My must read of the day is "Harry Reid: Jobless benefits top priority in 2014," in Politico:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday that extending unemployment benefits will be the first item on the Senate’s to-do list in 2014.
As Reid, flanked by his top leadership deputies, laid out Senate Democrats’ election-year agenda focused on income inequality, the Nevada Democrat emphasized that the "first thing [for the Senate] is to make sure that those people who are waiting and waiting to find a job still get the important check that they deserve."
Absent a vote on the legislation before the Senate goes home for Christmas break – which appears unlikely – Reid said he’ll file cloture on the bill before the chamber adjourns and that he is aiming for a vote no later than Jan. 7.
Reid is quoted as saying, "It’s a good bill and it deserves a vote." He’s wrong about that. It is not a good bill. It is a lazy one.
The unemployment extension as it is written today is nothing more than an immediate feel good proposal. You can feel great that you extended benefits then face the exact same problem one year later.
This legislation embodies one of my greatest complaints of liberalism. It picks up an emotional cause; one where if you disagree you feel like a jerk (and liberals treat you like one), but it does not offer a solution. It offers a parochial option that is the legislative equivalent of painting over rust. The paint may be gleaming, but you have the same issue underneath it.
The immediate action of the policy is the reward. The long-term consequences, good or bad, are irrelevant—lawmakers vote yea and get praised for it—what happens later is a different problem for a different time. That is a shame.
Conservatism is different. It sees those long-term consequences because it operates in reality, but if it operates in reality it must also recognize that there are people hurting and stuck in an unwanted—and exceptionally high—cycle of unemployment.
Unemployment benefits are not bad. In fact, they’re needed—but as I’ve said before they need to be more effective. Instead of simply handing a check, there should be options—options that actually address the issue of long-term unemployment.
Offer those eligible for extended unemployment benefits a choice: the money or relocation assistance. Money and guidance could be provided to the long-term unemployed who select the latter option so they can move to a more prosperous job market.
If someone has been unemployed long enough to receive federal unemployment compensation, I’m willing to bet a lot of those people would be open to relocating for a job. The government should use what would be a no strings attached check to make them aware of those jobs and help them get there.
Conservatives shouldn’t reject extending unemployment benefits, but they should reject extending them as is and present a way to make them more effective.