Summary of Amendments Submitted to the Rules Committee for H.R. 1745 - Unemployment Compensation Bill

Summaries Derived from Information Provided by Sponsors

Bilirakis (FL)

#2

Would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to prevent payment of unemployment compensation to individuals discharged for drug or alcohol use. Those individuals fired for drug or alcohol use in connection with work would be required to secure new employment and meet state criteria before becoming eligible for unemployment compensation again.

Camp (MI)

#1

MANAGERS AMENDMENT - The Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute includes technical changes to section 203 of the legislation, which were brought to the Committee's attention after markup and are designed to ensure that individuals currently eligible for Extended Benefits remain eligible and that States are not able to claim additional matching payments since the bill already provides full Federal funding for those benefits.

Cleaver (MO), Conyers (MI), Fudge (OH)

#15

Would delay enactment of the law until the economy is in a period of full employment, including when the ratio of unemployed person per job opening is two to one and the national unemployment rate is below 6%.

Cleaver (MO), Towns (NY)

#17

Substitute Late Would substitute the bill with the Urban Youth jobs Act which provides jobs and job training for youth.

Davis, Danny K. (IL), Payne (NJ)

#3

Would delay implementation until the Secretary of Labor determines that the implementation of the Act will not have disproportionate adverse effects on racial or ethnic minority groups.

Davis, Danny K. (IL), Payne (NJ)

#13

Would require the State to provide clear public notice on an Internet website of any reductions or terminations of extended or emergency unemployment compensation benefits resulting from passage of this Act as well as clear statements of what the State will use the federal dollars on instead.

Davis, Danny K. (IL)

#14

Would require the State to provide clear public notice on an Internet website of any reductions or terminations of extended or emergency unemployment compensation benefits resulting from passage of this Act as well as clear statements of what the State will use the federal dollars on instead.

Johnson, Eddie Bernice (TX)

#11

Would delay enactment of the bill if it is found to increase the percentage of children and other individuals in poverty.

King, Steve (IA)

#16

Late Would require a CBO study, within 3 months after the date of enactment, on the behavioral and economic effects of Federal extended unemployment benefits since 2008.

Lee, Barbara (CA)

#4

Substitute Would strike the underlying legislation and insert HR 589 in its place, thereby extending unemployment benefits by an additional 14 weeks.

Moore, Gwen (WI)

#7

Would prevent Titles I and II from taking effect until the date at which the Secretary of Labor determines that the implementation of this Act will not have a disproportionately adverse effect on single-parent households. The Secretary must provide written notification to Congress to that effect.

Moore, Gwen (WI)

#8

Withdrawn Would require, no longer than 60 days after the Act is enacted, the Government Accountability Office to study and submit to Congress its findings with respect to the impact of this Act on dependent children and other family members of individuals whose extended or emergency unemployment compensation is reduced, terminated, or otherwise adversely affected by the Act. The statistics in the report shall be disaggregated by race, ethnicity, age, single parenthood, persons with disabilities, and seniors.

Peters (MI)

#10

Would require States that make legislative changes to unemployment compensation to submit information to the Secretary of Labor on the anticipated and actual effects of such changes. This information must include the number of individuals becoming ineligible for extended, emergency, or other unemployment compensation and changes in the amount or duration of compensation.

Renacci (OH)

#9

Would add at the end of the bill the text of the EMPLOY Act, which allows states to create a non-mandatory employer subsidy program as part of the Unemployment Insurance program. The program would allow eligible individuals to transfer a portion their unemployment benefits to an employer willing to hire them at a rate higher than their benefit amount.

Ryan, Paul (WI)

#12

Would provide for a technical correction to the emergency designation included in HR 1745 to include the budget resolution for FY11 as provided for in H. Res. 5 as an emergency designation. This would add to the emergency designation, a designation that it is an emergency for purposes of the Budget Act.

Wilson (FL)

#5

Would strike Section 102, which requires that a person meet specific educational requirements (a high school diploma or its equivalent) prior to being eligible for benefits.

Wilson (FL)

#6

Would alter the effective date by requiring the Secretary of Labor to first provide written notification to Congress that this legislation will not have a disproportionately adverse effect on persons age 55 or over.