Democrats Want to Take the Fate of the Unemployed Out of Mitch McConnell’s Hands

Senate Democrats want unemployment insurance to have automatic stabilizers.

Michael Brochstein/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

As temporary enhancements to unemployment benefits are set to sunset at the end of July, Senate Democrats are proposing a permanent extension, one that would automatically adjust with changing economic conditions, marking a leftward shift among the party’s leadership as it navigates the country’s economic recovery in the face of the pandemic.

The proposal, from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), would continue the current $600-per-week boost to unemployment benefits to states until a state’s three-month average total unemployment rate falls below 11 percent. The enhanced benefit would then decrease by $100 for every percentage point decreases in the unemployment rate. For example, while the rate is above 10 percent, the boost would be $500; if the rate is above 9 percent, the boost would be $400. States would resume their pre-COVID rates once the unemployment rate falls below 6 percent.

The extended 13 weeks of emergency unemployment compensation made available in Congress’ first emergency relief package would remain available until March 27, 2021. After that date, it would be available until a state’s three-month average unemployment rate is below 5.5 percent. Additional weeks of support would be available, depending on how high a state’s unemployment rate is. Schumer called the benefits a “long-term solution,” but one meant to extend only through the lengthy COVID recovery: Once the state’s three-month average unemployment rate hits 5.5 percent, the emergency provisions end.

“What we’ve seen is wealth and income disparity, and the pandemic crisis has exacerbated that problem,” Schumer tells me. “This undoes a giant hole in the safety net.”

These automatic stabilizers would address a pernicious problem Democrats have faced as they’ve tried to extend the unemployment boost: The need to continually renegotiate benefits in the face of the pandemic’s ever-changing economic outlook. So far, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and the Trump administration have resisted attempts to keep the benefits going—even though the unemployment rate has ballooned since Congress passed the emergency relief bill that included these provisions in late March, currently at 13.3 percent.

Given those political realities, this bill likely won’t pass Congress. But it’s significant that Democratic leadership is embracing automatic stabilizers, which have been championed mostly by progressive economists and lawmakers. Schumer’s proposal has won the praise of economists such as Stephanie Kelton, a former adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) who has often been at odds with mainstream Democratic thinking. “The politics make it difficult to do the right thing,” Keltons says. “If you can make the decision making automated so its contingent on changing economic realities rather than changing political winds, you’ll get better, more responsive policymaking,” Kelton says.

Schumer cites the influence of Heather Boushey, the president of the left-leaning Washington Center for Equitable Growth who co-leads Joe Biden campaign’s economic policy working group. Boushey wrote a book, Recession Ready, about how automatic stabilizers could prepare the US economy for the next recession. Indivar Dutta-Gupta, the co-executive director of the Georgetown Center on Poverty & Inequality who contributed to Boushey’s book and also co-leads Biden’s economic policy outreach, has been meeting with a separate group of roughly a dozen liberal economists and advocates to develop a political strategy around advancing automatic stabilizers among congressional Democrats and the Biden campaign. 

Schumer says he plans to ask Biden to back his proposal; the Biden campaign declined to comment on whether it would. But if it was law, it would spare a would-be President Biden having to spend his limited political capital on negotiating unemployment benefits if he takes office in January.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate