Eric Cantor: The Grinch Who Stole Americans' Unemployment Insurance

[oldembed src="" width="400" height="319" resize="1" fid="21"]

Jim Cramer on CNBC seemed to be shocked that Rep. Eric Cantor wasn't going to support the idea of extending unemployment benefits since the private sector refuses to spend those trillions of dollars they have been sitting on and hire American workers.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor recently said that government just can't keep its promises to Americans. In that case he was talking Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Now he's including extending unemployment compensation in the promises he wants to break, on the grounds that extending the insurance program is "pumping up" the jobless.

In response to today’s jobs report, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) declared that “unemployment is far too high” and that Congress “must push pro-growth policies to get back on track.” Noting Cantor’s apparent concern as “spot on,”, CNBC host Jim Kramer told Cantor that obviously, “you’re for extending unemployment benefits given the chaotic situation.” Cantor’s response? Nope, because “for too long in Washington now we’ve been worried about pumping up the stimulus moneys and pumping up unemployment benefits”.

Cantor declared that “the most important thing we can do for somebody who’s unemployed is to see if we can get them a job” and declared that the only way unemployment benefits could be extended is if “we find commensurate cuts somewhere else”:

CANTOR: Jim, the most important thing we can do for somebody who’s unemployed is to see if we can get them a job. I mean, that’s what needs to be the focus. For too long in Washington now we’ve been worried about pumping up the stimulus moneys and pumping up unemployment benefits and to a certain extent you have states for which you can get unemployment for almost two years and I think those people on unemployment benefits would rather have a job. So that’s where our focus needs to be.

KRAMER: I just want to be very, very clear, on a day when we have a good unemployment number, that’s terrific, but not a great one and you confirmed not a great one, you are not in favor and will go against the president’s wishes to extend those unemployment benefits?

CANTOR: What I have said all along, Jim, is if we’re going to spend money in Washington, we better start to make choices and we’ve got to set priorities. If we’re going to spend money, we better cut it somewhere else.

That's Cantor Logic. He says we need to find them some jobs, but not how or what he'll do to find people jobs. For him, it's out of the question to help struggling American families. I'm surprised he didn't suggest a get together with Gov. Rick Perry so the two could join in a prayer meeting asking the good Lord to create new jobs for those who are suffering.

Joan has a good idea:

In the meantime, I recommend all unemployed people send their resume and a request for a job interview to Rep. Cantor, since he says the most important thing he, as part of government, can do is to get unemployed people jobs. Maybe he'll share his bootstraps with the rest of us.

Maybe Cantor can dip into his Wall Street fund and pass around his bribe money campaign contributions to those less fortunate than himself.
Tanya writes:

A brief survey of Cantor’s priorities quickly reveals why his callous lack of concern for the unemployed is not surprising. He has always intimated that extending jobless benefits, or even preventing layoffs, are not his priorities. Even though unemployment benefits actually spur economic growth, Cantor prefers to focus on preserving tax cuts for the wealthy — something he even admitted actually would “dig the hole deeper” on the deficit.

In considering whether to fund programs like unemployment benefits that spur the economy and buoy struggling families, Cantor adopted an all-too-familiar Republican attitude: “I would say that sort of, we’ve been there, done that.” “So if nothing else,” he said, “let’s at least try something else.”


We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.