WASHINGTON (AP) — For jobless Americans struggling to pay their bills and keep their homes, the restoration of unemployment benefits could keep their crisis from getting worse.
The same might be said of the broader economy.
The Senate is expected to vote Wednesday to keep providing unemployment benefits for up to 99 weeks to more than 5 million long-term unemployed. The injection of an estimated $33 billion into a $14.6 trillion economy over the next five months won't be enough to energize the recovery. But economists say it could at least help sustain it.
The vote comes as evidence mounts that growth is slowing. Consumers, facing lower home values and high unemployment, are saving more and spending cautiously. The housing market is slumping again after a tax credit expired in April. And the impact of last year's $787 billion stimulus package has begun to fade.
By extending the unemployment aid, Congress will remove one potential drag on the economy, analysts say.
"It reduces the likelihood of a double-dip recession," said Gus Faucher, an economist at Moody's Analytics.
During the recession, Congress provided up to 73 extra weeks of unemployment aid, paid for by the federal government. They came on top of the 26 weeks customarily provided by the states.
But the extra benefits expired in early June. They had been routinely extended during the worst parts of the recession. But Congress reached an impasse last month. Republicans demanded that the extension be paid for with leftover stimulus money. Democrats countered that unemployment benefits are normally considered an emergency need and paid for by adding to the deficit.
About 2.5 million people ran out of jobless aid during the political battle. They will now have the aid restored retroactively. That could create chaos if state unemployment offices are flooded with people seeking to reapply.
An additional 3 million people were still receiving aid under the extended benefits program. They will be able to keep doing so.
The legislation Congress is expected to approve will inject $33 billion into the economy by renewing the extra benefits through the end of November. That money will likely be spent quickly and generate extra economic activity, economists say. Jobless aid is widely seen as providing more "bang for the buck" than many other stimulus programs.
"It recycles very quickly into the economy," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's. "If that's your only source of money, you're going to spend it."
Moody's Analytics estimates that every dollar of unemployment aid generates $1.61 in economic activity. Still, that translates into a boost of only $54 billion — less than one-half of 1 percent of the overall economy.
"It's not going to make or break" the recovery, Faucher said.
Weekly unemployment checks average about $309, though they vary widely by state. Benefit levels also depend on how much a recipient earned while working. The checks are financed through a tax on employers.
Many of those out of work don't receive unemployment benefits. Only those who have lost jobs through no fault of their own are eligible. Applicants must also have earned certain minimum pay, set by the states.
Partly because of the extensions, about two-thirds of the nearly 15 million unemployed are receiving unemployment aid. That's a greater proportion than in previous downturns. The Obama administration's stimulus package encouraged many states to expand eligibility to part-time workers and other groups.
In recessions, Congress usually adds extra weeks as unemployment rises and hiring slows. The federal government also pays for the extensions to lessen the burden on states, which are required to balance their budgets. Many experts argue that the program, begun in the 1930s, is ill-equipped to handle extended downturns. One result is that the program has been extended in almost every recession and often gets tangled in political fights.
The current benefit extensions are the longest on record.
Of the 2.5 million people whose benefits will be restored, nearly 430,000 are in California, nearly 200,000 are in New York, 175,000 are in Florida and 174,000 are in Pennsylvania, the Labor Department estimates. Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio and Texas also have more than 100,000 recipients who were cut off.
Unlike with some previous extensions, Congress isn't adding extra weeks. It's just keeping the extended program going.
For those who have exhausted all their 99 weeks, the Senate's vote Tuesday provides little hope. They face the prospect of looking for work even as hiring remains slow, with the unemployment rate at 9.5 percent.
"There's a lot more people than jobs out there right now," Wyss said.



Republicans are wrong all the time every time.
SonofTron asked the question is the economy better under Obama or Bush. The answer is an unequivocal - Obama. In 2008 the economy was headed for depression. Job losses were accelerating toward a million a month, credit was frozen, bankruptcies, and foreclosures were increasing, profits were down, deflation loomed as a real possibility. Had Bush continued in the Presidentcy into 2009 50,000,000 million Americans would have been unemployed, tent cities would have sprouted up across the country, my company would have gone into bankruptcy. Obama stopped the slide into the abyss and stablized the economy.
Now as you know employment is a trailing economic indictator. It took the economy at excellent growth rates under Clinton 8 years to reduce unemployment from the first Bush recession from 8+ to 4.3%. It will take 8 years or more to bring unemployment down from this Bush Great Recession.
