Log in to WRAL.com with one click using your favorite social network:
OR
Log in using your WRAL.com account:



Wrong email/password combination.

Forgot password?

Register with WRAL.com using your favorite social network:
OR
Register for a WRAL.com account using our web form.

2:33 a.m. • 6-18-13

Weather Forecast for Raleigh

  • Today: Thunderstorm.
    • Hi: 82° F
  • Wed: Thunderstorm.
    • Hi: 82° F
  • Thu: Partly Cloudy.
    • Hi: 83° F

Other Locations

> 7 Day Forecast

Doppler Image
@NCCapitol
Jobless generic, unemployment line
print friendly

GOP muscles jobless benefits cuts to House floor

Published: 2013-01-31 11:23:00
Updated: 2013-01-31 18:24:18

The Republican majority of the House Finance Committee beat back efforts Thursday morning to soften legislation slashing jobless benefits as part of an overhaul of the state unemployment system.

After a 23-13 party line vote, House Bill 4 is expected to go to a floor vote Monday night.

The bill cuts the maximum weekly unemployment benefit from $535 to $350 and replaces 26 weeks of state-paid benefits with a sliding cap of 12 to 20 weeks, based on the health of North Carolina's economy. It also slightly raises unemployment insurance taxes on employers.

Analysts said the changes would help the state repay $2.5 billion to the federal government three years faster than leaving the system unchanged. North Carolina borrowed the money to pay jobless benefits during the recession.

"This is going to cost us jobs if we don't act," said Rep. Harry Warren, R-Rowan. "It's not an easy solution."

Other Republicans voiced similar regrets about cutting jobless benefits but said the state needs to get its unemployment insurance system on sound financial footing.

"We need to emphasize putting people back to work rather than compensating them for being unemployed," said Rep. Jeff Collins, R-Nash.

Proposed amendments by Rep. Paul Tine, D-Dare, to set the maximum benefit at $425 a week and raise taxes on employers a bit more and by Rep. Deborah Ross, D-Wake, to use a 1993 formula for calculating benefits were defeated by party-line votes. The GOP didn't even allow votes on two other amendments, calling them out of order.

Rep. Paul Luebke, D-Durham, pleaded with the committee for more balance to the bill. He noted that the benefit cuts amount to about $225 million taken out of the pockets of unemployed people statewide, while the tax increases on employers would total only $20 million.

"The unemployed were not at the table when this deal was cut. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise," Luebke said, calling the benefit cuts "reprehensible."

If approved, the changes would take effect July 1, ending federal unemployment benefits received by thousands of North Carolina residents who have been out of work for months. The benefits would have continued through the end of 2013 under a bill Congress passed on New Year's Day to avert the so-called "fiscal cliff," but changing the state unemployment benefits voids that provision of the federal law.

The committee debated the bill for more than 90 minutes before allowing four minutes of public comment by representatives of the N.C. Justice Center and the AFL-CIO.

"It's not balanced," Bill Rowe, general counsel and director of advocacy for the Justice Center, said of the bill. "Employees will be paying more than 70 percent of this debt in reduced benefits."

Rowe urged lawmakers to let the bill sit in committee for at least a week to give their constituents a chance to voice their opinion on the proposal.

Read More Posts from this Blog

319 Comments


WRAL.com welcomes your comments on this story. All comments are moderated prior to publication based on our posting guidelines. Please review them prior to posting and if your message is not approved.

This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.


page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
<prev    next>
sort order: oldest first | newest first

GrandOnion said..Of course unemployment payments stimulated the economy during the recession. How could they not as the put money into the economy that otherwise would not be there.

Well You have lost all credibility now. ..Otherwise would not be there???? Where the heck does it come from? Gov. Takes it from somewhere and if they did not take it, and take a cut for distributing it...then they would not have it...IE it would be in the market.... in folks pocket, letting them choose how to spend it. Yes I know it comes from business, but it ultimatly comes from people. Comment on his specific quote. How do you take money from one person, give it to another, and think thats stimulating the economy...If we all stopped working and went on unemployment, based on your logic...the economy would grow like crazy. It is you sir, that is showing your clueless status.

