Ivanka Trump: Paid family leave is an investment in America's families -- It deserves bipartisan support
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
In September 2016, when then-Republican presidential primary candidate Donald J. Trump called for a national paid family leave plan, pundits called it “a striking departure from GOP orthodoxy. ” Indeed it was.
But over the past 21 months, we have witnessed conservatives building a majority in support of this important policy.
In conversations with members of the GOP, there is burgeoning agreement on the intrinsically conservative nature of a national paid family leave plan.
Social conservatives underscore paid leave as a way to forge more tightly bonded families and protect infants and parents at their most vulnerable.
If executed responsibly, paid family leave is targeted government action with the right incentives – designed to increase the independence, health and dignity of our citizens.
Fiscal hawks recognize the efficiency of increasing workforce attachment and minimizing government dependence.
And everyone shares the concern for our country’s plummeting fertility rates, now the lowest in history, and the effect that will have on our society and economy at large.
If executed responsibly, paid family leave is targeted government action with the right incentives – designed to increase the independence, health and dignity of our citizens.
Some 25 years ago, Congress passed, with bipartisan support, the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. The legislation granted eligible American workers 12 weeks of unpaid leave. Now we have a historic opportunity to build on this progress.
Without debating the value and merits (of which there are many) of paid leave legislation supported by members of the Republican and Democratic parties, we must recognize their failure to gain majority consensus within or across party lines. Hence, our focus must turn to policy ideas that can secure congressional approval.
Included in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is an important provision introduced by Senator Deb Fischer, R-Neb., to incentivize businesses nationwide to offer workers up to 12 weeks of paid family leave. This business credit of up to 25 percent is a foundational step in achieving a national plan.
But a tax credit alone will not suffice. Republicans are committed to developing a plan for working parents. In working with Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., – chairman of the Senate Finance Committee’s Subcommittee on Social Security, Pensions and Family Policy – we agreed on the urgent need for earnest bipartisan debate in order to address this issue.
Under Sen. Cassidy’s leadership and in coordination with the White House, his subcommittee will hold a hearing Wednesday on paid family leave, giving this critical issue real bipartisan momentum for the first time.
No doubt, members of Congress will have diverse opinions about how to structure the policy and how to pay for it. But rather than allowing differences to prevent progress, our lawmakers are coming together to find the best solution.
Republicans are at the table, with sincere interest and rolled-up sleeves, looking for smart policy solutions that will empower American working families.
Paid family leave enables parents to balance the competing demands of work and family, pursue their careers, and build strong and thriving families. It is an investment in the future of our workers, our families, and our country.
As our lawmakers arrive to the negotiating table, let us applaud their efforts, encourage them to reach across the aisle, and create smart and lasting policy that does right by all.
Ivanka Trump is Advisor to the president.
Tags
Who is online
103 visitors
“In conversations with members of the GOP, there is burgeoning agreement on the intrinsically conservative nature of a national paid family leave plan.
Social conservatives underscore paid leave as a way to forge more tightly bonded families and protect infants and parents at their most vulnerable.
Fiscal hawks recognize the efficiency of increasing workforce attachment and minimizing government dependence.
And everyone shares the concern for our country’s plummeting fertility rates, now the lowest in history, and the effect that will have on our society and economy at large.
If executed responsibly, paid family leave is targeted government action with the right incentives – designed to increase the independence, health and dignity of our citizens....
Included in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is an important provision introduced by Senator Deb Fischer, R-Neb., to incentivize businesses nationwide to offer workers up to 12 weeks of paid family leave. This business credit of up to 25 percent is a foundational step in achieving a national plan.
But a tax credit alone will not suffice. Republicans are committed to developing a plan for working parents.”
If the Heartland Institute is for it, there has to be a serious poison pill involved.
What would that bitter pill be?
Inquiring minds want to know.
1. Trump is not interested.
2. Neither is Ivanka.
3. A Trump family shell game without the shells or a table.
Link please. The article clearly states the opposite of what you say.
