By Liriel Higa and David Clarke, CQ Staff

House Democrats tried to move quickly Wednesday to respond to the spike in unemployment announced last week, but were unable to muster enough votes to pass an extension of unemployment benefits.

The 279-144 vote was not enough to pass the bill under suspension of the rules, which requires a two-thirds majority and bars amendments.

Democrats were hoping for a strong showing to bolster their case for extending the benefits and put them in a better bargaining position with the White House, which threatened a veto of the measure.

The legislation (HR 5749) would extend benefits for 13 weeks beyond the 26 weeks already authorized under law for all states. In addition, states with a high unemployment would get an additional 13 weeks.

In a policy statement, the White House said, “the best way to help workers is to create an environment that encourages job creation and to promote effective job training,” calling on Congress to pass pending free trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea, make permanent tax cuts championed by President Bush that will expire in 2010 and overhaul the Trade Adjustment Assistance program and the Workforce Investment Act.

Last month, the unemployment rate jumped from 5 percent to 5.5 percent from the previous month. It was the biggest increase in over two decades and added impetus to the Democrats’ efforts. Still, the administration noted that the extensions are usually granted when the unemployment rate is around 7 percent. The last temporary extension came in March 2002, after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and the unemployment rate was 5.7 percent.

The administration also expressed concern that even states with low unemployment rates would receive the 13-week extension, and some individuals who have worked for as little as two weeks could still potentially qualify for a year of benefits.

But the White House indicated it was willing to accept a targeted extension, echoing the stance of many GOP lawmakers. “[T]he administration could support legislation that would offer a 13-week extension of federally financed unemployment benefits to high-unemployment states alone.”

Republican Ways and Means member Jerry Weller of Illinois has a proposal (HR 5688) to provide an additional 13 weeks for states that have an above-average unemployment rate, experienced a 20 percent rise in unemployment rates in the past year or have unemployment rates above 6 percent.

Weller noted that Republicans on the Ways and Means panel had all supported some form of additional unemployment insurance benefits. But he decried the elimination of the requirement that individuals work at least 20 weeks before collecting extended federal benefits, as proposed in the Democratic plan.

“I am especially opposed to the cynical election-year maneuvering reflected in how the House is considering this important issue today,” Weller said. “Does the majority think that is fair to taxpayers? To pay 12 months of unemployment benefits in exchange for less than one month of work?”

The bill approved by the Ways and Means panel — 24-13, with three Republicans voting in favor — would violate the House’s pay-as-you-go budget rule, which requires the cost of new mandatory spending or tax cuts to be fully offset. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill would add $8.5 billion to the deficit over 10 years. But the benefit is funded by a trust fund dedicated to the program. That money would be used to pay for the extension and supporters of the bill argue because of that it does not need an offset.

Members of the House Blue Dog Coalition, a group of 49 fiscally conservative Democrats, have not insisted that the unemployment extension be offset, arguing it is a one-time cost and could be considered an economic emergency.