Dissing the jobless
Why the Republicans feel comfortable dumping on people out of work
Dissing the jobless
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
Pennsylvania Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Corbett has rightly sparked a controversy with his Friday lament about how jobless people would supposedly prefer to suck for eternity on the public teat rather than seek an honest day's pay. In Corbett's words, "The jobs are there. But if we keep extending unemployment, people are just going to sit there." Hence, his exhortation to the jobless: "Get off your duffs and go to work."
It's probably a waste of cyberspace to detail the obvious - that millions of jobless people would clearly prefer to be working full-time with health benefits, as opposed to sinking into despair at home with no such benefits and a weekly unemployment check capped in Pennsylvania at roughly $560 (with the more typical stipend at $310); that, on average nationwide, there are five active job seekers for every opening (and a far worse ratio for the quality openings); and that these unemployment checks at least give the jobless an opportunity to function as consumers and prime the economic pump (a new study by Moody's Analytics concludes that each dollar spent by the government on jobless pay yields an overall return of $1.61 for the economy).
So let's just look at the politics. Bottom line, Corbett's basic narrative about shiftless slackers is fully in sync with his party's fundamental 'tude. Among other examples, Nevada Senate candidate and tea-party heroine Sharron Angle insists that the long-term jobless are "spoiled," House member Dean Heller has condemned them as "hobos," Senator Orrin Hatch has suggested that jobless people applying for extended benefits should first be required to pass a drug test (jobless = junkies), and Senator John Kyl says that the jobless shouldn't get extended benefits because those benefits make the federal deficit worse (by contrast, this weekend Kyl told Fox News Sunday that tax cuts for the wealthy should be extended, even if they make the federal deficit worse). All of this explains why Senate Republicans (joined by Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson, whose state of Nebraska enjoys a 4.9 percent jobless rate) have blocked the latest push to extend benefits for those on verge of being cut off.
It would appear - at first glance, anyway - that the Republican stance toward the jobless is wildly at odds with the prevailing public mood. In the latest Washington Post-ABC Poll, this question was posed: "Because of the economic downturn, Congress has extended the period in which people can receive unemployment benefits, and is considering doing so again. Supporters say this will help those who can't find work. Opponents say this adds too much to the federal budget deficit. Do you think Congress should or should not approve another extension of unemployment benefits?"
The percentage of those who said that Congress should again extend benefits: 62. The percentage of those opposed: 36.
Even 43 percent of self-identified Republicans (and 57 percent of self-identified moderate/liberal Republicans) are in the Yes camp, apparently buying the basic argument voiced yesterday by a spokesman at the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry: "People are not getting rich off of unemployment. They are not putting money in the bank. It's keeping food on the table and a roof over their heads."
But what's striking is that the aforementioned Republican candidates and lawmakers seem not to fear that their Marie Antoinette let-them-eat-cake rhetoric will backfire at the ballot box. The Post-ABC survey only measures general public sentiment, not the sentiment of those who seem most motivated to vote in November. And those with the greatest enthusiasm - notably, tea-party conservatives who (studies show) are more affluent than the norm - generally buy the GOP's harsh caricature.
To borrow Tom Corbett's terminology, the real question is whether diehard Democrats will get off their duffs and go to the polls en masse in November, or whether they're too demoralized by the current state of play. The GOP's willingness to diss the jobless is proof that they anticipate a decisive conservative turnout.
Merry Christmas Dan Onorato.— potus
Does anyone actually believe Dick Polman reads these comments? Has he ever responded to a single one? In the several months I've been posting not once have I seen a response. Face it folks, Dick couldn't care less about what you think and has virtually no interest in an "American Debate." He is simply a single-minded political partisan who hacks away at conservatives and republicans with no regard for their actual positions and beliefs.
