Dueling bills introduced on paid family leave law

OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - Six years ago, Washington state lawmakers approved a program giving parents five weeks paid time off to be with a new child.
But the question of how to pay for the program was never answered, and now some lawmakers are looking to remove it from the books, while the senator who introduced the bill is looking to expand the program. Its start already has been delayed until 2015.
The bill, passed with much fanfare in 2007, was supposed to start paying benefits of up to $250 a week starting in October 2009. But without an agreed-upon funding source, the Legislature has postponed its implementation twice.
"It may have seemed like a good idea, but we don't have the money to do it," said Sen. John Braun, R-Centralia, who is sponsoring the measure to repeal the law. "We need to face the reality and deal with it."
Sen. Karen Keiser, a Democrat from Kent who sponsored the initial bill, decried any effort to repeal the law.
"It's an appalling move at a time when middleclass families are having a hard time making things work," she said. "We're getting steady again in our economy. It's time to look forward."
Keiser on Thursday introduced her own bill to expand the underlying measure to include caring for a family member or an employee's own disability. Her bill would pay two-thirds of a worker's pay a week, up to $1,000 a week, and would expand the time allowed from five weeks to 12 weeks. The program would be paid for with a payroll tax on both employees and employers starting in 2014.
Keiser said she based her new measure on laws in California and New Jersey.
"I am not backing off and not going to give up this endeavor that working families have some economic security if they have a family crisis, a new baby or a disability," she said. "Working families deserve that."
Braun's bill has 10 co-sponsors, including two Democrats who have joined with Republicans to form a new coalition this legislative session. The measure has its first public hearing Monday. Braun called Keiser's counter-bill one of "good intentions, but good intentions aren't always affordable."
"We already have a program on the books that we can't fund," he said. "Expanding it seems contrary to public interests."
A repeal of the state paid-leave law would have no impact on federal leave laws. Under federal law, paid leave is not required, but businesses with 50 or more employees must give workers up to 12 weeks of medical leave per year for themselves or to take care of a new child or ailing relative.
The state law requires the paid leave be taken concurrently with the federal leave.
___
The measure to repeal paid family leave is Senate Bill 5159. The measure to expand it is Senate Bill 5292.
But the question of how to pay for the program was never answered, and now some lawmakers are looking to remove it from the books, while the senator who introduced the bill is looking to expand the program. Its start already has been delayed until 2015.
The bill, passed with much fanfare in 2007, was supposed to start paying benefits of up to $250 a week starting in October 2009. But without an agreed-upon funding source, the Legislature has postponed its implementation twice.
"It may have seemed like a good idea, but we don't have the money to do it," said Sen. John Braun, R-Centralia, who is sponsoring the measure to repeal the law. "We need to face the reality and deal with it."
Sen. Karen Keiser, a Democrat from Kent who sponsored the initial bill, decried any effort to repeal the law.
"It's an appalling move at a time when middleclass families are having a hard time making things work," she said. "We're getting steady again in our economy. It's time to look forward."
Keiser on Thursday introduced her own bill to expand the underlying measure to include caring for a family member or an employee's own disability. Her bill would pay two-thirds of a worker's pay a week, up to $1,000 a week, and would expand the time allowed from five weeks to 12 weeks. The program would be paid for with a payroll tax on both employees and employers starting in 2014.
Keiser said she based her new measure on laws in California and New Jersey.
"I am not backing off and not going to give up this endeavor that working families have some economic security if they have a family crisis, a new baby or a disability," she said. "Working families deserve that."
Braun's bill has 10 co-sponsors, including two Democrats who have joined with Republicans to form a new coalition this legislative session. The measure has its first public hearing Monday. Braun called Keiser's counter-bill one of "good intentions, but good intentions aren't always affordable."
"We already have a program on the books that we can't fund," he said. "Expanding it seems contrary to public interests."
A repeal of the state paid-leave law would have no impact on federal leave laws. Under federal law, paid leave is not required, but businesses with 50 or more employees must give workers up to 12 weeks of medical leave per year for themselves or to take care of a new child or ailing relative.
The state law requires the paid leave be taken concurrently with the federal leave.
___
The measure to repeal paid family leave is Senate Bill 5159. The measure to expand it is Senate Bill 5292.
