

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

With a 58-40 vote, Democrats fell short of the 60 needed. Reuters reports:
With the support of four Republicans, backers of the bill initially got 59 votes, one shy of the needed 60. [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid then switched his vote from yes to no, which under Senate rules allows him to bring the measure up again.
The vote was an attempt to fund an emergency benefits package that extends aid to the jobless during periods of high unemployment. The provision was passed in the wake of the 2008 economic crash, but lawmakers have failed to renew it after several attempts despite continued long-term unemployment numbers.
In addition to the two million recipients who lost benefits at the end of last year, each additional week another 73,000 Americans will lose those benefits -- "benefits that help them keep food on the table and a roof over their heads while they search for a job," as Sen. Reid noted.
"All 42 Republicans need to answer for this vote," writes Bill Scher at Campaign for America's Future. "Why did they decide now was the time to cut off aid to the long-term unemployed, when we could help them at no cost to the taxpayers, at a time when there are three unemployed workers for every one job opening and those out of work for more than six months have the hardest time getting job interviews?"
Scher continues, "The Republican Party is now standing squarely against help for the unemployed, at any cost. And unless they shift before November, they will have to take that message to the voters."
______________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. He is the author of Migrant Justice in the Age of Removal. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.

With a 58-40 vote, Democrats fell short of the 60 needed. Reuters reports:
With the support of four Republicans, backers of the bill initially got 59 votes, one shy of the needed 60. [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid then switched his vote from yes to no, which under Senate rules allows him to bring the measure up again.
The vote was an attempt to fund an emergency benefits package that extends aid to the jobless during periods of high unemployment. The provision was passed in the wake of the 2008 economic crash, but lawmakers have failed to renew it after several attempts despite continued long-term unemployment numbers.
In addition to the two million recipients who lost benefits at the end of last year, each additional week another 73,000 Americans will lose those benefits -- "benefits that help them keep food on the table and a roof over their heads while they search for a job," as Sen. Reid noted.
"All 42 Republicans need to answer for this vote," writes Bill Scher at Campaign for America's Future. "Why did they decide now was the time to cut off aid to the long-term unemployed, when we could help them at no cost to the taxpayers, at a time when there are three unemployed workers for every one job opening and those out of work for more than six months have the hardest time getting job interviews?"
Scher continues, "The Republican Party is now standing squarely against help for the unemployed, at any cost. And unless they shift before November, they will have to take that message to the voters."
______________________
Jacob Chamberlain is a former staff writer for Common Dreams. He is the author of Migrant Justice in the Age of Removal. His website is www.jacobpchamberlain.com.

With a 58-40 vote, Democrats fell short of the 60 needed. Reuters reports:
With the support of four Republicans, backers of the bill initially got 59 votes, one shy of the needed 60. [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid then switched his vote from yes to no, which under Senate rules allows him to bring the measure up again.
The vote was an attempt to fund an emergency benefits package that extends aid to the jobless during periods of high unemployment. The provision was passed in the wake of the 2008 economic crash, but lawmakers have failed to renew it after several attempts despite continued long-term unemployment numbers.
In addition to the two million recipients who lost benefits at the end of last year, each additional week another 73,000 Americans will lose those benefits -- "benefits that help them keep food on the table and a roof over their heads while they search for a job," as Sen. Reid noted.
"All 42 Republicans need to answer for this vote," writes Bill Scher at Campaign for America's Future. "Why did they decide now was the time to cut off aid to the long-term unemployed, when we could help them at no cost to the taxpayers, at a time when there are three unemployed workers for every one job opening and those out of work for more than six months have the hardest time getting job interviews?"
Scher continues, "The Republican Party is now standing squarely against help for the unemployed, at any cost. And unless they shift before November, they will have to take that message to the voters."
______________________