In the Boston Globe article Brown’s jobless bill wins little support: Gets scant notice, even from GOP, Scott Brown is quoted as asking

“Why is it that I’m always the one that has to vote with the Democrats?” Brown lamented. “Bipartisanship is a two-way street, you know? Why can’t they also work together to pay for these things within the budget, within the monies that we already have? Why is it that we always have to add to the deficit?”

Why can’t Scott Brown understand economics?

You balance the budget when the economy is doing well. Stimulating the economy requires running a deficit.

Unemployment benefits are necessary to sustaining the people who receive them. Doing it by cutting somewhere else defeats the stimulative effect of paying these benefits.

Why can’t Scott Brown see that there are two reasons for extending unemployment benefits? Rather than rhetorically wondering why nobody will vote for his proposal, he ought to seriously look for answers to this question. There are plenty available. How about the other negative things he has in his bill? Might those be reasons for not voting for it in preference for the Democratic bill?

The article also mentions that:

In addition to the $35 billion in unspent money that he would divert from the overall $787 billion stimulus program, Brown would freeze food stamp increases and change Medicaid pricing for certain types of prescription drugs, providing $50.9 billion for the unemployment extension as well as summer jobs and a boost in Medicaid funding for states.

Do you suppose this has anything to do with the lack of support for his idea?