Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) speaks while flanked by Senators Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) during a press conference at the US Capitol March 25, 2020 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Alex Edelman/AFP via Getty Images)
Mar 25, 2020
This is a developing news story... Check back for possible updates...
Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham, Tim Scott, and Ben Sasse on Wednesday threatened to delay the Senate's multi-trillion-dollar coronavirus stimulus bill because they believe the legislation's unemployment provisions are too generous.
In a joint statement, the GOP senators claimed there is "a massive drafting error in the current version of the coronavirus relief legislation could have devastating consequences: Unless this bill is fixed, there is a strong incentive for employees to be laid off instead of going to work."
As Vox's Matt Yglesias noted on Twitter, "That's not how layoffs work. You can quit your job, but then you're not eligible for [unemployment insurance]. You can't lay yourself off."
The trio of Republicans went on to say that they "must sadly oppose the fast-tracking of this bill until this text is addressed, or the Department of Labor issues regulatory guidance that no American would earn more by not working than by working."
\u201cWould this apply to CEOs too?\u201d— Matt Duss (@Matt Duss) 1585158026
While the full text of the Senate bill is not yet publicly available, reporters said the unemployment provision in question is not an error. The bill would provide an extra $600 a week on top of state-provided unemployment benefits for a period of four months, which progressives celebrated as a historic expansion of unemployment insurance as they criticized the totality of the measure. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) described the package as "unemployment insurance on steroids."
As Slate's Jordan Weissmann explained, under the stimulus bill "a lot of low-wage workers will end up getting more money through unemployment than they previously were earning on the job"--precisely the scenario that so concerns Graham, Scott, and Sasse.
"Perhaps not coincidentally, $600 a week is what you would earn working 40 hours a week at $15 per hour (pretax)," Weissmann wrote. "And again, that's in addition to normal unemployment insurance. For a lot of restaurant and retail workers who've been furloughed or laid off as a result of the crisis, it's a pretty excellent deal."
\u201cLindsey Graham wants the government to help the jobless, just not THAT much https://t.co/3CcLCXIH2c\u201d— Arthur Delaney \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@Arthur Delaney \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1585163971
During a press conference Wednesday afternoon, Graham--joined by Sasse, Scott, and Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)--said if the unemployment language is not a mistake, "it's the worst idea I've seen in a long time."
"It's not a drafting error," tweeted Dan Riffle, a former policy adviser to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). "Senate Republicans are just so inhumane they can't imagine policymakers intentionally providing working people with enough money to temporarily live on in the event they're laid off."
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
This is a developing news story... Check back for possible updates...
Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham, Tim Scott, and Ben Sasse on Wednesday threatened to delay the Senate's multi-trillion-dollar coronavirus stimulus bill because they believe the legislation's unemployment provisions are too generous.
In a joint statement, the GOP senators claimed there is "a massive drafting error in the current version of the coronavirus relief legislation could have devastating consequences: Unless this bill is fixed, there is a strong incentive for employees to be laid off instead of going to work."
As Vox's Matt Yglesias noted on Twitter, "That's not how layoffs work. You can quit your job, but then you're not eligible for [unemployment insurance]. You can't lay yourself off."
The trio of Republicans went on to say that they "must sadly oppose the fast-tracking of this bill until this text is addressed, or the Department of Labor issues regulatory guidance that no American would earn more by not working than by working."
\u201cWould this apply to CEOs too?\u201d— Matt Duss (@Matt Duss) 1585158026
While the full text of the Senate bill is not yet publicly available, reporters said the unemployment provision in question is not an error. The bill would provide an extra $600 a week on top of state-provided unemployment benefits for a period of four months, which progressives celebrated as a historic expansion of unemployment insurance as they criticized the totality of the measure. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) described the package as "unemployment insurance on steroids."
As Slate's Jordan Weissmann explained, under the stimulus bill "a lot of low-wage workers will end up getting more money through unemployment than they previously were earning on the job"--precisely the scenario that so concerns Graham, Scott, and Sasse.
"Perhaps not coincidentally, $600 a week is what you would earn working 40 hours a week at $15 per hour (pretax)," Weissmann wrote. "And again, that's in addition to normal unemployment insurance. For a lot of restaurant and retail workers who've been furloughed or laid off as a result of the crisis, it's a pretty excellent deal."
\u201cLindsey Graham wants the government to help the jobless, just not THAT much https://t.co/3CcLCXIH2c\u201d— Arthur Delaney \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@Arthur Delaney \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1585163971
During a press conference Wednesday afternoon, Graham--joined by Sasse, Scott, and Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)--said if the unemployment language is not a mistake, "it's the worst idea I've seen in a long time."
"It's not a drafting error," tweeted Dan Riffle, a former policy adviser to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). "Senate Republicans are just so inhumane they can't imagine policymakers intentionally providing working people with enough money to temporarily live on in the event they're laid off."
This is a developing news story... Check back for possible updates...
Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham, Tim Scott, and Ben Sasse on Wednesday threatened to delay the Senate's multi-trillion-dollar coronavirus stimulus bill because they believe the legislation's unemployment provisions are too generous.
In a joint statement, the GOP senators claimed there is "a massive drafting error in the current version of the coronavirus relief legislation could have devastating consequences: Unless this bill is fixed, there is a strong incentive for employees to be laid off instead of going to work."
As Vox's Matt Yglesias noted on Twitter, "That's not how layoffs work. You can quit your job, but then you're not eligible for [unemployment insurance]. You can't lay yourself off."
The trio of Republicans went on to say that they "must sadly oppose the fast-tracking of this bill until this text is addressed, or the Department of Labor issues regulatory guidance that no American would earn more by not working than by working."
\u201cWould this apply to CEOs too?\u201d— Matt Duss (@Matt Duss) 1585158026
While the full text of the Senate bill is not yet publicly available, reporters said the unemployment provision in question is not an error. The bill would provide an extra $600 a week on top of state-provided unemployment benefits for a period of four months, which progressives celebrated as a historic expansion of unemployment insurance as they criticized the totality of the measure. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) described the package as "unemployment insurance on steroids."
As Slate's Jordan Weissmann explained, under the stimulus bill "a lot of low-wage workers will end up getting more money through unemployment than they previously were earning on the job"--precisely the scenario that so concerns Graham, Scott, and Sasse.
"Perhaps not coincidentally, $600 a week is what you would earn working 40 hours a week at $15 per hour (pretax)," Weissmann wrote. "And again, that's in addition to normal unemployment insurance. For a lot of restaurant and retail workers who've been furloughed or laid off as a result of the crisis, it's a pretty excellent deal."
\u201cLindsey Graham wants the government to help the jobless, just not THAT much https://t.co/3CcLCXIH2c\u201d— Arthur Delaney \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@Arthur Delaney \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1585163971
During a press conference Wednesday afternoon, Graham--joined by Sasse, Scott, and Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.)--said if the unemployment language is not a mistake, "it's the worst idea I've seen in a long time."
"It's not a drafting error," tweeted Dan Riffle, a former policy adviser to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). "Senate Republicans are just so inhumane they can't imagine policymakers intentionally providing working people with enough money to temporarily live on in the event they're laid off."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.