<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Sage Lewis &#187; jindal</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sagelewis.com/tag/jindal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sagelewis.com</link>
	<description>Speaker / Consultant</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:44:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Jindal Is Wrong &#8211; Expanding State Unemployment Insurance Is Temporary</title>
		<link>http://www.sagelewis.com/2009/02/25/jindal-is-wrong-expanding-state-unemployment-insurance-is-temporary/</link>
		<comments>http://www.sagelewis.com/2009/02/25/jindal-is-wrong-expanding-state-unemployment-insurance-is-temporary/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:34:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sage</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Current Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jindal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagelewis.com/?p=541</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;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 &#8211; Alexander Burns &#8211; POLITICO.com Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal announced Friday that he will decline stimulus money specifically targeted at expanding state unemployment [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>I&#8217;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:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/19092.html">Jindal to refuse some stimulus money &#8211; Alexander Burns &#8211; POLITICO.com</a></p>
<blockquote><p>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.</p></blockquote>
<p>So, I set out to see what I could find.</p>
<p>First, I <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&amp;docid=f:h1enr.pdf">downloaded the Act</a>.</p>
<p>Of course they put it in pdf format so it&#8217;s really hard to search and there certainly aren&#8217;t any hyperlinks.</p>
<p>It would have been nice of these governors to reference the specific section of concern. But alas, politicians don&#8217;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.)</p>
<p>Because I&#8217;m not a lawyer, and I have other obligations besides slicing and dicing 13mb pdf files filled with legalese, in a quick scan, I <em><strong>think</strong></em> the section they are referring to is:</p>
<p>Division B</p>
<p>TITLE II—ASSISTANCE FOR UNEMPLOYED WORKERS AND STRUGGLING FAMILIES</p>
<p>Sec. 2005. Full Federal funding of extended unemployment compensation for a limited<br />
period.</p>
<p>*********</p>
<p>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:</p>
<p>Sec. 2000. Short title; table of contents of title.<br />
Subtitle A—Unemployment Insurance<br />
Sec. 2001. Extension of emergency unemployment compensation program.<br />
Sec. 2002. Increase in unemployment compensation benefits.<br />
Sec. 2003. Special transfers for unemployment compensation modernization.<br />
Sec. 2004. Temporary assistance for states with advances.<br />
Sec. 2005. Full Federal funding of extended unemployment compensation for a limited<br />
period.<br />
Sec. 2006. Temporary increase in extended unemployment benefits under the Railroad<br />
Unemployment Insurance Act.<br />
Subtitle B—Assistance for Vulnerable Individuals<br />
Sec. 2101. Emergency fund for TANF program.<br />
Sec. 2102. Extension of TANF supplemental grants.<br />
Sec. 2103. Clarification of authority of States to use TANF funds carried over from<br />
prior years to provide TANF benefits and services.<br />
Sec. 2104. Temporary resumption of prior child support law.<br />
Subtitle C—Economic Recovery Payments to Certain Individuals<br />
Sec. 2201. Economic recovery payment to recipients of social security, supplemental<br />
security income, railroad retirement benefits, and veterans disability<br />
compensation or pension benefits.<br />
Sec. 2202. Special credit for certain government retirees.</p>
<p>*************</p>
<p>If you look at all those headings, Section 2005 appears to be the section. This is what it says:</p>
<p>SEC. 2005. FULL FEDERAL FUNDING OF EXTENDED UNEMPLOYMENT<br />
COMPENSATION FOR A LIMITED PERIOD.<br />
(a) IN GENERAL.—In the case of sharable extended compensation<br />
and sharable regular compensation paid for weeks of unemployment<br />
beginning after the date of the enactment of this section<br />
and before January 1, 2010, section 204(a)(1) of the Federal-State<br />
Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 (26 U.S.C.<br />
3304 note) shall be applied by substituting ‘‘100 percent of’’ for<br />
‘‘one-half of’’.<br />
(b) SPECIAL RULE.—At the option of a State, for any weeks<br />
of unemployment beginning after the date of the enactment of<br />
this section and before January 1, 2010, an individual’s eligibility<br />
period (as described in section 203(c) of the Federal-State Extended<br />
Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970) shall, for purposes of<br />
any determination of eligibility for extended compensation under<br />
the State law of such State, be considered to include any week<br />
which begins—<br />
(1) after the date as of which such individual exhausts<br />
all rights to emergency unemployment compensation; and<br />
(2) during an extended benefit period that began on or<br />
before the date described in paragraph (1).<br />
(c) LIMITED EXTENSION.—In the case of an individual who<br />
receives extended compensation with respect to 1 or more weeks<br />
of unemployment beginning after the date of the enactment of<br />
this Act and before January 1, 2010, the provisions of subsections<br />
(a) and (b) shall, at the option of a State, be applied by substituting<br />
