The Future of the Family Act

by Anna Steffeney

CEO
LeaveLogic

by Kirsten Gillibrand, JD

U.S. Senator
D-N.Y.

Feb. 5, 2017 marked the 24^th anniversary of the groundbreaking federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Shortly thereafter, the Family Act, legislation to create a self-sustaining family insurance program for all American workers, was reintroduced to Congress by Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn). During a recent group interview with Sen. Gillibrand, she discussed the future of the Family Act. The statements of Senator Gillibrand in advocating for legislation do not necessarily reflect the opinion of DMEC or its members.

Question: What is the value of a federal program as opposed to state-run programs?

Sen. Gillibrand: Not all states have a large enough population to afford a state-run paid leave plan. The smaller states that support a paid leave bill, North Dakota for example, would never have a risk pool large enough, like California and New York, to afford a state-wide plan. They need a national plan where the risk pool is the whole country so that the buy-in for this insurance is low. Currently, the buy-in to have a paid leave plan for up to three months off at 66% pay is $2.00 a week per employee. Employers and employees will contribute to the fund which would be used to pay the employee’s salary while on leave. This approach makes a paid leave possible for small businesses that otherwise couldn’t afford it.

Question: What is the opposition to the Family Act?

Sen. Gillibrand: The primary opposition is against any additional tax. However, the Family Act is built exactly like the Social Security Act — an earned benefit, an investment in yourself to be used when you need it. Other groups are concerned about deviating potential funds that could otherwise be invested in the Social Security fund. This argument does not take into consideration the fact that the constituency benefiting from Social Security, the Baby Boomers, will also benefit from the Family Act through the funds supporting family members to care for them. Most people are part of families, and they want to be there for their family member when they need it.

Question: What is the likelihood of the bill passing? 

Sen. Gillibrand: When we started this effort three years ago, we wanted to get the conversation onto the presidential slate. We did. Two Republican candidates proposed a paid leave plan, both President Trump and Marco Rubio. While President Trump’s plan only covers birth mothers, he has discussed openly the need for a national paid leave policy. My position is that any national policy must be gender-neutral. A women-only policy continues to marginalize women as the only caregivers in the company. Paid leave should be about family, not about women.

Among the American public, 70% believe paid leave is smart and makes good business sense.¹ We are trying to create a bipartisan movement, and we think the best way to make that happen is to continue the momentum toward a national narrative and call to action for federal legislation.

References

1. Horowitz JM, K Parker, N Graf. Americans Widely Support Paid Family and Medical Leave, but Differ Over Specific Policies. Pew Research Center. March 2017.