By Jake Grovum, Stateline Staff Writer, State and Consumer Initiatives
North Carolina drew national attention last week when it dramatically scaled back its unemployment insurance program, ending benefits for tens of thousands and slashing the amount of time that jobless people can collect aid.
But the North Carolina reductions, which drew fierce protests in Raleigh, were just the latest in a string of unprecedented and historic state cuts in unemployment aid. Even as the nation’s unemployment rate remains stubbornly high, other states have cut unemployment benefits to levels not seen since the 1935 Social Security Act created the program.
Since it became the standard decades ago, no state has offered fewer than 26 weeks of benefits — until recently. Georgia’s benefits now run out after 18 weeks, and five other states have set limits of either 19 or 20 weeks. Of the 11.8 million unemployed Americans, 4.3 million have been without work for 27 weeks or longer, according to the most recent federal data.
As the reductions cut more deeply, safety-net advocates worry that state unemployment insurance won’t be sufficient to support jobless workers when the next recession comes.
“These are historic and disturbing cuts,” said Mike Leachman of the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “When the next recession hits, the unemployment system of the country is going to be significantly less effective. And it means the next recession will be deeper than it otherwise would have been.”
Maurice Emsellem of the National Employment Law Project pointed out that unemployment insurance puts money into the hands of people who are sure to spend it, pumping more money into the economy. “One of the core functions of unemployment benefits is to help support a strong recovery,” Emsellem said. “(Cutting so deeply) undermines the recovery.”
Leading up to the recession, many states cut the employment taxes that support the trust funds, leaving them ill-equipped to deal with the growth in joblessness that followed. Many states borrowed money from the federal government to cover the resulting shortfalls. To pay back that money, many of them have raised taxes on employers, trimmed benefits for recipients, or both.
Pages: 1 · 2
More Articles
- Department of Labor Awards $5M to Train, Expand Pathways for Women for Registered Apprenticeships, Nontraditional Occupations
- Julia Sneden Wrote: Going Forth On the Fourth After Strict Blackout Conditions and Requisitioned Gunpowder Had Been the Law
- Voting Rights: Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke Testifies Before the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing; “One of the most monumental laws in the entire history of American freedom”
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB): Lenders Cannot Discriminate Based on Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity
- Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF), February 8th: This Early Stage of the COVID-19 Vaccine Roll-Out, Most Older Adults Have Not Yet Been Vaccinated As Supply Remains Limited
- How are States Prioritizing Who Will Get the COVID-19 Vaccine First? CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) Released an Interim Recommendation For the Highest Priority Group
- Scientific American Endorses Joe Biden We’ve never backed a presidential candidate in our 175-year history — until now
- Stateline: Many Faithful Say It’s Time to Gather. Some Governors Disagree
- Automatic Stabilizers: What Are They and Do They Help Workers Who Stay Home Due to the Corona Virus?
- Weekly National Summary of Week 50: Outpatient Illness Surveillance, Geographic Spread, Mortality Surveillance