Finally, something to quote by Saint Meghan of McArdle:

[I]n recessions, the length of time for which people need “temporary” [unemployment benefit] assistance stretches out. That means that the government has to respond with temporary benefit extensions. These aren’t just good for the people who are unemployed; it’s also good for us. Unemployment assistance is one of the “automatic fiscal stabilizers” that all but the most hard-nosed conservative economists agree help smooth the business cycle in modern industrial countries. Indeed, it’s one of the most effective forms of stimulus we have.

Even if you think the government needs a plan to get its house in order, why on earth is Bunning making a stand on this issue? It’s political poison–even the Republican base knows people who are out of work. It’s terrible economic policy–suddenly cutting off the taps would have nasty knock-on effects on the economy. And while it’s a lot of money, it’s one of the few government programs that pretty much unequivocally improve the net welfare of the American people. If Bunning wants to hold up something, how about finding some useless defense appropriations to complain about?