SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Hundreds of unemployed Kentucky residents wait in long lines outside the Kentucky Career Center for help with their unemployment claims on June 19, 2020 in Frankfort, Kentucky. (Photo: John Sommers II/Getty Images)
Experts Warn Trump Executive Action on Unemployment Insurance Deliberately Leaves Out Poorest Americans
"Literally every new detail about these executive orders confirms that in addition to being wildly unconstitutional, they will do absolutely nothing to help anyone who's suffering."
Aug 10, 2020
On top of serious questions about the directive's legality and workability, experts are warning that President Donald Trump's executive action to extend the federal unemployment insurance boost at $400 per week--using $44 billion in funds meant for disaster relief--leaves out the poorest Americans by design.
"This is what happens when the president cares about posturing for an election but not about people."
--Leah Greenberg, Indivisible
The language of Trump's unemployment memorandum issued over the weekend defines "eligible claimants" as those receiving "at least $100 per week" in state unemployment benefits--meaning that laid-off workers currently receiving less than $100 per week in aid will not see a dollar in federal relief unless states agree to increase their benefits.
As the Washington Post reported late Sunday:
Even if state governments sign onto the program, the jobless benefits might be out of reach for Americans in greatest need: Only out-of-work Americans receiving more than $100 a week in state unemployment insurance are eligible for the federal aid.
That means those at the bottom of the income distribution--particularly workers who rely on tips and the self-employed--could see no additional federal benefit at all, said Andy Stettner, an unemployment insurance expert at the Century Foundation.
The Post Jeff Stein noted that one estimate suggests Trump's unilateral unemployment insurance boost "will block payments from going to 10-15% [of the] lowest-earning UI recipients."
Jason Bailey, executive director of the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, tweeted that "this plan is asking laid-off [Kentucky] workers to somehow live on as little as $39 a week."
Trump's directive calls for a $400-per-week boost--a significant cut to the previous $600 level--to what out-of-work Americans are receiving in state unemployment benefits. But, as analysts hastened to point out, Trump's plan would require states to kick in 25%--$100--of the $400 total, a difficult task for states reeling from massive budget shortfalls and administrative deficiencies.
"It's a difficult proposition for states to implement in a short period of time," Stettner told USA Today. "States had already struggled to get unemployment money in the hands of out-of-work Americans. This will disappoint workers. They think they'll get that $400 next week, but they're not."
In a statement on Saturday, National Employment Law Project executive director Rebecca Dixon said "states that have the most sophisticated systems may be able to stand up this program eventually, but those states that have been faltering due to decades of neglect or outright sabotage will be less likely to see any of this money."
"This is not a serious approach to solving a very serious problem," Dixon said of the president's executive action. "We urge the administration to get back to real negotiations with Congress on a comprehensive and operable approach that will ensure people have the resources they need to survive for the duration of this crisis."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
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 |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
On top of serious questions about the directive's legality and workability, experts are warning that President Donald Trump's executive action to extend the federal unemployment insurance boost at $400 per week--using $44 billion in funds meant for disaster relief--leaves out the poorest Americans by design.
"This is what happens when the president cares about posturing for an election but not about people."
--Leah Greenberg, Indivisible
The language of Trump's unemployment memorandum issued over the weekend defines "eligible claimants" as those receiving "at least $100 per week" in state unemployment benefits--meaning that laid-off workers currently receiving less than $100 per week in aid will not see a dollar in federal relief unless states agree to increase their benefits.
As the Washington Post reported late Sunday:
Even if state governments sign onto the program, the jobless benefits might be out of reach for Americans in greatest need: Only out-of-work Americans receiving more than $100 a week in state unemployment insurance are eligible for the federal aid.
That means those at the bottom of the income distribution--particularly workers who rely on tips and the self-employed--could see no additional federal benefit at all, said Andy Stettner, an unemployment insurance expert at the Century Foundation.
The Post Jeff Stein noted that one estimate suggests Trump's unilateral unemployment insurance boost "will block payments from going to 10-15% [of the] lowest-earning UI recipients."
Jason Bailey, executive director of the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, tweeted that "this plan is asking laid-off [Kentucky] workers to somehow live on as little as $39 a week."
Trump's directive calls for a $400-per-week boost--a significant cut to the previous $600 level--to what out-of-work Americans are receiving in state unemployment benefits. But, as analysts hastened to point out, Trump's plan would require states to kick in 25%--$100--of the $400 total, a difficult task for states reeling from massive budget shortfalls and administrative deficiencies.
"It's a difficult proposition for states to implement in a short period of time," Stettner told USA Today. "States had already struggled to get unemployment money in the hands of out-of-work Americans. This will disappoint workers. They think they'll get that $400 next week, but they're not."
In a statement on Saturday, National Employment Law Project executive director Rebecca Dixon said "states that have the most sophisticated systems may be able to stand up this program eventually, but those states that have been faltering due to decades of neglect or outright sabotage will be less likely to see any of this money."
"This is not a serious approach to solving a very serious problem," Dixon said of the president's executive action. "We urge the administration to get back to real negotiations with Congress on a comprehensive and operable approach that will ensure people have the resources they need to survive for the duration of this crisis."
On top of serious questions about the directive's legality and workability, experts are warning that President Donald Trump's executive action to extend the federal unemployment insurance boost at $400 per week--using $44 billion in funds meant for disaster relief--leaves out the poorest Americans by design.
"This is what happens when the president cares about posturing for an election but not about people."
--Leah Greenberg, Indivisible
The language of Trump's unemployment memorandum issued over the weekend defines "eligible claimants" as those receiving "at least $100 per week" in state unemployment benefits--meaning that laid-off workers currently receiving less than $100 per week in aid will not see a dollar in federal relief unless states agree to increase their benefits.
As the Washington Post reported late Sunday:
Even if state governments sign onto the program, the jobless benefits might be out of reach for Americans in greatest need: Only out-of-work Americans receiving more than $100 a week in state unemployment insurance are eligible for the federal aid.
That means those at the bottom of the income distribution--particularly workers who rely on tips and the self-employed--could see no additional federal benefit at all, said Andy Stettner, an unemployment insurance expert at the Century Foundation.
The Post Jeff Stein noted that one estimate suggests Trump's unilateral unemployment insurance boost "will block payments from going to 10-15% [of the] lowest-earning UI recipients."
Jason Bailey, executive director of the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, tweeted that "this plan is asking laid-off [Kentucky] workers to somehow live on as little as $39 a week."
Trump's directive calls for a $400-per-week boost--a significant cut to the previous $600 level--to what out-of-work Americans are receiving in state unemployment benefits. But, as analysts hastened to point out, Trump's plan would require states to kick in 25%--$100--of the $400 total, a difficult task for states reeling from massive budget shortfalls and administrative deficiencies.
"It's a difficult proposition for states to implement in a short period of time," Stettner told USA Today. "States had already struggled to get unemployment money in the hands of out-of-work Americans. This will disappoint workers. They think they'll get that $400 next week, but they're not."
In a statement on Saturday, National Employment Law Project executive director Rebecca Dixon said "states that have the most sophisticated systems may be able to stand up this program eventually, but those states that have been faltering due to decades of neglect or outright sabotage will be less likely to see any of this money."
"This is not a serious approach to solving a very serious problem," Dixon said of the president's executive action. "We urge the administration to get back to real negotiations with Congress on a comprehensive and operable approach that will ensure people have the resources they need to survive for the duration of this crisis."
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.