Of course, Republicans don't want a solution. They want to extend the recession as long as they can to blame democrats for what they, the Republican Party, caused. They are willing to sacrifice America, its standing in the world, and our future to gain 10 seats in the house of representatives. Pathetic losers.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.interesting
wasn't tarp past under bush. obama has done nothing to stop the slide. exactly what has he done to stop the slide?
in the last 20 years, whenever the democrats have been in control of congress, unemployment has always been over 5%. once the republicans took control of congress in 1994, unemployment hit a high of 6.3% and then went down to 3.7% in 2000. even after the attacks of September 11, unemployment peaked at 6.5% and then went back down to 4.1%. when the democrats took control of congress in 2007, unemployment in january was only 5%. it bounced in the high 4% for the next year and then it has been on steady climb up.
democrats in control of congress means higher unemployment. the answer is simple. the policies democrats believe in are bad for businesses. their policies cost businesses money. the more money a business has to give the government, that is less they can reinvest into the company, add new employees or pay their existing employees.
unemployment will continue to increase during 2011. why? the expiration of the bush tax cuts in 2011 will cost businesses more. the passing of the health care bill will introduce new taxes. as long as the democrats believe in higher taxes the economy will continue to falter.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Fraid not Olympia:
Instead, creating JOBS and lowering TAXES to entice buisnesses to come back to Maine would relieve our dependancy on sucking our own system dry. You remind me of a 30 year old still trying to breast feed off your mother. Time to grow up, get a job, and fend for yourself. If you leagalized marijuana and taxed it we would not have to rely on others to bail us out. If you took the revenue from marijuana (which would create jobs) and used it to lower taxes for buisnesses, JOBS WOULD COME BACK TO MAINE! All we've got to offer in Maine is: OOB (the decayed pier, ancient rides, overrated litte beach, fried food, and 200 seedy motels), lobster (not for long cause the oil spill is a comin!), places like Rangely and Moosehead Lake (AKA feeding frenzy for black flies and mosquitos), and Walmart (where the bread is bad and the produce is worse but the meat....uh.). I don't know what Canadians see here that's worth a Vacation. Bass shoe, Jordan Meats, and many other buisneesses are dying or dead by now. What are you going to do when L.L. Bean packs up and leaves a big parking lot on Campus Rd in Freeport? What are you going to do when there's not enough buisness for Sugarloaf and Sunday River to survive? What are you going to do when the next lobster boar comes in with oil contaminated lobster? I am afraid it's going to be too little, too late for us here in Maine. Our resources are here but no one in power seems to want to tap into them and get ahead of this crisis. Lets just cut the school budgets and spend the money on jails. Lets cut the road repair budget ( because Rt 100 in Falmouth and Gray look great to me). Let's cut snow removal too (global warming will fix that little problem for us). Let's cut DHHS's budget (they suck anyway). We'll spend it on somthing worth while like the next presidential campaign or just give congress a raise(because they DESERVE IT) they work way harder than the people out in front of Labor Ready at 3:00 in the morning that ride the trash truck all day. Oh wait, that's right most of them don't because there arent enough jobs to send them out to. I think the GOP should pack their bags and their moey and give the whole US the finger for not being responsible. I think they should abandon us like an immature 30 year old that refuses to take responsibility for their bad dcisions or correct their mistakes. Olympia Snowe, you should be ashamed for turning a blind eye to the solutions in your own hand because your negligence is a direct cause of joblessness, homelessness, lack of graduating students in every town and city, and rising crime across the state of Maine. You call yourself a patriot. Grow up and prove it.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Tron
I think they should take away tron's check and give it to someone recently unemployed.
Why should he continue to get a check when hard working people who have lost their
jobs lose their benefits?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Great posts Maine Ken. No
Great posts Maine Ken. No one in there right mind is hiring right now.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I am amazed no one picked up
I am amazed no one picked up on Ksandra's comments; we have so many running for office that the law of supply and demand tells me we should cut the pay and BENEFITS we citizens give to our elected officials. It is high time they learn to live as we do. As far as the unemployed, after so long of not working are they interested in working or are they just enjoying early retirement? Maybe it is not the dream job people are looking for, but they have to go with changes in life. If your trade is making buggy whips, realize this job is not in great demand and learn to do another job.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Yet, not suprisingly, Senate Republicans do NOT
say where they would suggest taking to money, to pay for continuing unemployemnt benefits. They have NOT recommended cutting farm subsidies, eliminate oil company tax breaks, or even reinstating the inheritance tax. Heck, taxes on George Steinbrenner's estate would pay for it all, but instead his heirs will get it all, tax free, thanks the republicans. But give money to unemployed people, people who lost their jobs because republicans destroyed the economy with their recklessnss, not on your life!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.is economy better now or in 2008?