"Some people actually believe unemployment stimulates the economy....hahahaha... If that were true we all need to stop working and go on unemployment...think of how much faster our economy would recover if we all stopped working....that is twisted logic that Nancy Pelosi spewed....and some liberal democrats actually believe it....how funny.... Unemployment simulates the economy...."

are you really this clueless? Of course unemployment payments stimulated the economy during the recession. How could they not as the put money into the economy that otherwise would not be there. Furthermore they reduced the number of foreclosures and so stopped the collapse of the housing market.

Sarge - "and they're going to say, "too Old (or whatever)" on the reason they weren't hired... lol yeah RIGHT!"

The paperwork would reveal it without anyone saying a thing.

But then, as a Sarge, you'd know that. Right?

You have to prove it, therein lies the crux.

Hay folks, The days of high pay , do nothing jobs are over,,3,4,5 percent increases JUst Because, Are over.. Way too many service providing jobs OVER, HDTV,Recording in 5 rooms, Video Chat,Unlimited Data,, A 10.00 Job will be the norm,, Adjust your life style,, I feel sorry for people raised in entitlement life by the Govt,, That is over,,,Get out get a job, help your neighbor, Barter, Cut Back, save,,,One car, one phone ,one TV, set the thermo to 65 winter, 80 summer, open the windows spring an fall, I heat my house maybe 2.5 months, Cool only on days that are above 80 at night, Find things to do at home with your family, plant a garden, get chickens, drink water, Those of us over 50 have lived just as well with a lot less,,,

lessismore..name does not fit (less is even less). I know many of my daughter's friends (late teens, early twenties)as well as myself. Who work 3 part time jobs, they never clear more than 300 a week. Gas is 100 a week (gas is not cheap). Basic math here...4.3 weeks per month times 300 equals 1290. If you have 2 or 3 children, and have a 3 bedroom cheap apartment somewhere SAFE..which in this area is about 850 a month. Hmmm...1290-850-430 (gas). Gee...after 200-300 in utilities, you have exactly 10 for food, car insurance, car repairs since it is an old vehicle and needs repairs(no car payment...can't afford it!)If you can feed 4 people on 10 a month and still survive, kudos to you. I am a coupon/sale queen, I cannot do it. OH..yeah..doing all those "start your own business" things...uh...you need business and liability insurance. You are violating state law by not having it. Are you saying we should break the law? Or have you not done basic math yet?

I hope all who voted Republican remember this when it comes the tme they lose their job this Summer. I believe the saying is SOL

Hey Lessismore> I hope you are never unemployed in the future. You lack emphathy for the unemployed and assume that the all people unemployed are lazy. I hope you never have to experience the numerous rejections of looking for work and not getting hired because you are too old or too experienced. The $535 payment was before taxes and really only amounted to $400 or even less after federal and state income taxes. The new amount of $350 is before taxes also and will only be given to the unemployed who made probably $30,000 a year. This amount will probably be $250 a week after taxes. Anyone making less than $30,000 will receive less than $350/week. This amount will not even be enough for gas and food for a family of four or more. Stop blaming PRESIDENT OBAMA, this program existed before he was even President. The previous three Presidents were Republicans. Their screw up of the economy caused this mess. PRESIDENT OBAMA IS FOR ALL PEOPLE EVEN SELFISH ONES.

I too was unemployed for an extremely long time. I did volunteer work to keep my job skills sharp, odd jobs here and there and yes I drew my unemployment. The sad thing is that if a person is drawing unemployment they are looked at as a dirty rotten bum which is wrong. I heard it time and time again that I was over qualified for menial positions.

I agree we need to revamp the unemployment I believe they should work strenously to get the unemployment down and then revamp unemployment. Hanging our citizens out to dry is not ethical and we should all realize that we could in that position as the other half a million people in NC are.

Good...quit the spending!!!

Some people actually believe unemployment stimulates the economy....hahahaha... If that were true we all need to stop working and go on unemployment...think of how much faster our economy would recover if we all stopped working....that is twisted logic that Nancy Pelosi spewed....and some liberal democrats actually believe it....how funny.... Unemployment simulates the economy....

If the unemployment is trimmed down on my friends and family I will still have to foot the bill to help them. If not taxes then out of my own pocket which restricts me from buying anything and helping the economy.

Would you help your family and friends eat by selling your home, car, boat, RV and empty your 401K?

I guess its a question you can answer to the Ulmighty himself.