If you cant afford to have a child then DONT. The FMLA laws are to the point where you can miss more days than the days you work. There are so many reasons to take off work and be covered by FMLA and now we are going to think about paying people to be off work. this is crazy!!! As hard as it is to find work, it is crazy to allow all these people FMLA benifits to take time off work. Everyone knows how this would be funded. You and I will have to pay for the people that figure out how to get FMLA benifits. You and I will not only have to pay for some one to be off work we are going to have to do their work when they are gone. There will be no incentive to return to work as long as they are getting paid. Plus I would guess it will not only cover the mother but it will cover the father also. Just like today except today they dont get paid. Then it will move to all the other types of FMLA people recieve benifits for. Â
If you get pregnant you have 9 months to save and plan on how much time off you want. Why does anyone else have to pay you for your vacation? And yes I am directing this MORE to the men than the women. Get off your lazy back side and be the husband/father you need to be!!
Oh, and I have a 3 month old. I am still home. I chose to take a leave of absence for 1 year. They are holding a position for me. I am lucky that my husband makes enough to support our family while I am not working. Daycare would be more expensive, but I would prefer to stay at home with my little one during these precious months.
I think if a pregnancy is planned, it would be neat to have the option of taking however much out of one's own paycheck, and put into a fund for themselves. That way they are paying for it themselves, but a little bit adds up over time. I do not believe everyone should be taxed so one person can stay home.
Hey 33rd district, please take note of what your Senator is doing and vote her out next time around. If she doesn't have the common sense to stop pushing for a program that cannot be funded, she doesn't deserve her seat.
This is just another example of why we have so many entitlement programs. I think this tax would be just totally unreasonable. If these people want to have this available then let them volunteer to pay into a fund out of their own pocket. The taxpaying public is already paying for to many entitlement programs that should be individual responsibility to take care of.
Senator Keiser presents this bill as though the "State" would be paying this. Sorry, thats not going to happen.
Â
The state will take this on just like the L&I system and it will be yet another tax on small business that is collected by the state and then redistributed to the workers at a rate of .25 on the dollar. Here's an idea - If you want disability insurance... buy it!  If you want money to live off of while you have a kid... save it!  If you have a tragedy in your family... work with your employer to find a way to make things as workable as possible!
Â
If you want a slush-fund to help you pick up the pieces from things, it is YOUR responsibility to save, plan and make chioces in life that allow that to happen.Â
Â
Our state is currently unable to fund constitutionally mandated public education - I think it is far fetched to be proposing that we pay for personal vacations.
 @nlholdem "Our state is currently unable to fund constitutionally mandated public education - I think it is far fetched to be proposing that we pay for personal vacations"
Yes but a lot of them will be teachers!
I guess I am having a hard time figuring how Sen Keiser thinks that hitting all the folks not having babies with a payroll tax so that those folks that are having babies can have a paycheck while they take 12 weeks off is even remotely feasible.
The government should not be subsidizing someone staying home because they had a kid. Most companies I have worked for offer short term disability that you can get if you choose that would cover it through an independant company. I'm sure this is also available to the general public for a small monthly fee.
This comment has been deleted
 @TruthinAdverts Its not a companies problem to pay people when they get sick. Give them the time off, sure, but no reason a company should be forced to pay people to get sick.
This comment has been deleted
 @Blindman  @TruthinAdverts Please, PLEASE define what the h[// is "unregulated socialism."
Â
I hope you never get banned by the KOMO God.
 @TruthinAdverts  @Blindman I have no problem if companies want to voluntarily pay people not to work, but having the government enforce a rule like this is just wrong. If people don't like their job conditions or wages then either leave or start unionizing. I have no problems with unions helping people get better benefits. But more and more this country only seems to stand for greed.
 @TruthinAdverts  @Blindman I'm not a capitalist. Unregulated capitalism is just as dangerous to a free society as unregulated socialism is. I just believe to be paid by an employer you need to do an honest days work. If you're sick at home you're not doing an  honest days work. Its the same with holidays. If you're not making a profit for the company why should you be paid.
 @TruthinAdverts  Sorry I'm as libtard as the next commie, but it's pretty silly for the state to pay people to have kids. It is perfectly reasonable to protect that person's job and allow them maternity/paternity leave, but it's something else to take money from everyone else and just fork it over to someone else because they want to spend time with a newborn. Frankly, that is discrimination against people who work and do not have kids.Â
I have an 8 year old and it is no ones responsbility to pay for him but me!!!
When I chose to have children, I knew I would not be working for three months. I didn't expect the taxpayers to foot the bill for my time off (maternity leave). Today people feel entitled to have others pay for their decisions.Â
Time off without pay, and a guarantee that you have your job when you return from maternity (or paternity) leave is enough.
