America


Hawaii, and Massachusetts have all introduced bills in recent sessions that would award unemployment benefits to workers who elect to go out on strike. California legislators, meanwhile,


Blue States Pay Workers Who Go on Strike


They get unemployment compensation for walking picket line.


A BY DAVID A. PATTEN


growing number of blue states are enacting taxpayer-funded benefits to support workers who go


on strike. Critics warn the new policies shift


the balance of power away from free- market businesses and in favor of organized labor. Historically, unem- ployment compensation has only been offered to workers who are laid off or lose their jobs inadvertently. Four states have decided in recent


years to award unemployment com- pensation to workers who clock out to


join the picket lines — New York, New Jersey, Oregon, and Washington. In addition, at least four other state legislatures are currently considering unemployment benefits for workers who go on strike. The most recent state to adopt the


new policy is Washington. It’s pro- jected to pay over $1 million this year in unemployment benefits to striking union workers. The latest example of the impact


there: Over 100 hospitality workers, who elected to walk off their jobs at the Embassy Suites in Seattle’s Pioneer Square neighborhood in mid-June, have applied to receive unemploy- ment compensation in July. The pro-labor shift in Washington


appears to be part of a larger trend. Legislators in Connecticut, Delaware,


Gov. Newsom: We Can’t Afford It! O


ne of the nation’s most progressive states —


California — has rejected giving unemployment compensation to striking workers. The reason: Uber-liberal


California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed it. In September 2023, the


California state Legislature approved a bill to subsidize striking workers. But the state Chamber of Commerce and


16 NEWSMAX | OCTOBER 2026


other pro-business groups warned the measure would be a jobs killer. Newsom was widely


passed a measure to subsidize unem- ployment for striking workers in 2023. Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill, however, calling it too expensive. The U.S. Department of Labor,


which establishes regulations and issues grants to support state unem- ployment insurance programs, states workers receiving unemployment benefits must be “individuals out of work, generally through no fault of their own, for periods between jobs.” Earlier this year, the U.S. Depart-


ment of Labor sent a pointed reminder to blue state leaders, reminding them that workers must show evidence of continued efforts to seek employment if they want to continue to participate in the program. Economist Stephen Moore, co-


founder of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, says providing unemploy- ment benefits to workers going on strike is a mistake. “It’s going in the wrong direction


for a couple of reasons,” Moore tells Newsmax.


“Economically, it reduces the costs


to the workers going on strike,” he adds. “So, you’re going to see more strikes. They’re going to be longer strikes, and it’s going to give a lot more bargaining power to the unions.”


expected to sign the measure into law. But instead, the politician widely considered a frontrunner for the 2028 Democratic Party presidential nomination vetoed it. The Los Angeles Times


called that veto “a rare blow to organized labor” in the Golden State. In explaining his decision,


Newsom pointed out that California’s unemployed workers’ fund, which is subsidized by federal loans, was


already approaching $20 billion in debt. He said California just couldn’t afford to plunge into more red ink.


That unpaid debt, which


has since climbed to nearly $22 billion, stems largely from federal bailouts that date back to the COVID-19 era. Every other state has repaid


its COVID-19 era federal loans. California paid the federal government $668.3 million last year in interest payments alone. — D.P.


STRIKE/ISTOCK.COM/ERREMMO / NEWSOMRICK KERN/GETTY IMAGES FOR VOX MEDIA


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108