NE wrote: "Studies show that people do not seriously look (or accept a lower paying job) for work until their unemployemnt benefits are about to run out." Didn't Larry Summers say something almost like that before he became BO's economic advisor?— pj katauskas- NEPhilly - please site your sources of all of these "studies" that state some of the most ridiculous logic I have ever heard about the psychology of the long-term unemployed. Nonsense! You cannot just pull BS out of your arse. You obviously have not been unemployed for any great length of time. And please list all of those "Dems own policies" that have contributed to the unemployment rate. The record shows that it is was the GOP's failed economic policies and tax cuts for the very wealthy that sank the economy and caused the massive layoffs, starting in 2007.— Nebuchadrezzar II
- ***One of the most thoroughly established results in labor economics is the effect of unemployment benefits on unemployed workers' behavior. labor economists agree that extended unemployment benefits cause workers to remain unemployed longer than they otherwise would.[8] This occurs for obvious reasons: Workers respond to incentives. Unemployment benefits reduce the incentive and the pressure to find a new job by making it less costly to remain without work. Consequently workers with UI benefits look for new jobs less rigorously than do workers without them. The typical unemployed worker spends about 32 minutes a day looking for a new job.[9] Workers eligible for UI benefits spend only 20 minutes a day looking for work during their 15th week of unemployment. They look much harder when their benefits are about to end, spending more than 70 minutes a day job hunting in the 26th week of unemployment.[10]*** http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2008/11/Extended-Unemployment-Insurance-No-Economic-Stimulus— NEPhilly
- Neb, google Larry Summers on jobless benefits and employment.— pj katauskas
- Same article. ***After taking the labor-market effects into account, extended UI benefits provide little economic stimulus. The 13-week extension already passed by Congress is estimated to have increased annual GDP by an average of $0.25 for each $1 spent while extended benefits are in effect. Increasing the duration by an additional 7 weeks to 20 weeks would depress the economy, causing GDP to decrease by $1.7 billion. Unemployment insurance provides virtually no "bang for the buck" as economic stimulus. This research confirms the existing scholarly analysis that finds greater unemployment benefits provide little stimulus.[2] Paying workers not to work does not promote economic growth.***— NEPhilly
- The GOP better tread lightly here. I'm sure there are some slackers who are collecting checks...but the vast majority would rather be working.— TommyF
- Don't lie NEP. Studies actually show that people do look for jobs, except for a fraction of 1%. Those studies are by DLI and the Fed. Also, it's Republicans policies that have kept people from hiring. 5 to 1 seekers to opening ratio? That's more unsustainable than the deficit. Regular people view the unemployment extension as more important than the deficit. jmc, are you skeptical because you think people are saving their money, because, if not, it makes sense. You want to close the deficit so much, I'm sure you support raising taxes on the wealthiest 5%, right? Obama may not be great, but health care reform, wall st reform, education reform, credit card reform and he's pushing for the extension. At least he's trying to fight for the majority of people in this country.— HandNik
- hand, when you bash private companies from your bully pulpit, take over private companies, raise mandates, raise taxes & raise the govt. debt you get less hiring by the private sector. If govt. spending stimulated economies we would be swimming in new economic activity, but we are not. Why? Because govt. spending is such a drop in the bucket and so inefficiently spent that it does not work. Only private companies hiring can end our economic woes & they won't hire in this nasty economic environment created by the President & the dems in congress.— NEPhilly
- Remember these conservatives railing against unemployment benefits are the same ones who think minimum wage should be abolished, or the Department of Labor should be eliminated, or that poor kids shouldn't be given free lunches on the public's dime. They don't care about real, working people because they've never been a real working person. Can't poor people just grab their bootstraps already and start pulling?— Logathis
- Ironic that these conservative vermin have the nerve to disrespect unemployed folks while they collect paychecks on the backs of the U.S. taxpayers. These rats should be sent packing from their cushy little jobs of making the rich richer while people struggle to find suitable work where they can provide for their families.— RightWingHypocrite
- JOBS— Phil Checchia
- NEPhilly- You have completely discredited your argument by citing your data from the HERITAGE FOUNDATION. The Heritage Foundation!? Here is their mission statement copied from their website: To formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. Does that sound like a balanced perspective? You're entitled to your own disproven conservatives ideas, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Keep citing and reading Heritage Foundation nonsense and your head will keep going father into the sand. Stop bashing the unemployed after you supported the policies that lead to their current condition. It's just mean.— Logathis
- You can whine and jump up and down and try to make political capital out of Corbett's comments all you want, and you'll probably have some success (mostly with people who won't vote for him anyway), but there is more than one study in existence which pretty clearly shows he is right.— Fascinated
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