Â
Stop with the crazy entitlement legislation, and get real folks!
 @Gnirk And yet we allow people to have tax deductions just for having more kids. The government should not be promoting moire child births.
 @Blindman  @Gnirk It's not the tax deductions. It's the tax CREDITS. See Earned-Income Tax Credit. This one really chaps my hide.
 @Gnirk "Time off without pay, and a guarantee that you have your job when you return from maternity (or paternity) leave is enough."
Â
Exactly. Well said.Â
 @lakeview 'guarantee job when they return' don't sit well with me...if i'm employer and you choose to get knocked up fine..whatever...but if you were 'marginal' or an 'average' employee and while you're out someone walks in that seems like they'd be a helluva lot better, i can't hire them because i have an obligation to hold position for you? i feel if you wanna take time off to be a parent, good for you and i'd say call me when you're ready to come back and we'll see where we're at...
And why is the State going to pay for this?? If you want to have a child,great, but If you chose to have a child make sure you financially able to take the 5 weeks off. I see no reason that because someone made a choice to have a child that the state should pay for them to sit at home with that child.  That's the Problem with everyone anymore, no one has any sense of financial responsibility when it comes to having children and they want a hand out any way they can get it. I say throw it out and let the people having children pay their own way.  Sounds more like a silver spoon bill to me.
If they were able to use the L&I slush fund that all workers have deducted from their paychecks each week, it might work. I'm against it though because it just leads to more inflation. The same way with all the ridiculous paid holidays, none of them should be paid holidays.
 @Blindman ridiculous paid holidays? You mean Xmas, Thanksgiving, new years and 4th of July? those ridiculous holidays?
 @Jalharad  @Blindman Absolutely To begin with religious holidays are unconstitutional, separation of church and state, 1st Amendment. Labor day would probably be a good one to keep. Columbus day certainly needs to be got rid of. 4th of July? Hardly anyone  knows why we observe it any more.
"It's an appalling move at a time when middle class families are having a hard time making things work," she said.
Â
Uh, maybe then it's not the time to decide to have a kid you can't afford?
 @Getov Mylon EXACTLY !!  Why should the State, or I,  be paying for any of this??????
 @Seahawker Of course, they also forget the unintended consequences factor;
Â
The recently impregnated will pull an Okie, load up the jitney and herd to the land of milk and honey. And paid maternity leave after a few desultory months working the drive-thru.
 @Getov Mylon Maybe they should have saved their money before having a child. Why is it people always think they have freedom of choice ? But paying for your choice is the taxpayers.Â
 @Getov Mylon Or take more money out of the paychecks of everyone through another payroll tax.Â
 @lakeview Time for a tattoo and piercing tax. I'm on board. Seems they can afford those, but buying diapers for the lil' (off-spring) is too much.
"Keiser said she based her new measure on laws in California and New Jersey."
Â
Now we know why California is bankrupt.....
 @PCSNUPR Actually, they are predicting a budget surplus this year in California of about 1 billion.Â
 @lakeview  @PCSNUPR That all depends on revenue projection accuracy. Using numbers from the Nov. 2012 election of raising taxes on incomes over $250,000. How many of them are going to leave ,or already have ? I read an article this morning that one persons first 2013 paycheck was 46% of gross after deductions for state and federal }.  How is that fair ?Â
 @lakeview  @PCSNUPR Not gonna happen. The expected revenue from tax increases always falls short, yet they will have budgeted as if it won't.  A dozen Top Pot Donuts to you if they have a surplus on December 31!
 @lakeview OK, I'll split the donuts.
 @lakeview You know, those teachers unions could use a little love. Dang. California is one State that The Great Sky God smiled on... but then got distracted.Â
 @Getov Mylon Hey I grew up there. I know how it works. Of course they will run a deficit. Jerry Brown is already salivating at what to do with their projected surplus. It will be spent in other words.Â
Great idea in theory, in reality the money has to come from some where. Â And who should pay for it? Â I'm sorry but your going to have to cut this one till our government can cut spending and balance it's books and is flush with cash that it doesn't know what to do with it.
It will never pass because it's a tax increase. And tax increases require a supermajority in the legislature OR a public vote.Â
@lakeview GOOD! If people want to have kids, they should plan for it accordingly. Taxpayers and businesses should not have to fund their vacations. Just what we need right now, more money coming out of our paycheck. Ugh.