PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 110-449.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Nov 21, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on October 3, 2008. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2008 - Amends the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 to revise the formula for Tier-1 amounts a state credits to an applicant's emergency unemployment compensation account (EUCA) for a benefit year. Increases the figures in the formula (the lesser of which shall be the amount credited): (1) from 50% to 80% of the total amount of regular compensation (including dependents' allowances) payable to the individual during the benefit year; and (2) from 13 to 20 times the individual's average weekly benefit amount for the benefit year.
Provides an additional Tier-2 period for deposits to an individual's EUCA, using the current formula, if, at the time that the amount established under this Act is exhausted, or at any time thereafter, the individual's state is in an extended benefit period.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prescribes a formula for determining if a state is in an extended benefit period.
Allows the Tier-2 period augmentation to be applied to the individual's EUCA only once.
Prohibits a Tier-2 augmentation to an individual's EUCA under this Act after March 31, 2009, if the EUCA is exhausted after such date.
Extends the period of emergency unemployment compensation through August 27, 2009.
Exempts weeks of unemployment between enactment of this Act and December 8, 2009, from the prohibition in the Federal-State Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 1970 against federal matching payments to a state for the first week in an individual's eligibility period for which extended compensation or sharable regular compensation is paid if the state law of such state provides for payment (at any time or under any circumstances) of regular compensation to an individual for his first week of otherwise compensable unemployment. (Thus allows temporary federal matching for the first week of extended benefits for states with no waiting period.)
People & committees
Rep. McDermott, Jim [D-WA-7] · D–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 110-449.
Became Public Law No: 110-449.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote.
Measure laid before Senate by motion.
Motion to proceed to consideration of measure agreed to in Senate. (consideration: CR S10701-10702)
Cloture on the motion to proceed to the measure invoked in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 89 - 6. Record Vote Number: 214. (consideration: CR S10701-10702; text: CR S10701)
Senate roll call 214 · Individual votesCloture motion on the motion to proceed to the measure presented in Senate. (consideration: CR S10627-10628; text: CR S10627)
Motion to proceed to consideration of measure made in Senate. (consideration: CR S10627-10628)
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 1123 under authority of the order of the Senate of 11/17/2008.
Received in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 368 - 28 (Roll no. 683). (text: CR H10808-10809)
House roll call 683 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 368 - 28 (Roll no. 683).(text: CR H10808-10809)
House roll call 683 · Individual votesDEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6867.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10808-10814)
Mr. Rangel moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
ORDER OF BUSINESS - Mr. Rangel asked unanimous consent that it be in order today for the Speaker to entertain motions to suspend the rules relating to H.R. 6867. Agreed to without objection.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 6, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.6867 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.6867 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.6867 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.6867 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.