Julie Vogtman, Senior Counsel

If you’ve been following our coverage of how the continuing unemployment crisis is affecting women and their families, you’re probably well aware of the critical need to maintain federal unemployment insurance (UI) benefits. But even if you’ve never read this blog before today, you probably know that unemployment has been far too high for far too long. And I’m guessing someone you know well – a friend, a sibling, an aunt, a neighbor, or maybe you – has lost a job in recent years and depended on state and/or federal UI benefits to stay afloat.  

So it might have sounded like good news when Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), Chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee, introduced the “Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act” (H.R. 3630) and promised to “get[] Americans back to work through commonsense reforms” to UI and other programs. But don’t be fooled by the title – among many other misguided and downright awful provisions, the bill would severely undermine the effectiveness of UI by cutting federal benefits in the states hardest hit by the recession and attacking the very nature of the UI program as social insurance. 

Specifically, H.R. 3630 would dismantle the longstanding structure of the federal-state UI program by:

• Imposing unnecessary restrictions on UI eligibility and increasing state administrative costs. State laws already require UI recipients to actively seek new employment. But H.R. 3630 would require them to develop and implement costly new systems to closely track job seeking activities, imposing an unfunded and unnecessary administrative burden on state agencies. This new requirement appears to stem directly from the oft-repeated but ill-informed notion that jobless workers are lazy and don’t want to work. This noxious stereotype also seems to motivate the bill’s inclusion of another offensive (and costly) provision encouraging states to require UI applicants to submit to drug tests before they can receive benefits.

After the Thanksgiving feast, some lament how quickly the focus shifts to next round of holidays – but I have to admit I embrace it. Christmas music in the air 24/7? Fine by me. My tree is up, the house is bright with twinkly lights, and I’m thrilled to exchange my typical coffee order at Starbucks to a peppermint mocha in a bright red cup.

Sadly, I can usually count on some Members of Congress to put a damper on my holiday spirit. Just this Sunday, as I was trying to get a head start on trimming the tree, Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) was on “This Week,” saying he was “terribly disappointed” that the super-committee (of which he was a member) did not agree on a deficit reduction plan along the lines of his proposal – a proposal that would cut taxes for the highest-income earners while forcing lower-income families to bear both harsh program cuts and substantial tax increases. (Needless to say, we at NWLC were not disappointed that Sen. Toomey’s plan did not win over a majority on the super-committee.)