Tennessee House Bill HB0222

Tennessee 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/13/23
• Refer: 1/21/23
• Refer: 2/6/23
• Engrossed: 2/14/23
• Enrolled: 3/1/23
• Passed: 3/14/23
• Chaptered: 3/23/23

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 29 and Title 50, Chapter 7, relative to the state unemployment compensation advisory council.

Impact

The bill proposes amendments to existing provisions in Title 4, Chapter 29, and Title 50, Chapter 7 of the Tennessee Code. By doing so, it seeks to streamline the operational processes of the unemployment compensation advisory council, potentially improving its responsiveness to the needs of the unemployed population in the state. This legislative change is expected to have a direct effect on how unemployment benefits are managed and disbursed, thus influencing the overall employment landscape in Tennessee.

Summary

House Bill 0222, also known as the act to amend Tennessee Code Annotated related to the state unemployment compensation advisory council, aims to revise current statutes that govern the functioning and structure of the advisory body responsible for overseeing unemployment compensation in Tennessee. The bill intends to provide clearer guidelines for the advisory council's role and responsibilities, enhancing its effectiveness in managing unemployment claims and advising state authorities on related issues.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding HB 0222 appears to be supportive, particularly among lawmakers who recognize the need for a functional and effective advisory council to address the complexities of unemployment compensation. The fact that the bill passed with a unanimous vote indicates a strong consensus on its importance to the ongoing management of unemployment benefits, reflecting an understanding of its role in aiding Tennessee's workforce, especially in challenging economic times.

Contention

Notably, there were no significant points of contention raised during the discussions around HB 0222, as evidenced by the unanimous voting outcome. The lack of opposition suggests that the changes proposed by the bill are considered necessary and beneficial for both the advisory council and the constituents it serves. However, it also highlights a possible gap in public discourse regarding detailed scrutiny of such amendments, raising questions about whether all stakeholders' voices are being adequately reflected in these legislative changes.