tron, was the economy better under bush or under obama? unemployment nearly 3% higher under obama. what do consider a good economy?
exactly how does giving money to the unemployed create jobs? reducing taxes from companies so they can invest it in new equipment or higher new people, that creates jobs. the government cannot create jobs, but the government can destroy jobs.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Love how you FAILED to answer the question
the article says the republicans were in favor of extending unemployment benefits, but only if it was paid for. They failed to deliniate what they wanted to cut to fund the extension. You go off on a wacko tangent, avoid the question, and makes it about President Obama or bush. Answer the question, what would you right wing wackos give up to fund the extension. Just answer the question.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.here is your answer
no, i would not extend the benefits. i would cut taxes to business. then give them another cut for adding jobs, but only if they hire someone who is unemployed and for investment in equipment.
also, you did not answer my question, is the economy better now or in 2008? what do consider a good economy?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.build more capacity
Your idea is to build and invest in more capacity, even though there is excess capacity right now? Give businesses tax cuts to hire people to stand around? Brilliant! If the unemployed keep receiving benefits, they spend right away, creating demand. Increased demand means increased production. Increased production means more people hired.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.pay for it
What programs would you cut to pay for the tax cuts? Or extending the Bush tax cuts?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Lil...what happened to
Lil...what happened to Barry's promise of:
“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”
So did he lie?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.frnchmn: not one single dime
frnchmn, in obama's speech to a joint session of congress on feb. 24, 2009, he said the following, "if your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime. "
he is right, our taxes will not be increased by a single dime, but by a lot of nickles, dimes, quarters, half dollars and dollars. so, he is right, it won't be a "single dime" but a whole lot of them.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Just so you don't get your panties in a snit
the economy is better now than 2008. Is it great? No. But it is better. So, good night!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Troll you are such a liar!
Troll you are such a liar! With this comment, you have proven you really do live in a cave beneath a bridge. Why let the facts get in the way of your story. This economy is one the worst in US history. What a bafoon you've proven yourself to be.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.how is it better?
how can you say the economy is better? unemployment is up nearly 3% since obama took office. it will only go higher next year. i guess if you consider the destruction of the economy better, then your answer makes sense.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.The government has no money.
The government has no money. In order to GIVE money to those who have exhausted ALL of the extensions to unemployment, the government has to TAKE that money from someone else. Could someone please explain how taking from one person to give to another is going to help the economy?? As a small business owner I have to pay into the unemployment system, however I can NEVER collect from it. We need to stop giving handouts at the expense of others. How about paying the unemployed to clean the roadsides? sidewalks? parks? etc instead of just handing them a check? It would put people to work, "stimulate the economy", and provide valuable service.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Well Ken
why don't you start hiring, instead of going to Club Med this year?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I would hire immediately if
I would hire immediately if it wasn't so expensive to do so. In addition, with the uncertainty of our current administrations (State and Federal) I would have to be nuts to hire anyone right now!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.So you would not extend unemployment benefits
because it would increase the deficit, BUT you'd cut business taxes, which would increase the deficit, not only now, but for a long while. Makes absolutely no sense, we've tried something similar and it is bankrupting out nation. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. You're crazy.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.you don't understand economics
tron, you don't understand economics. yes, there would be short term increase to the deficit, but if you get more people working that means more pay taxes. not only that the government saves money because they don't have to play unemployment and less will be dependent on the government. but, i realize you like the idea of more government dependency, so the idea having people not dependent on the government is not an idea you would embrace.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I think the GOP has the right
I think the GOP has the right idea but I doubt they would like how I would pay for the extension of benefits for the unemployed. You see we start with an across the board 25% reduction of salary for all congressmen and the president. Then we link their retirement to the same vested retirement plans all other government employees are in, you are in office for 4 years sorry you didn't get vested, in for 8 you get the same small percentage any other government worked would get who only worked for 8 years. Then we increase their contribution to their health care insurance by 10%. That should pretty much cover the cost. If not we start reinstating the tax breaks they gave themselves. Lets do recall you pretty much have to be rich to get into federal office these days so it is a matter of giving themselves tax breaks.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.