"To remove tens of thousands of consumers from a contracting economy is extremely shortsighted. The result will be more jobs lost, more people on the street and more business failures. It's not clear who, if anyone, will benefit from that."

And will result from those same people going on welfare and food stamps to survive, benefits which THE TAXPAYER FUNDS, instead of leaving them on unemployment which THE EMPLOYER FUNDS.

Idiocy!!!

Rebelyell55 - "Them repbulicans taking care of their corp. masters, making those who can lease afford it to pay back the money the goverment wasted. Even after giving business a ride for years at the lower rate, knowing the funds won't there."

It was the Democrats who gave businesses a ride at the lower rate FOR DECADES Rebel - not the Republicans.

But now the Republicans are compounding the problem by not correcting what the Democrats did, and worse - sticking it to those without jobs and without money - simply to try to keep from sticking it to employers EQUALLY who they fear might take their jobs and businesses elsewhere.

I say, do it 50/50, or look for the $$$ elsewhere.

Morrigan - "But no, a sensible employer wants to run the business they got into with a loyal, reliable crew. Even if you don't "care" about your emps, it's just working smarter not harder."

That's surely what I'd do, but how many employers do you know nowadays that put their employees ahead of their profits?

Pretty darn few, I'd say.

SAS maybe.

That's the only one I can think of, and that's a maybe cause I'm not too familiar with the company and their methods in recent years.

Nephesh - or they want to get underqualified people on the cheap, see if they can turn them into silk purses (no disrespect intended) while paying for sow's ears, and then shrug, "Sink or swim," once it's apparent it's not going to work out.

But no, a sensible employer wants to run the business they got into with a loyal, reliable crew. Even if you don't "care" about your emps, it's just working smarter not harder.

"Unemployment benefits are immediately pumped back into the economy because the recipients use them for necessities. To remove tens of thousands of consumers from a contracting economy is extremely shortsighted. The result will be more jobs lost, more people on the street and more business failures. It's not clear who, if anyone, will benefit from that."

WOW! Common sense all the way. I'm just glad someone else see's this as well.

They can't even budget their OWN money:

NC SENATOR'S PROPERTY SET FOR FORECLOSURE SALE

TARBORO, NC — A foreclosure sale on property belonging to six-term Democratic state Sen. Clark Jenkins of Tarboro is scheduled for April. Jenkins and his wife defaulted on a loan owned by PNC Bank and owe $488,800.36, including $35,701.34 in past due payments, $1,235.52 in late fees and $225.50 in other related costs.

An affidavit submitted by PNC on Dec. 12, 2012, said the last payment made on the loan was for the period ending Sept. 1, 2011.

Also, Dare County records show Jenkins owes delinquent taxes of $3,272.98.

Jenkins serves on six committees, including the Senate Finance Committee."

http://www.wral.com/nc-senator-s-property-set-for-foreclosure-sale/12049145/

Ain't THAT just grand?!?

Unemployment benefits are immediately pumped back into the economy because the recipients use them for necessities. To remove tens of thousands of consumers from a contracting economy is extremely shortsighted. The result will be more jobs lost, more people on the street and more business failures. It's not clear who, if anyone, will benefit from that.

Them repbulicans taking care of their corp. masters, making those who can lease afford it to pay back the money the goverment wasted. Even after giving business a ride for years at the lower rate, knowing the funds won't there.

No Party Affiliate - "Agree, along with many more I know."

We need a [Like] button here.

:)

"There will be more bankruptcy's, more foreclosures, housing prices will drop with the excess inventory, more homeless, more hungry."

Dead right. And those responsible for the above will continue to be "surprised" when the unemployment reports come out and their stocks continue to tank.

"'We need to emphasize putting people back to work rather than compensating them for being unemployed,' said Rep. Jeff Collins, R-Nash."

With the US having lost FOURTEEN MILLION JOBS since 2006/8???

No doubt about it then, they need to work on bringing some of those jobs back from overseas, heavily taxing companies who take jobs from US citizens to give to overseas companies for no other reason than the workforce can be had for peanuts there.

Sumo Vita - "Nevertheless, it's the GOP that's chosen to fix this mess disproportionately on the backs of the newly laid-off, rather than with those companies that benefited from the lowered UE taxes."

That I agree with, and I've stated it should be 50/50 or they need to look elsewhere altogether.

