Congress passes modest job-creation bill

WASHINGTON Thu Nov 17, 2011 11:54am EST

Mervin Sealy from Hickory, North Carolina, takes part in a protest rally outside the Capitol Building in Washington, October 5, 2011.    REUTERS/Jason Reed

Mervin Sealy from Hickory, North Carolina, takes part in a protest rally outside the Capitol Building in Washington, October 5, 2011.

Credit: Reuters/Jason Reed

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a rare display of cooperation, Republicans and Democrats in Congress overwhelmingly approved a limited jobs bill on Wednesday that would help some veterans find work but otherwise do little to bring down the nation's 9 percent unemployment rate.

The bill, aimed at government contractors and veterans, is so far the only piece of President Barack Obama's $447 billion job-creation package to clear Congress. Republicans have lined up behind a contrasting agenda of their own ahead of the 2012 presidential and congressional elections.

It passed the House of Representatives by a unanimous vote of 422 to 0. Only one lawmaker voted against the bill when it passed the Senate last week. Obama has said he will sign it into law.

Republicans have rejected Obama proposals that would boost construction spending and help cash-strapped local governments avoid layoffs of teachers, police and other public employees.

Congress could still act on other elements due to expire at the end of the year, such as enhanced unemployment benefits and a payroll tax cut for workers, which the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says are among the most effective ways to boost the economy in the short term.

Allowing them to expire would slow economic growth next year, according to CBO.

The bill approved Wednesday represents a small slice of Obama's jobs plan.

It aims to reduce unemployment among military veterans by giving a tax break to businesses that hire them. It would also boost veterans' job training programs.

Veterans account for 850,000 of the country's 14 million unemployed workers, according to the White House, and 1 million service members are projected to leave the military in the coming five years as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq wind down.

The bill also eliminates a yet-to-be enacted law that would have withheld 3 percent of payments to government contractors to ensure that they pay their taxes. Business groups say it would interfere with their cash flow, and Congress has prevented it from taking effect since it was passed in 2006.

The bill's $9 billion price tag would be offset by tweaks to mortgage and healthcare programs.

President Obama hailed its passage, saying in a statement: "I want to congratulate Republicans and Democrats in Congress for coming together to pass these tax credits that will encourage businesses to hire America's veterans.

"This is a good first step, but it is only a step. Congress needs to pass the rest of my American Jobs Act so that we can create jobs and put money in the pockets of the middle class."


Economist Mark Zandi, who has advised policymakers from both parties, said the bill would help veterans find work but would not have a big enough impact to lower the overall jobless rate.

"These provisions are good policy, but not because they will lower unemployment," said Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics.

Republicans said the bill's passage was proof that the two parties could find some common ground.

"When we work together, we can find bipartisan solutions to the laws and regulations that stifle job creation," said Representative Dave Camp, who heads the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee.

Democrats said that does not make up for the fact that Republicans have blocked larger pieces of Obama's jobs plan.

"Picking out two of the smaller pieces of that agenda and saying you've acted on the president's jobs bill is really disingenuous," said Representative Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee.

The Republican jobs plan would boost oil and gas drilling and ease pollution controls and other business regulations. Republicans count 22 bills on their agenda that have stalled in the Democratic-controlled Senate after passing the House.

CBO and private-sector analysts say that approach would do little to bring down unemployment in the near term.

(Editing by Deborah Charles and Eric Walsh)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see
Comments (3)
NewsDebbie wrote:
This bill like Congress is worthless.

Nov 17, 2011 12:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Thomas269 wrote:
I was a Vietnam vet who was unemployed for a year, so I know what the ex-military face. However, this selective jobs program is based on the false assumption that servicemen deserve a job, but others do not. There are unemployed out there who have spent decades contributing to society. A selective job bill implies that they somehow are not deserving, or perhaps even loafers. Nothing could be further from the truth. The nation needs a comprehensive jobs bill, not stop-gap measures that favor a particular constituency. Congratulations, vets, on the help you will be getting. Now Congress, help the rest of the unemployed.

Nov 17, 2011 12:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
FlorianSchach wrote:
It’s great that congress has reached a consensus on on getting paprt of these necessary measures through so that we can put people back to work. But the government here still lacks a long term plan stable enough for a real economic recovery. Overall, we do need immediate jobs but it won’t do much good if the jobs that we just created are all of sudden disappearing right afterward ( It would be wise of us to think about how we can keep our promises to our young veterans and others so that we can avoid the kinds of unemployment and economic trends that we have seen in the past (

Nov 17, 2011 7:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.