Ivanka is a feckless . . . . who does nothing for anyone except herself. Funny how she is exempt from the China tariffs. Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmm
Really? The Chinese wrote a trade law exempting Ivanka Trump from their tariffs?
X - why are you up so early? I thought we'd have another hour at least.
Deleted
The Office of the United States Trade Representative explained that the goods to be levied with tariffs were chosen based on what would disrupt the U.S. economy the least and have the least impact on consumers. Snopes, the fact checking website, pointed out that imposing tariffs would have a large impact on American consumers because 35% of all apparel imported in 2016 came from China. And 72% of shoes sold in the U.S. are from China, according to the South China Morning Post, citing the American Apparel and Footwear Association.
You know some will insist that it is only because of Ivanka. Silly people!
Apparently some people think that!
Weird, huh?
Not one shred of evidence to back that thinking up, but, hey, they don't let facts and reason stand in the way!
The focus is the 'the Trumps.' They are what they are------------and aren't.
That is the secular progressive way! Great 👍 post. 👏
The focus here should be on the paid family leave act being considered.
There is already a majority that support paid family leave but that would require the GOP to work with Democrats and they won't.
The GOP is the majority in both houses. It is up to the democrats to cooperate to pass a bill. The 25% tax credit from the recent tax bill is a good foundation upon which to build a market and family friendly plan without adding much to the deficit.
"Family friendly" and the far right wing don't coincide. with anybody. Scorched ground is all fanatics do.
Yet the House, which passes bills by majority vote, haven't even had hearings on this issue so this BS about GOP consensus is just that BS. NOT ONE GOP bill that has been filed has more than 20 cosponsors in the House. Conversely, there are a couple of Dem bills in the House that have over 100 cosponsors, one has 148.
Deflection.
How can a direct quote from my own seeded article be a deflection from the content of the seeded article?
Seems like someone either didn't read/understand your seeded article or your comment's reference to the seeded article but dove in anyway.
Oh, and that 25% tax credit mentioned in the article and by me above is already law so even if the senate filibusters a bill to prevent the accomplishment of a complete bill, we will at the least have that to take to the voters in November.
So, when the GOP produces a bill and the Dems filibuster it they will be the scorched earth extremists, right?
I didn't say it was 'off topic'. As a response to my comment, it's a deflection. It's like you thought you needed filler so you grabbed something totally irrelevant to my comment out of the seed.
You know that tax credit goes only to employers with over 50 employees right? It actually STARTS @ 12.5 5 and goes up .25 % for every percentage the employer pays OVER 50% of original wages. Most employers that fit the criteria pay at most 75% of wages for FMLA. So that's a whole 18.70%.
OH and there are some very specific limitations, many of them based on the government mandating the content of 'company policy' [which I thought y'all were against].
The ACTUAL number of workers that provision covers is pretty fucking small. But hey, when you find a tiny little peg to hang your hat on, you gotta go with it.
In short, it can hardly be considered a 'foundational step' in universal PAID family leave legislation.
There is nothing more relevant to the issue than the part of it that is already law and hopefully will be expanded as part of any final bill.
It’s something we did. It’s an accomplishment through the tax bill just like ending the Obamacare mandate and getting gas and oil development in ANWR. The Dems can compromise with the majority and cooperate on a bill or the majority could put it in the budget under a reconciliation and have it expire the same time the tax cuts do and then link them to a bill to make both permanent or neither.
When you say 'compromise' you actually mean capitulate. Compromise connotes give and take.
It does but it also means that the majority side is going to get more of what it wants than the minority side does.
Yet the GOP does NOT negotiate with the Dems so 'compromise' is impossible.
Clearly false.
Actually HA, the Congressional record proves pretty fucking clear that no hearings have been held on the vast majority of the legislation that has been passed in this session.
