<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Time Flies for UI</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2007/11/29/time-flies-for-ui/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2007/11/29/time-flies-for-ui/</link>
	<description>Affecting NC public policy through informed, energetic and progressive conversations.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:29:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2007/11/29/time-flies-for-ui/#comment-3908</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:56:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/?p=730#comment-3908</guid>
		<description>The Bush Administration, unfortunately, has been opposed to both UI and TAA. Yet it has offered no substantive alternative to actually address the problems facing dislocated or unemployed workers.  

That said, the U.S. House still passed the measures by a bipartisan vote. There is no reason why the Senate couldn&#039;t do the same.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Bush Administration, unfortunately, has been opposed to both UI and TAA. Yet it has offered no substantive alternative to actually address the problems facing dislocated or unemployed workers.  </p>
<p>That said, the U.S. House still passed the measures by a bipartisan vote. There is no reason why the Senate couldn&#8217;t do the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2007/11/29/time-flies-for-ui/#comment-3905</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 01:36:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/?p=730#comment-3905</guid>
		<description>The Administration advised the Labor Secretary in a letter that it would not support UI Modernization and the Trade Adjustment Assitance re-authorizaton (as expanded in the House bill).

UI systems across the country not only need to modernize policy, but their service delivery methods, and automation systems as well.

www.naswa.org
President Bush in his Statement of Administration Policy said he could not support the TAA reauthorization bill as approved by the House because it â€œconverts TAA from a trade-related program to a universal income-support and training program.â€  

This is quite a hurdle to overcome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Administration advised the Labor Secretary in a letter that it would not support UI Modernization and the Trade Adjustment Assitance re-authorizaton (as expanded in the House bill).</p>
<p>UI systems across the country not only need to modernize policy, but their service delivery methods, and automation systems as well.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.naswa.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.naswa.org</a><br />
President Bush in his Statement of Administration Policy said he could not support the TAA reauthorization bill as approved by the House because it â€œconverts TAA from a trade-related program to a universal income-support and training program.â€  </p>
<p>This is quite a hurdle to overcome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