‘‘ending before June 1, 2010’’ for ‘‘before January 1, 2010’’.<br />
(d) EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY FEDERAL MATCHING FOR THE<br />
FIRST WEEK OF EXTENDED BENEFITS FOR STATES WITH NO WAITING<br />
WEEK.—<br />
(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 5 of the Unemployment Compensation<br />
Extension Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–449) is<br />
amended by striking ‘‘December 8, 2009’’ and inserting ‘‘May<br />
30, 2010’’.<br />
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by paragraph<br />
(1) shall take effect as if included in the enactment of the<br />
Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2008 (Public<br />
Law 110–449).<br />
(e) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section—<br />
(1) the terms ‘‘sharable extended compensation’’ and ‘‘sharable<br />
regular compensation’’ have the respective meanings given<br />
such terms under section 204 of the Federal-State Extended<br />
Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970;<br />
(2) the terms ‘‘extended compensation’’, ‘‘State’’, ‘‘State law’’,<br />
and ‘‘week’’ have the respective meanings given such terms<br />
under section 205 of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment<br />
Compensation Act of 1970;<br />
(3) the term ‘‘emergency unemployment compensation’’<br />
means benefits payable to individuals under title IV of the<br />
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 with respect to their<br />
unemployment; and<br />
(4) the term ‘‘extended benefit period’’ means an extended<br />
benefit period as determined in accordance with applicable<br />
H. R. 1—331<br />
provisions of the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation<br />
Act of 1970.<br />
(f) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary of Labor may prescribe any<br />
operating instructions or regulations necessary to carry out this<br />
section.</p>
<p>***********</p>
<p>I also found a part of Section 2002 interesting:</p>
<p>&#8230;from SEC. 2002. INCREASE IN UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BENEFITS.<br />
(e) APPLICABILITY.—<br />
(1) IN GENERAL.—An agreement entered into under this<br />
section shall apply to weeks of unemployment—<br />
(A) beginning after the date on which such agreement<br />
is entered into; and<br />
(B) ending before January 1, 2010.<br />
(2) TRANSITION RULE FOR INDIVIDUALS REMAINING ENTITLED<br />
TO REGULAR COMPENSATION AS OF JANUARY 1, 2010.—In the<br />
case of any individual who, as of the date specified in paragraph<br />
(1)(B), has not yet exhausted all rights to regular compensation<br />
under the State law of a State with respect to a benefit year<br />
that began before such date, additional compensation (as<br />
described in subsection (b)(1)) shall continue to be payable<br />
to such individual for any week beginning on or after such<br />
date for which the individual is otherwise eligible for regular<br />
compensation with respect to such benefit year.<br />
(3) TERMINATION.—Notwithstanding any other provision of<br />
this subsection, no additional compensation (as described in<br />
subsection (b)(1)) shall be payable for any week beginning after<br />
June 30, 2010.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m pretty sure Jindal is talking about this money:</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009#Aid_to_poor.2C_unemployed_and_retirees_.28including_job_training.29">$40 billion to provide extended unemployment benefits through Dec. 31, and increase them by $25 a week</a></p>
<p>If that&#8217;s the sticky wicket, then that is found here:</p>
<p>SEC. 2002. INCREASE IN UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BENEFITS.<br />
(a) FEDERAL-STATE AGREEMENTS.—Any State which desires to<br />
do so may enter into and participate in an agreement under this<br />
section with the Secretary of Labor (hereinafter in this section<br />
referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’). Any State which is a party to<br />
an agreement under this section may, upon providing 30 days’<br />
written notice to the Secretary, terminate such agreement.<br />
(b) PROVISIONS OF AGREEMENT.—<br />
(1) ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION.—Any agreement under this<br />
section shall provide that the State agency of the State will<br />
make payments of regular compensation to individuals in<br />
amounts and to the extent that they would be determined<br />
if the State law of the State were applied, with respect to<br />
any week for which the individual is (disregarding this section)<br />
otherwise entitled under the State law to receive regular compensation,<br />
as if such State law had been modified in a manner<br />
such that the amount of regular compensation (including<br />
dependents’ allowances) payable for any week shall be equal<br />
to the amount determined under the State law (before the<br />
application of this paragraph)<strong> plus an additional $25.</strong></p>
<p>*************</p>
<p>The interesting part of that section is this: <strong>&#8220;Any State which is a party to<br />
an agreement under this section may, upon providing 30 days’<br />
written notice to the Secretary, terminate such agreement.&#8221;</strong></p>
<h2>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.</h2>
<p>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&#8217;t true.</p>
<p>Republicans have a valuable role in the 2 party system. But this isn&#8217;t it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.sagelewis.com/2009/02/25/jindal-is-wrong-expanding-state-unemployment-insurance-is-temporary/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

