Posted on 01/09/2014 4:26:38 AM PST by Kaslin
The discord between Democrats and Republicans regarding the three-month extension of unemployment benefits will be used by the Democrats for political fodder against the Republicans, if Republicans let them.
The mid-term elections during a president's second term tend to be tough on the president's party. Additionally, Obama's approval rating tanked in December to 40 percent as the rollout of his signature health plan foundered. With the recent passage of a bipartisan budget bill, the need for a diversion -- a new target to focus political operatives and therefore voters -- is key.
President Barack Obama laid out his 2014 agenda during his address on Jan. 4, but also provided insight into the Democratic campaign plan for the 2014 mid-term elections this fall.
Republicans: mean and cruel, Democrats: good.
"Just a few days after Christmas, more than one million of our fellow Americans lost a vital economic lifeline," he said in reference to the expiration of emergency additional federal unemployment compensation for those unemployed for more than 26 weeks.
Obama conjured images of parents trying to make ends meet, and cited facts from the Congressional Budget Office about the potential "drag on our economic growth."
Obama drew a line in the ground: "Right now, a bipartisan group in Congress is working on a three-month extension of unemployment insurance -- and if they pass it, I will sign it," he said.
He left unsaid the hope among some Democrats that the Republicans would block the extension and could therefore be called cruel and heartless for the balance of the year.
The political messaging in Obama's address was clear: "Republicans in Congress went home for the holidays and let that lifeline expire," Republicans are "punishing families who can least afford it," are "just plain cruel," and "are willing to abandon the American people."
All that is far different from the message Obama projected about himself and his allies, who "don't abandon our fellow Americans when times get tough -- we keep the faith with them until they start that new job."
This false construct was cracked on Tuesday of this week when Senate Democrats moved forward on the three-month extension -- with the help of six Republicans and with a news release from Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Boehner embraced working on "another extension of temporary emergency unemployment benefits," but said they "should not only be paid for, but include something to help put people back to work."
Republicans: "nice, helpful," was the message.
The facts are there: according to Boehner's website, "'Emergency Unemployment Compensation' program is put in place only in the worst economic conditions and is designed to be temporary ... the recent program ... was in place longer (66 months), was extended more times (12), aided more people (24 million), cost more ($265 billion) and added more to the debt ($210 billion) than any previous program. ... the vital safety net that provides all eligible unemployed workers 26 weeks of benefits" is still in place.
Republicans should aggressively back temporary additional unemployment benefits, make sure they're paid for, and tie them to job training and tax breaks for job creation. What's really needed, as Obama says, is more jobs, and additional unemployment compensation does not provide jobs, just money.
To be successful, the Republican argument this fall has to be about more than facts and figures; it has to include emotion as well and be phrased in a positive manner.
Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute, links a person's happiness to "the belief that you've created value in your life and value in the lives of other people. When people say that they have earned their success, they become much happier than their neighbors, friends, and families."
But we need to do more to communicate emotionally, linking policy to people.
We are for a program that provides support for the long-term unemployed, but also encourages skills training and job creation while not adding to the debt. Such a program would allow a single mother, who has recently learned new skills, to be hired by a small company that can afford to hire her because of tax breaks. She can now explain to her son how she helps others in her job and earns money for their family.
Now that's a message Republicans should communicate all year long.
Why do they keep saying there is discord between the parties? I don’t think so. It’s discord between the people and the government. It’s the cheaters, liars and thieves in our government and their pals.
I don’t understand how this could add to the debt. I thought the employers were supposed to contribute to each employee they have. Is the government BSing us again?
What whom I call the GOPES (gop elite snobs) whom are so tied down to the DC scene fail to do. Is when through their responces they attempt to modify or even offer a “molifier” to those socialist central planning sound great from the goverment free-bees. Instead of challanging the ultimate result or even cite wastefull pet projects the dem-coms have already emplaced that could be eliminated and that funding would go to that proposed project they don’t even do that.
What the response should be by the House is a Waste attack and when its presented it should include every wastefull project and cite the beneficiaries when doing so.
Since the inception of establishing a “minimum wage” the very basic coin of the realm,the cent, has become valueless. Todays penny costs more to make than its assigned value. Even Canada stopped making them.
Yet this is not an argument for abolishing the coin itself. But to point out when a minimum wage is raised it affixes a given rate of inflation to the period of time it’s emplaced. All raising the minimum wage does actually is devalue the dollar because costs get adjusted in time to compensate to the increase.
A case in point is in the 1940’s a candy bar cost 5 cents when the hourly minimum wage was $.50 per hour. What does it cost today ? Likewise what were the costs of basic goods and services during that period of time as compared with todays basic wage feel good tinkering ?
Who gets hurt the worst when these adjustments are decreed by government? It’s those living on fixed incomes who’s income value is based on previous minimum wage levels but not adjusted to the previous current rates of inflation.
When these feel good socialists frauds under the democrat party banner propose these increases. That is never considered as they pound their breasts claiming they’re for the little guy. All they’re doing is un-necessarily raising the price on goods and services broadening the demand that those affected seek help from them.
2014 update to consider and a RAT Senator to vote out:
The old joke that keeps on giving:
The Democrats propose to tear down the Washington Monument, and the Republicans respond with a workable plan to do it in three stages.
Anybody who’s been unemployed for several years should probably sign up for welfare or be forced to sign up for welfare if UI is more lucrative.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.