The Farmville herald. (Farmville, Va.) 1957-current, 1959-05-05

| IhlS is the time OF year W h r
| Washington is really humming. La
Dor legislation, the budget, foreign
policy, foreign aid, taxes, unem,
ployment compensation. and host
Of other problems are all in the
limelight. In later columns one af.
ter another of these will be con
Sldered but the issue of changing
our unemployment compensation
system has now advanced to a
point legiSlatively where it deserves
analysis.
AS everyone knows unemploy-
ment compensation is system in
which the Federal Government col
lects 3 per cent tax upon the
wages Of employees and the tax is
paid entirely by the employers. OF
the sum collected all but a small
fraction Of one per cent is left with
the States for their use in making
unemployment compensation pay
ments. The States determine both
the amount and the duration of the
payments. The States also set the
requirements which must be met
II one is to receive such payments.
These requirements may be stated
as SO and so many weeks of work
or they may be in dollars earned.
Among the States there is a fairly
wide difference on all of these
points. as the States have attempted
over the years to fit the system
to their local conditions.
Bills have been introduced in
both House and Senate to change
the present system. These bills
would require each State to pay
benefits to all eligible claimants for
uniform duration of 80 weeks. as
contrasted with present State laws.
most of which provide variable du-
ration up to 26 weeks. The bills
would also require each State to
raise its maximum weekly benefit
to tWothlrds of the average weekly
wage in the State. If these bills
were to become law the result
would be to federalize determine
ton Of unemployment benefit poll
cies- The Administration has asked
for an increase in the tax base from
the present $4,000 to 81 200.
The Ways and Means Committee
has completed rather extensive
hearings on the House bills. Much
of the testimony was carefully pre-
pared and outstanding. Labor
spokesman were in favor of the pro-
posals. but most of the other Wit
nesSeS were opposed
From the point of view of in
fluence upon the members of the
Committee perhaps the most i'm
portant statement was that Of Rev
erend Joseph NJ Becker. S. j. Of
the Institute Of Social Order at st.
Louis University He opened bv
pointing out that over the years
there has been continuous debate
over what he said might be called
the competitive and welfare con
cepts the one emphasizing in
dividual responsibility for the pay
ment of unemployment benefits
the other. collective responsibility. +
And he emphasized that we ALWAYS
have worked under compromise
OF these two points of view. Then
he added.
i believe more viable
compromise can be achieved
by making use of distinction
whose pivotal importance is becom-
ing progressively clearer. refer
to the distinction between normal
and abnormal periods Of unemploy
ment and to the different rolls that
unemployment benefits have to
play in each situation.
He then went ahead to saw that
he Is convinced that we need two
programs-one for periods of nor
NAL unemployment and emphasiz-
ing the competitive approach. and
supplementary program designed
for abnormal periods and making
greater use Of the Welfare ap-
preach.
In Father Bccker's opinion the
present State system should be
permitted to meet the first need.
and new. special system might
be considered to take care Of the
second need He did not spell out