0 on day two. there are 1.3 million people in this country right now dealing with that completely undeserved ministry. i agree with you. to say to continue writing them a check is the right prescription for that problem is wrong. i think there s a lot of really great ideas out there as to how to address this issue. the american enterprise institute has done fabulous work on this. some ways to look at this system, and continue to have a safety net that actually encourages workers and allows people to search for a job and rewards them for doing so. here s what i will agree with you. it is necessary to continue these benefits for these folks. it is not sufficient for getting them book to work. mattie duppler. thank you so much tonight. joining me now, senator chris murphy, democrat from kentucky. member of the senate health education labor and pension committee. senator, the vote is scheduled for tomorrow. as of now, the most recent whip count according to my colleague, kasie hunt i
0 stop right there, again. i will agree with you kicking the can now for three months, let s just extend it permanently. let s put in benchmarks of unemployment rates, right, so we don t have to keep doing this. totally agree can you. instead of just having to do this every three months on an emergency basis, let s say if we have unemployment at a certain level, have the long-term unemployed at a certain level, it just renews automatically? that would be great. my question to you, there seems to be some confusion on the right whether they re ideologically opposed to the very idea of long-term unemployment insurance, emergency unemployment insurance during a weak labor market. what is the argument against it? well, i think that you re right. we haven t had an actual process where we brought the bill to the floor and been able to see why republicans don t want to vote on the senate bill. if we had an open amendment process and had republicans and democrats who come to the floor and o
a local paper called the ensnare men who merely discussed or agreed to have consensual sex with an undercover agent. the unenforceable law is the antisodomy law which was struck down by the u.s. supreme court in lawrence v. texas a decade ago. now the sheriff s office is backtracking saying they will no longer enforce that policy. joining me now, the editor in chief for the national magazine the advocate, which broke that story first but matthew, i know you guys have been covering this. certainly one to watch because the district attorney couldn t move forward with charges against any of those arrested because no crime had officially occurred. now we have this statement from the sheriff s office apologizing saying that the way these investigations were handled made it appear that we were targeting the gay community. that was not our intent.
open stance than popes have made in the past. but for myself, i will be much happier when religion does not influence public policy. do you think though that this will help the dialogue, not just with where we stand as certain catholics in this country might be conflicted or disenfranchised with the catholic church, but in seeing a change from pope benedict to pope francis. i do think you ll see a change, a more embracing attitude. i m hoping the catholics around the world take serious note of that, who am i to judge frayed from the pope and make that a part of their own lives. it seems like he wants to get back to the golden rule philosophy that jesus was teaching at least the teachings in the bible and that would be certainly nice to see coming from the pope. matthew breen from the
is that to be believed? because this is the antisodomy laws were struck down over ten years ago so why the need to strike up this type of entrapment or this type of snare program? those that backtracking is absolutely not to be believed in my opinion. we were talking about 12 arrests since 2011. this is a fairly recent sting that s been going on for the past couple of years and we re now a full decade away from the lawrence v. texas decision that declared unconstitutional the law in texas and 14 other states regarding consensual sex between gay men adults. matthew, quickly, were they trying to crack down on lewd behavior by a certain park or something that i was reading about? was that the original intent? and then they were entrapping