As Congress returns from its July 4 recess, the ongoing debate over whether to extend unemployment benefits to jobless workers returns as well. When the Senate left for its holiday vacation, it also allowed the unemployment benefits of millions across the country to expire.

Needing 60 votes for passage, a vote to extend benefits failed by only one Senator before its recess. The failure to extend benefits left thousands of jobless workers in Iowa without weekly payments.

So, should the Senate extend unemployment benefits? Yes, and the senators should do so immediately. But a combination of Senate Republicans and Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., have been successful thus far in blocking extension.

There are a few arguments made by those who oppose extending benefits. There are those who oppose any benefit extension that adds to the deficit. This is the primary argument for opposition put forward by Congressional Republicans. Republicans want Democrats to use unspent money from the stimulus to offset the costs. It’s argued that any measure that adds to the deficit now places an intolerable burden on future generations. And that the level of deficit and debt has reached a near apocalyptic point. With the exception of Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Senate Republicans don’t seem to be budging from this view.

Second, there is the argument made that extending benefits gives the jobless an incentive to stay unemployed. That as long as the unemployed can count on weekly checks, they won’t search for a job and may even decline work. Some of the unemployed might even need to be drug tested as Senator Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., suggested.

Last, there’s an argument made on rigid ideological grounds. Existing mostly of conservative intelligentsia at libertarian and right-wing think tanks, those who hold this view don’t believe in the efficacy of fiscal spending. Or have a very narrow and limited sense of what type of fiscal spending is appropriate.

Democrats counter that the average bout of unemployment exceeds six months, while normal benefits only last 26 weeks. With the unemployment rate just below 10 percent and one job available for every five jobless workers, Congress must act to extend benefits. Furthermore, Congress has historically always extended benefits without concerns about adding to the deficit in times of abnormally high unemployment. In Republican and Democratic administrations, Congress has extended benefits for the long-term unemployed.

The evidence supports extending benefits — even if it adds to the deficit. After all, extending unemployment benefits now will only add a fraction of 1 percent to the debt. The oft cited economist Mark Zandi (and former adviser to John McCain) recently urged the Senate to extend benefits because it’s a cost-effective step to take to improve the economy. Every dollar spent by the federal government on unemployment generates more than $1 in economic activity.

Congressional bickering has left millions of Americans without any other recourse to pay for basic necessities. Are those who continue to oppose extending unemployment benefits misanthropes — lacking empathy for those who are jobless at no fault of their own? I hope not. But it is becoming increasingly difficult not to think so. This is not a debate made in the abstract. Failure to extend benefits could cause the economy to plunge further, and it could result in troubling psychological aspects. There’s evidence of an increase in calls to the National Suicide Hotline that are definitely related to economic recession and could be related to those who are long-term unemployed.

At the top of the Senate’s to-do list should be passing the unemployment extension bill that has already passed in the House. Further delay will cause more harm to the jobless and the economy.