The Big Question: Was Bunning right to block renewing benefits?

Some of the nation’s top political commentators, legislators and
intellectuals offer their frank insight into the biggest question burning up
the blogosphere today.

Today’s question:

Was Sen. Jim Bunning’s objection to the temporary extension of some unemployment and COBRA healthcare benefits a good decision?

Some background reading here.

Alan Abramowitz, professor of Political Science at Emory University, said:

No, it was a dumb decision, which is not surprising coming from Jim Bunning.  But he’s on his way out anyway so it won’t hurt him.  I’m just surprised that other Republican senators haven’t put more pressure on him to cease and desist.

Bruce E. Gronbeck, professor of Political Communication at the University of Iowa, said:

Another wild pitch by Bunning.  By denying aid to desperate families in the name of economic and political principle, he’s dehumanized his legislative agenda.  Retirement’s not coming soon enough.  Kentuckians deserve a senator with their, and not his own, best interests at heart.

Craig Newmark, founder of Craigslist.org, said:

Well, if you’re a beliver in tradtional Judeo-Christian values and morality, Bunning’s decision, not so good.

Joe Madison, host of “The Black Eagle” radio show, said:

His “last stand”, requires all of us to stand up for our friends, neighbors and loved ones who are unemployed and depending on the meager assistance to make ends meet. His last stand and the Party of “No” created two thousand unemployed Transportation employees, prevented individuals from being able to buy groceries, heat homes and job search. I am calling on my colleagues in radio, TV, Labor, campuses to march on Washington to say, “Enough is enough”.

Frank Askin, professor of law at Rutgers University, said:

Jim Bunning hasn’t made a good decision since he hung up his cleats and entered politics! 

Justin Raimondo, editorial director Antiwar.com, said

Senator Bunning’s objection to the extension of unemployment/COBRA benefits is simple: he wants the Senate to find something to cut to pay for this. Why is that so unreasonable?

I have a suggestion: why not cut $10 billion (the cost of the benefits Bunning is holding up) from the multi-trillion-dollar bank bailout cornucopia? Or, failing that, how about cutting the (secret) funding for the (secret) war in Pakistan?

I suspect Bunning would not agree — which points to the real reason for “gridlock” in Washington. Not Republican intransigence, but Republican hypocrisy…..

Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, said:

Yeah, it was a great decision to obstruct benefit payments if you like to see children suffer and make unemployed people worry about how they will pay their bills and stay in their homes. I suppose he will go home and boil some frogs and kick the cat.

John F. McManus, president of the John Birch Society, said:

Senator Bunning has sent the nation a good message, no matter what his motives might be as he winds down his political career.  The $10 billion sought by the legislation in question isn’t there, and it will have to be added to a national debt that already has the potential to sink this nation.  The new billions will materialize via the production of additional inflationary-created dollars that will eventually lower the value of all dollars.  Ultimately, this is hidden tax on everyone.
 
However, his message will likely not be heeded, especially in an election year.  Politicians are famous for taking money from some to give to others.  And when they do so without the “some” being immediately aware, while the “others” become more intense partisans for government acting like Santa Claus. But we know that Santa is a myth. The truly sad part here is that the enormous – and growing – national indebtedness is NOT a myth. Just think about what the older generations are allowing to be done to their children and grandchildren!.
 
Fixing unemployment will never be accomplished by government – unless everyone ends up working for the government in a totalitarian system.