I worked for a state agency that make workforce services software for several states. Not unemployment, but the other programs to help people find jobs and/or get retrained.
The management overwhelmingly wanted to find ways to help people and spend the money (that's how they get bigger grants, after all, by spending all of the last one and "coming up short"). The majority of the staff wanted to help people and spend the state's money as well.
But the rules are arcane and the agencies are perpetually understaffed and the software systems are terrible (federal programs often allow too small of a fraction of the allocated money to be spent on administration). So it's still a hell of a thing to get the money spent helping people, even if everybody's heart is in the right place.
The problems are myriad, but I'd say the biggest issue is state legislators that are unwilling to invest in modernization in "good times" when the benefits programs aren't over-taxed, and then wonder why the systems (both technical and people) can't scale when society needs the help.
Exactly, and this is by design. Here is how it was designed to not work in Florida:
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/04/florida-unemployment...
But the general outline is the same most everywhere.
> management overwhelmingly wanted to find ways to help
They don't matter, they don't set the rules or the budget.
This is not accidental.
The problem is that systems are deliberately designed to be difficult to navigate in order to discourage use.
It isn't money. It is a belief that recipients are not deserving, and so should be made to "pay" for it or denied altogether.