Secondly, there have been NO bipartisan meetings on the vast majority of legislation and NO Amendments are allowed to legislation written by the GOP. Unless of course you count the couple of meetings they had with Trump where he changed his mind from one sentence to the next.
Do you KNOW why John McCain voted against Trumpcare? Do you care?
Well I'll tell you anyway, because he told the GOP leadership from the beginning that he wanted the bill to go through the Senate under REGULAR ORDER. Meetings, hearings, testimony, committee mark ups, Amendments and floor debate. That's ALL he asked for. That thumb's down PROVES that didn't happen...
Hillary Clinton supports paid family leave. There - that ought to turn every RWNJ against it.
Trump supports it. There, that ought to turn every liberal against it. Ivanka Trump wrote the seeded article.
Bwahaha, the complicit one, who really doesn't care about families, unless their name is Trump or Kushner.
How about this! We wait til republicans actually come up with something they can pass, we can revisit. Until then, don't expect support just because. No substance, much like de-nuking NK. Nothing but empty bullshit words they can't bring to fruition. If they want to pass a good bill they can take democrat input for bipartisan support. Or they can fail.
Or we can put our plan into the appropriate budget resolution for the next fiscal year and pass a basic bill with only our votes under reconciliation like we did the Medicare part D senior Rx and Medicare advantage and health savings accounts along with it to get GOP support.
If you had taken the time to actually read the seeded article or even the headline, you would have known that she was seeking a bill with bi partisan support. Do that before you comment next time.
She isn't 'doing' anything, the GOP has to do it. Who gives a crap what she thinks? She is dust in the wind, her own dad doesn't listen to her. Besides , she has some big problems she must be trying to escape. When gop puts up, come back to me.
Why did you change the title of the article from the seed?
it appears on Fox as
Go back and read the first paragraph of the article and the Washington Post linked article and tell me again that her dad didn’t listen to her.
I don’t need to include the authors name in the title.
Donald Trump would support abortion in front of the right crowd.
He is very pro choice.
You need to use the exact title that the article has. And if a mod shows you in black and white from the CoC why, you are supposed to correct.
Careful Dean, half of Trump’s evangelical base hasn’t seen that video, and the other half has been trying like crazy to pretend they never heard it.
Well they didn’t seed it that way at Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/8ybmzd/paid_family_leave_is_an_investment_in_americas/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=comment_list https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/8ybmzd/paid_family_leave_is_an_investment_in_americas/
Reddit's a blog - but here's the link they used
It’s where some of the newsviners who didn’t come here went when it closed.
It’s interesting that I seed a positive article about a bi partisan objective democrats have always wanted and now republicans are beginning to consider and the content here is no different than if I’d made an all liberals are evil seed.
Paid Family Leave is good and if you never used any then you should get to retire early
I used it for a week when I adopted my son. Here they add a small amount to the unemployment insurance cost and when used the benefit is the the same weekly rate as unemployment insurance is, not full pay.
I'm all for it. Anxiously await the GOP bill and CBO score. Not holding my breath.
Based on the policies of this Administration families should start preparing their kids for a latchkey life.
deleted
"And everyone shares the concern for our country’s plummeting fertility rates, now the lowest in history, and the effect that will have on our society and economy at large."
No I'm not concerned with plummeting fertility rates. I believe we should be working at reducing our population as robotics is reducing the need for manual work. Reducing our population will solve many of our problems and make for a nicer environment to live and work in. I'm sick of traffic jams and destroying our land by turning nature into strip malls and parking lots as a result of our population explosion. The population in this country has almost doubled in the last fifty years and it has not been good for the country. Expanding our population will result in millions of low income people looking for government to take care of them from cradle to grave.
Stunning.... I completely agree with EVERYTHING you just posted.
I disagree. Responsible population growth from live births and desired legal immigrants is a good thing. The amount of abortions has reduced the numbers of domestically born people who would have become adults between 1991 and now who would be working and ending the shortfall in the Medicare and social security for future retirees. Abortion has severely damaged those programs.