals
Sec. 2101. Emergency fund for TANF program.
Sec. 2102. Extension of TANF supplemental grants.
Sec. 2103. Clarification of authority of States to use TANF funds carried over from
prior years to provide TANF benefits and services.
Sec. 2104. Temporary resumption of prior child support law.
Subtitle C—Economic Recovery Payments to Certain Individuals
Sec. 2201. Economic recovery payment to recipients of social security, supplemental
security income, railroad retirement benefits, and veterans disability
compensation or pension benefits.
Sec. 2202. Special credit for certain government retirees.
*************
If you look at all those headings, Section 2005 appears to be the section. This is what it says:
SEC. 2005. FULL FEDERAL FUNDING OF EXTENDED UNEMPLOYMENT
COMPENSATION FOR A LIMITED PERIOD.
(a) IN GENERAL.—In the case of sharable extended compensation
and sharable regular compensation paid for weeks of unemployment
beginning after the date of the enactment of this section
and before January 1, 2010, section 204(a)(1) of the Federal-State
Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C.
3304 note) shall be applied by substituting ‘‘100 percent of’’ for
‘‘one-half of’’.
(b) SPECIAL RULE.—At the option of a State, for any weeks
of unemployment beginning after the date of the enactment of
this section and before January 1, 2010, an individual’s eligibility
period (as described in section 203(c) of the Federal-State Extended
Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970) shall, for purposes of
any determination of eligibility for extended compensation under
the State law of such State, be considered to include any week
which begins—
(1) after the date as of which such individual exhausts
all rights to emergency unemployment compensation; and
(2) during an extended benefit period that began on or
before the date described in paragraph (1).
(c) LIMITED EXTENSION.—In the case of an individual who
receives extended compensation with respect to 1 or more weeks
of unemployment beginning after the date of the enactment of
this Act and before January 1, 2010, the provisions of subsections
(a) and (b) shall, at the option of a State, be applied by substituting
‘‘ending before June 1, 2010’’ for ‘‘before January 1, 2010’’.
(d) EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY FEDERAL MATCHING FOR THE
FIRST WEEK OF EXTENDED BENEFITS FOR STATES WITH NO WAITING
WEEK.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 5 of the Unemployment Compensation
Extension Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–449) is
amended by striking ‘‘December 8, 2009’’ and inserting ‘‘May
30, 2010’’.
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by paragraph
(1) shall take effect as if included in the enactment of the
Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2008 (Public
Law 110–449).
(e) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section—
(1) the terms ‘‘sharable extended compensation’’ and ‘‘sharable
regular compensation’’ have the respective meanings given
such terms under section 204 of the Federal-State Extended
Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970;
(2) the terms ‘‘extended compensation’’, ‘‘State’’, ‘‘State law’’,
and ‘‘week’’ have the respective meanings given such terms
under section 205 of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment
Compensation Act of 1970;
(3) the term ‘‘emergency unemployment compensation’’
means benefits payable to individuals under title IV of the
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 with respect to their
unemployment; and
(4) the term ‘‘extended benefit period’’ means an extended
benefit period as determined in accordance with applicable
H. R. 1—331
provisions of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation
Act of 1970.
(f) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary of Labor may prescribe any
operating instructions or regulations necessary to carry out this
section.
***********
I also found a part of Section 2002 interesting:
…from SEC. 2002. INCREASE IN UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BENEFITS.
(e) APPLICABILITY.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—An agreement entered into under this
section shall apply to weeks of unemployment—
(A) beginning after the date on which such agreement
is entered into; and
(B) ending before January 1, 2010.
(2) TRANSITION RULE FOR INDIVIDUALS REMAINING ENTITLED
TO REGULAR COMPENSATION AS OF JANUARY 1, 2010.—In the
case of any individual who, as of the date specified in paragraph
(1)(B), has not yet exhausted all rights to regular compensation
under the State law of a State with respect to a benefit year
that began before such date, additional compensation (as
described in subsection (b)(1)) shall continue to be payable
to such individual for any week beginning on or after such
date for which the individual is otherwise eligible for regular
compensation with respect to such benefit year.
(3) TERMINATION.—Notwithstanding any other provision of
this subsection, no additional compensation (as described in
subsection (b)(1)) shall be payable for any week beginning after
June 30, 2010.
I’m pretty sure Jindal is talking about this money:
If that’s the sticky wicket, then that is found here:
SEC. 2002. INCREASE IN UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BENEFITS.
(a) FEDERAL-STATE AGREEMENTS.—Any State which desires to
do so may enter into and participate in an agreement under this
section with the Secretary of Labor (hereinafter in this section
referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’). Any State which is a party to
an agreement under this section may, upon providing 30 days’
written notice to the Secretary, terminate such agreement.
(b) PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT.—
(1) ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION.—Any agreement under this
section shall provide that the State agency of the State will
make payments of regular compensation to individuals in
amounts and to the extent that they would be determined
if the State law of the State were applied, with respect to
any week for which the individual is (disregarding this section)
otherwise entitled under the State law to receive regular compensation,
as if such State law had been modified in a manner
such that the amount of regular compensation (including
dependents’ allowances) payable for any week shall be equal
to the amount determined under the State law (before the
application of this paragraph) plus an additional $25.
*************
The interesting part of that section is this: “Any State which is a party to
an agreement under this section may, upon providing 30 days’
written notice to the Secretary, terminate such agreement.”
Therefore, I conclude that Jindal and others like him are wrong. This money can have a sunset clause on it and they are using this as a way of trying to make something out of nothing.
If Republicans want to make a path for themselves they are going to have to come up with something better than manipulating people into believing things that aren’t true.
Republicans have a valuable role in the 2 party system. But this isn’t it.