Good thing it isn't the Red Counties that are filled with unemployed slackers ... Oh ... Wait ...

5.3% Seattle versus 7% statewide ... Hmmm

Failed Senate Candidate (and to a lesser extent, State Senator) Michael Baumgartner is only out there to make a name for himself.

I have an idea: when a Fortune 500 CEO is terminated, as a condition of his seven-figure severance package, why don't we require him to do 100 hours of community service for each million received in cash and stocks?

Republicans are terrible people.

Dickensian England, indeed. What's next, tread mills? Sen. Baumgarder, who some question if he actually lived in the 6th LD when he filed, is the same "deep thinker" who wants to introduce right-to-work legislation.

And presumably this would start at the beginning of unemployment, even if you've only been on the rolls for a week? What an amazing deal.

Why not just have the government hire workers at a living wage to do useful things around the state? That would reduce unemployment, stimulate demand for goods and services, and get useful stuff done.

Surely there are some chimneys they can be whipped into cleaning.

@8,

Because no one actually wants to reduce unemployment. Unemployment reduces labor mobility and wages across the board.

OMG what a jackwad.

I do love it when jackwads come right out and show their colors, however...

Agreed Goldy, and neither should the government require drug tests for unemployment/food stamps/welfare. Both are an affront to true conservatism which holds true that we have a safety net and it should afford its citizens to use it with dignity.

@12: It's been my opinion for quite some time that honest principled conservatives need to take back the GOP from the swarm of racists, bible-thumpers, and reactionaries you've saddled yourselves with. You lay down with the dogs, and boy did you ever get up with fleas.

@13: Yes, but you can take back the hyperbole. Or I could say "the dems are a swarm of obnoxious and condescending control freaks who want everyone to be equally poor instead of unequally prosperous - who constantly praise diversity as long as it is not diversity of thought" and call it a draw. Nevertheless, thank you venomlash.

the hard thing to believe is that they truly think they're doing good.

Lame indeed, He's gotta know it'll go nowhere so he should have gone for max publicity and included free beer with that required 8hrs of community service.

@15, they don't believe they're doing good; they have no interest in doing good. They simply think they're right and everyone else is wrong.

@5 said all that needs to be said.

8 hours over 4 weeks ? I'm not really sure that's punishment in a strict sense. Mandate is tricky to set but you it doesn't need to be punishment.

One of the real dangers of being unemployed can be the depression of not having a goal/routine in your day and, for some, being closed off from the world. Add to it the possibility that the unemployed may have a chip on their shoulder about the idea of new employment at a lower wage/seniority it might not be the worst idea to give someone a day of socialization, meeting other people, and perhaps doing a job that is usually considered somewhat "low" to appreciate the middle ground.

Would you consider it lowly if a person's church group asked some who eat at the soup kitchen regularly to help serve (without $15/hr in pay) ?

and here's a less hyperbolic interpretation of Baumgartner's motives:

http://blogs.seattletimes.com/politicsno…
Baumgartner said the requirement is not intended as a punitive measure, arguing “it’s going to help these people find jobs” by getting them out in the community to network and learn marketable skills.

The bill doesn’t say what kind of community service workers should do in order to get benefits, but Baumgartner said it could include helping out at soup kitchens, wiping down graffiti and environmental cleanup.

Fun fact, my high school required me to do so many hours of community service as a Sr to graduate. It was a part of our representing the school positively in the community.

Because wiping down graffiti is a great way to network & learn marketable skills, right?

The state legislature meets 60 days this year. Maybe they should legislate themselves some community service with all that extra time they're sitting around being unemployed parasites.

Community service also interferes with the thing the unemployed are supposed to be doing. Looking for paying work.

Do Olympia R's really want as many people as possible to be unemployed as long as possible? Asked and answered.

@18 I second the sentiment.

I have been on unemployment several times and it gets tiresome when you are truly looking and networking and finding nothing that will pay the bills. I think I would have welcomed a change of pace like required community service... something I wanted to do while on unemployment, but always felt the pressure of needing to be focused on job seeking at all times.

I'm not sure I would have learned marketable skills wiping down graffiti, but how about Habitat for Humanity? I learned quite a few skills volunteering for those projects. And while building trails in a park might not be a marketable skill, you might meet others who could see your work ethic and recommend you to their friend who is hiring in your original field of work.

Community service only seems to be viewed as a punishment by those who wouldn't stoop to do the work of their own volition.

@22 ....Uh, and what would exactly prevent someone who's feeling all tired of all that job-hunting and really wants a break like community service from [emphasis] volunteering [/emphasis] for such service anyway?

Nothing. You note you volunteered for community service. The state didn't force you to do it. That's a pretty sizable difference, and the real issue here (though I'm guessing you already know that).

While (perhaps) well-intentioned, your last post seems to suggest that everyone's needs will be exactly like your own. I'm betting they're not, and different people need to handle the frustrations of the job-search process in different ways. They sure as hell don't need the State stepping in to "help" them by forcing them into a "change of pace" of community service.

Am I growing more conservative? It actually seems like a halfway decent idea to me. 2hrs a week isn't that much, after all.

I know some folks on unemployment who use the time to look for work, and others who don't. For both groups it would be beneficial.

Can someone please get back to me with a weather report from Hell? Because I actually AGREE with a comment from Raindrop (cit ref @12). Oh well, stopped clocks and all.

@20: my thoughts exactly.

The one time I was unemployed for any significant period of time, I in fact did a LOT of volunteering, but then I've done that even while gainfully employed; just something I do. And yes, it can be of tremendous value in terms of socialization, feeling one is still actively contributing to the Greater Good, etc., etc. But compelling the unemployed to engage in the sorts of activities Baumgartner seems to be suggesting are downright demeaning. Will the they be working alongside prisoners, or parolees, or those convicted of misdemeanors, who already perform this kind of work? What sort of message does that send to the unemployed; that they're viewed by society as having the same status as criminals?

I would think it a much better idea to encourage volunteerism, preferably in areas where the unemployed have actual skills, so that they: A.) feel they are at least maintaining those skills in some fashion, and; B.) putting their knowledge and expertise to good use by directly contributing to the community. That would seem to me a much better, more compassionate and more productive means of achieving the same goal. And as an incentive, perhaps give the unemployed some sort of benefit in-return, say, by reducing the number of weekly job contacts required, or something similar.

After all, the Social Contract says that jobs have value and should be compensated; even a token form of compensation would go a long way towards helping the unemployed maintain some semblance of personal dignity while they continue to seek another job, rather than simply mixing them in with a bunch of people wearing orange jumpsuits to do make-work, because some politician has decided that a 21st Century version of Dickensian " Union (not in the sense of a labor organization) Workhouse" sounded like a great idea.

@23: Actually, she says she wanted to do it while on unemployment, but never did. So, she doesn't mind making it a requirement for others to do this thing she even felt the intention to do, but never got around to herself.

Because wiping down graffiti is a great way to network & learn marketable skills, right?

I'm sure it is. You've seen Breaking Bad, haven't you? Just think of all the new prospects Walter found after that ride-along.

Anyway, addressing the topic: UI already requires you attend a job search seminar thing after you've been on the rolls for awhile. This already serves the networking and socializing aspect. They also offer their services every weekday to anyone in the public that would like to show up to make use of them. This is measure is redundant at best, punitive at worst.