Extended unemployment benefits part of Bush exit plan, is it too little too late?

George Bush may have an unexpected parting gift for America's growing unemployed population when he leaves office in January 2009.  In a very un-Republican move Washington insiders are speculating that Bush will quickly sign legislation to broaden unemployment benefits for Americans.

The Bill in question has already passed in the House and is currently before the Senate.  In October Republican Senators defeated a similar unemployment assistance package but now that US jobless claims have skyrocketed to a 16 year high, and the Republicans have taken a lashing from American voters during November's election,  they appear to have changed their tune.

George Bush is finally ready to recognize that the dire US economic situation is not just hurting Wall Street but Main Street as well with legislation that will spend taxpayer money on actual taxpayers who have now lost their jobs. Bush seems to be accepting that bailouts for banks and insurance companies is not going to be enough.

The White House threatened to veto a previous $61 billion stimulus package that was designed in part to help newly unemployed Americans.  This $61 billion was too high a price tag to keep Americans working via public works projects, secure Medicaid benefits for people who had lost their jobs, and increase the length of time that the jobless can collect unemployment benefits.  Now that 1.2 million Americans are unemployed that $61 billion is looking like a serious bargain.

It is no secret that Bush actively supported the $700 billion bailout package given to key players in the US financial sector.   Of that $700 billion $150 billion, over 20%, has gone to one company; American International Group (AIG).  In 2007 AIG directly employed 116,000 people.  That works out to $1,293,103.45 in taxpayers dollars spent for every AIG employee.  

Last week Bush appointed Treasury Department officials gave the banks a further handout in the form of a $140 billion tax break that was quietly pushed through Treasury channels.  The bureaucratic change, related to terms within the bailout bill, effectively repealed a 22 year old Act of Congress that came as a reaction to the Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980's.  The Savings and Loan Scandals are often sited as a precursor to the current economic crisis.

The $61 billion stimulus package, that was rejected by Republicans in October, is a fire-sale bargain in comparison.  For each of the 1.2 million unemployed Americans who would have benefited from the defeated package the tab to taxpayers would have been a relatively meager $50,833.33. 

Even the $25 billion asked for by the Big 3 automakers would have been a better bang for taxpayers bucks.  A bailout for the Big 3 would have helped save 1.2 million jobs, maybe even more, and would have protected the pensions of some 625,000 retired Americans.  General Motors is the largest corporate provider of health care benefits in the United States, and by saving jobs at GM the government would also have kept those people and their families insured.

Of course this is an overly simplistic cost-to-benefits comparison but it certainly drives home the question that many Americans have been asking since the $700 billion bailout package was passed - exactly where do Republican loyalties lie?  No wonder American voters embraced a change of leadership.  Hopefully Obama will prioritize the needs of the average American taxpayer above the interests of corporate America.

Change and Hope, in that order, are what is really needed now.