...Republicans are introducing a new paid family leave proposal today. Here are the details

[DonViejo]

emphasis carried forward from the original print copy -- Don

The Health 202: Republicans are introducing a new paid family leave proposal today. Here are the details

By Paige Winfield Cunningham
March 27 at 8:01 AM

Republicans in Congress are starting to bring paid family leave proposals to the table, after years of resisting the idea. Several of them, led by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.), will introduce a bill today providing mothers and fathers with pay while caring for a new baby by allowing them to draw from future Social Security benefits.

The measure – which Rubio first introduced last August and has since slightly modified – avoids creating a new government benefit by drawing on existing retirement funds, stopping far short of a more generous but expensive parental leave bill Democrats are backing.

But it signals a major shift for Republicans, who are starting to acknowledge the growing role women are playing in the country’s economy. Their recent embrace of the issue also shows the influence of President Trump and his daughter Ivanka, who have indicated paid family leave is an issue they want to see Republicans solve rather than spurn.

"Our economic policies have left young, working families behind at a time when our marriage and childbirth rates are falling," Rubio said in a statement provided to Health 202. "It is time to realign our economic policies in support of American families, which is why I am proud to re-introduce the New Parents Act."

Rubio and Wagner's bill would allow parents of a newborn biological or adopted child to pull forward one month, two months or three months of their Social Security benefits in order to finance their time off of work. A summary of the bill provided to Health 202 says nearly all parents earning less than the $60,000 median family income would receive leave pay equal to about two-thirds of their wages.

more
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-health-202/2019/03/27/the-health-202-republicans-are-introducing-a-new-paid-family-leave-proposal-today-here-are-the-details/5c9a6ab71b326b0f7f38f271/

[ginnyinWI]

1. And what are they going to live on when they reach Social Security age?

I guess they'll have to beef up their savings by then.

[rownesheck]

2. With a combined

income of only $60000, savings are gonna be hard to come by. Robbing the future to pay for the present. How about they quit subsidizing oil and start subsidizing families?

[Ohiogal]

4. Well said.

The New York Times had a piece recently about postpartum depression, which studies show occurs much more frequently in countries with huge income inequality. They delved into the utter lack of support for working families in our country. It’s truly abysmal here compared to the rest of the modern world. It’s a wonder couples are even having children at all in the United States.

[mercuryblues]

9. From what I read

they will have to work longer to replace the money, before they can retire.

http://fortune.com/2018/06/15/ivanka-trump-marco-rubio-paid-leave-family-act/


If one of these working parents did take advantage of the Ivanka-Rubio plan with one 12-week leave, according to one analysis, they would have to push back retirement by as much as 25 weeks. If they did the same for a second child, they couldn’t retire until they were almost 68. The irony is that people with these types of jobs often retire at 62 due to the physical nature of these jobs. As much as we need truly supportive family leave policies, the last thing we need is to have them come at the expense of future well-being in retirement.

[Hela]

3. A woman's value to a Republican

I think this really reflects the idea that to most of today's "Republicans," a woman's greatest or even only value is in her role as a wife and mother. If you stay home with your child longer, what are the odds you won't return to work at all? And who cares if you get sick when you're old. You should just die and "decrease the surplus population" and not be a burden to society. You won't have healthcare and you won't have social security. Get diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and just die at 60-something already.

[Johnny2X2X]

5. Robbing from Social Security!

This bill would be a disaster and is a veiled attempt to weaken social security. Either come up with more money for this or make employers pay it as a benefit, but robbing social security would be bad for working people.

Each of us has a retirement account in social security, taking money from it early has a massive negative effect. Every dollar taken now would be 2 or more not available in 25 years when they retire.

[Polly Hennessey]

6. Well, one more stupid idea

from Rubio. Let’s rob the future to pay the present. Oh, wait, the repugs already do that now and again.

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

7. Next up...

The new and improved Social Security credit card. Low interest rate of only 47% APR. “Borrow from your future, worry about debt when it’s in your past”.

For reading small print at bottom, set your microscope at highest optimum setting.

[Solly Mack]

8. That doesn't support families as families deal with both children and aging parents.

Quality of life at the beginning or on the back end...but not both...not in a republican America.

[C_U_L8R]

10. That's one way to kill social security.

Republicans are determined to destroy our savings...
with incentives for citizens to do themselves in.
Awful.

[safeinOhio]

11. Great idea, now lets pay for those tax breaks for the rich by

by charging all future capital gains to regular income rates.

Gee this is easy.