"I find it so discouraging to read the comments on WRAL. So often, they are mean-spirited, selfish and ill-informed. I am glad they don't represent the sentiments of most North Carolinians. You people scare me." - cam7002

"Glad to hear a sane voice out in the darkness." - alicebtoklas

Agree, along with many more I know.

I feel this is going to bite those folks voting for this hard. That isn't even enough to pay rent for a family of 4. BUT...it could make it better too. People have already been talking about what this means. It will be easier to file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy with less income. Thousands more would be eligible for utility help, rent help, food stamps, medicaid...When I was out of work for 2 years, my 480 a week put my 3 kids and myself only $200 a month over the limits...now I could get 1200-1400 in help just to survive.NEAT! There will be more bankruptcy's, more foreclosures, housing prices will drop with the excess inventory, more homeless, more hungry. Gosh, our state government sure knows how to look out for its people!

"We need to emphasize putting people back to work rather than compensating them for being unemployed," said Rep. Jeff Collins, R-Nash.

When do they plan to start? Republicans have held the legislature for 2 years yet NC is among the leaders in nation wide unemployment rates.

"The GOP wasn't in the majority in this state when the votes were taken repeatedly to lower the UE Fund.

It was the Dems who did that, over and over again, setting this state up for this mess."

Nevertheless, it's the GOP that's chosen to fix this mess disproportionately on the backs of the newly laid-off, rather than with those companies that benefited from the lowered UE taxes.

"i would argue that 2.5 billion is hardly "blood from a turnip"

In a State the size of NC its not exactly big money either. Its $21 per employee per year for about 5 years.

Grand Union

you just said $2.5 billion is not exactly "big money"........

$2.5 billion isn't worth doing anything about? is that the best arguement you can produce?

I am trying to talk to someone about money who thinks that $2.5 billion is no big deal....

...well excuse me Mr. Buffet!

(done for the day!)

"Maybe the logic is such that the employer knows the content of the job and the attitudes of the other workers and has a certain responsibility to provide tools and guidance till the employee has had a reasonable training period. You can't just hire an underqualified person and then meh, let them go, they couldn't perform. Well, you can, and then you get to pay for your carelessness. Seems fair."

employers can lie......I've seen them do it. they have an interest in saying an employee was negligent etc just as much as the employee has an interest in saying they were not.

lrfarms27572 - "what industry?"

ALL OF THEM!!!

Have you not heard or read the news since 2007???

Even hospitals were laying off staff, from doctors to nurses who thought they'd never get laid off, nor should they have.

Only in America could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes - be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any income taxes at all. -Sarge

Please cite your source of information on this.

The "rich" have most of the money (& income) so they darn well should pay most of the taxes.

Only in America could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes - be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any income taxes at all."

Source? and why only income taxes? and would you rather earn 1 million and pay 500K in taxes or earn 40K and pay 5K in taxes?

which would be the greater burden?

Sumo Vita - "I'll tell you what's fair - when at least some of these GOP apologists get laid off, or "optimized", or "RA'd", or whatever the euphemism of the day is - and they quickly realize that flipping burgers won't even begin to pay their COBRA expenses."

The GOP wasn't in the majority in this state when the votes were taken repeatedly to lower the UE Fund.

It was the Dems who did that, over and over again, setting this state up for this mess.

Thats bogus. Higher returns take that into account....taxes are only payed on gains and losses are deductible. So unless you are very careless with your investments you make far more money and pay a far lower rate of taxes than if you actually worked for that money. I know, I have investments.

Grand Union

Capital gains tax + income tax is lower than just income tax?

please tell me how this works cause if thats true the gov't has been taking too much from me

lrfarms27572 - "i would argue that 2.5 billion is hardly "blood from a turnip"

geez

It is when the "turnips" you're trying to wring it from DON'T HAVE A JOB!!!

Sarge - "Only in America could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes - be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any income taxes at all."

I would dearly love to see where you got the 86% from.

Or is that 86% gross, before they start taking the truckload of deductions?

"i would argue that 2.5 billion is hardly "blood from a turnip"

In a State the size of NC its not exactly big money either. Its $21 per employee per year for about 5 years.

Morrigan - "You can't just hire an underqualified person and then meh, let them go, they couldn't perform. Well, you can, and then you get to pay for your carelessness. Seems fair."

You explained it very well. Thank you!

