According to The Columbus Dispatch, the sudden burst of unemployment claims with the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services has brought the system to its knees. Calls are going unanswered, and worse, the online claim system that the state encourages claimants to use has been brought down by the onslaught.

A spokesman for the department told a CD reporter that in the last month daily call loads have jumped from 7,500 to 80,000. One claimant says she was on hold for 5 1/2 hours on Monday and another 3 hours yesterday before finally getting through. While the state is busily hiring temporary workers to handle the overload (isn't that ironic? I bet they didn't have to look far to find willing applicants), there is no guarantee that the unemployed will receive their money on time. Ohio, like many other states, will soon exhaust its unemployment fund and be forced to turn to the feds for a loan to continue paying benefits.

Ohio is not alone in fund shortfalls. Those of Missouri, Indiana, and New Jersey, among others, are also in dire need of replenishment, and the states are looking to the new Obama adminstration for a handout, not a hand.

Public funds are in short supply, but so far the political discussion seems bipolar; either we kill programs to trim expenses or fund them as planned. What ever happened to the idea of putting off expenditures until we can get back on our feet?

In my home town, the city is about to spend half a million dollars to study the possible negative consequences of removing a lowhead dam from a river near The Ohio State University campus. How about putting off the $1.8 million dam removal and the study for two years? The dam has been there for the better part of a hundred years already, so a little delay can't make that much difference.

The intersection of two interstates downtown is about to undergo a $100 million plus reworking. Sure, our traffic gets snarled sometimes, but if we need money to keep our social service programs funded, why can't we hold off on this plan a couple of years more?

Any family facing a drop in income will look to reduce and postpone, and the fact that our state and federal governments aren't considering the same tells me that they still haven't quite got the message. If they can't bring themselves to pull the pork off the table, at least postpone it and route those dollars to essential services. How can they allow unemployment benefit funds to run dry while we spend money to

• Build the Hunting & Fishing Museum of Pennsylvania ($100,000)
• Develop a walking tour of Boydton, Virginia ($100,000)
• Build the National Teacher's Hall of Fame in Emporia, Kansas ($150,000)
• Improve bike trails in Highland, Indiana ($400,000)
• Fund the Burpee Museum in Rockford, Illinois ($150,000)
• Beaver management in North Carolina ($297,000)
• Study of the Light Brown Apple Moth ($1,000,000)

If you think $100,000 is inconsequential, tell that to the dozens of families for whom it represents rent money and food.

I'm not claiming that any or all of these projects are unworthy, but I'm asking, do they need to be done now? Are they more important than keeping the unemployed housed and fed during the current crash?

I don't think so.

That's it, I've got to give up the sunny life in California and move to Massachusetts, where life for the unemployed must be like living the high life.

In California, where I live and worked my entire life until being laid off in June, the unemployment rate is 7.7%. compared to the national average of 6.1%. I'm getting the maximum amount from the state in unemployment benefits, $450 a week, but it turns out I could be making double that if I lived and had worked in Massachusetts. I'm now putting my Oakland A's caps away and am on the hunt for a Red Sox hat.

"The Bay State," while much smaller geographically than "The Golden State," pays up to $900 per week, making it the highest paying state in the United States for unemployment benefits. Massachusetts has a 5.3% unemployment rate, which you'd think would be higher if employees knew how much they could collect if their companies are looking for people to go on the chopping block. Mississippi has the lowest payout, up to $210 a week, but has a 7.8% unemployment rate that is barely higher than California's. Looks like the jobless in Mississippi are getting the short end of the stick.