Few employers with sense would do that though. Don't you think? Unless they were just trying to get rid of that particular employee for some OTHER reason which sometimes happens.

Sumo Vita - "And I sincerely hope it stings especially hard for any of the unemployed that voted Republican this cycle."

Yeah, because Bev was so much better???

NOT!!!

"Tzarist Russia was like that......and the result was the Romneys of the time were put up against a wall and shot. Is that what you want for the USA? Grand Union not me but from the arguements that you make I would say that you do...."

Not at all, everyone loses when that happens. Russia is still recovering from that mistake. The West faced the same threat in the 20 and 30s, some turned right and became Fascists(we know how that turned out) and others went for the "new deal" approach. Who did the best in the long run?

affluent people typically have low debt b/c they realize the damage interest on debt can do. the longer you hold debt the more in interest you pay....amazing that people don't understand this lrfarms27572

=====================================

Oh, they understand it, just don't care. Sad this administration doesn't seem to grab the idea.

Bartmeister

and you are exactly right. it's a pure mentality. even privately, friends relatives, etc. will take loans and do the most profoundly dumb things b/c they "need" something.

I "need" a new car. we "need" a bigger home.

ok that doesn't mean get a brand new escalade with 22's and half million dollar house when you make $50k just cause on paper you can "make the payments"

you know what I mean...

Only in America could the rich people - who pay 86% of all income taxes - be accused of not paying their "fair share" by people who don't pay any income taxes at all.

Bona fide inability to perform the job is indeed a dismissal that's eligible for benefits. The employer can contest it, and then the claim has to be adjudicated (fought about).

Maybe the logic is such that the employer knows the content of the job and the attitudes of the other workers and has a certain responsibility to provide tools and guidance till the employee has had a reasonable training period. You can't just hire an underqualified person and then meh, let them go, they couldn't perform. Well, you can, and then you get to pay for your carelessness. Seems fair.

lrfarms27572 - "amazing that people don't understand this"

I understand interest full well.

I also understand one can't squeeze blood from a turnip, but that's exactly what our legislators are trying to do with this bill.

Do it 50/50, employer/UE beneficiary, or not at all.

Nephesh Kai

i would argue that 2.5 billion is hardly "blood from a turnip"

"how is that fair? It was employers that benefited when rates were not raised and caused the debt to begin with.....why should a few already unlucky ex employees pay what the employers saved????"

I'll tell you what's fair - when at least some of these GOP apologists get laid off, or "optimized", or "RA'd", or whatever the euphemism of the day is - and they quickly realize that flipping burgers won't even begin to pay their COBRA expenses.

"Agreed. And I sincerely hope it stings especially hard for any of the unemployed that voted Republican this cycle."

Karma indeed!

"Now we can get NC back on track to common sense government!"

Tell us when you thought it was last a common sense Gov?

"warren buffet risks more money than his secretary also. in ther words (that you may be able to comprehend) buffet invests the money he makes as where his secretary deposits her check in a banking account."

Thats bogus. Higher returns take that into account....taxes are only payed on gains and losses are deductible. So unless you are very careless with your investments you make far more money and pay a far lower rate of taxes than if you actually worked for that money. I know, I have investments.

affluent people typically have low debt b/c they realize the damage interest on debt can do. the longer you hold debt the more in interest you pay....amazing that people don't understand this lrfarms27572

=====================================

Oh, they understand it, just don't care. Sad this administration doesn't seem to grab the idea.

I know several who once earned six figures who got laid off.

When the companies went for the throat between 2007/9, they started by laying off middle management, often those who'd been with the company 20-30 years, and let their subordinates fill their positions for far less.

Many of those people are STILL looking for work.

Nephesh Kai

what industry?

page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
<prev    next>
sort order: oldest first | newest first

Political Video Picks

 
  • The state House will take up bills eliminating tax checkoff funding for political parties.

  • Former Gov. Jim Holshouser, who died early Monday, was hailed by North Carolina politicians as a decent man who bridged partisan…

  • The North Carolina Chapter of the NAACP gathers for Moral Monday protests on June 17. Chapter president the Rev. William Barber says…

  • President Barack Obama's approval rating dropped 8 percentage points over the last month, and for the first time in his presidency…

  • Who and what is behind the protests at the state legislature, and is anybody listening?

  • U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) today delivers the Weekly Republican Address, assuring Americans that Senate Republicans "will…