Economy & Business

The Corner

Rubio Takes Up Conservative Paid-Leave Plan

Last month, Carrie Lukas of the Independent Women’s Forum wrote in this space about a new idea for providing paid family leave:

The challenge has always been how to create a program that doesn’t discourage employers from providing their own leave benefits, require new taxes (which would lower people’s take home pay), or reduce job opportunities. These are all problems with the typical approach to the issue, which is to create a new entitlement program or mandate on employers.

Kristin Shapiro has developed an innovative alternative approach: Reform the Social Security program so that people have the option of taking benefits for qualifying time off from work in exchange for delaying their retirement benefits to compensate for the benefits they receive while working.

It almost goes without saying that this is a brilliant idea. It provides paid leave to everyone who needs it while addressing the good reasons conservatives have for being skeptical of such programs.

Now Marco Rubio and Ivanka Trump are working to bring it to life. Reports Politico:

Capitalizing on President Donald Trump’s endorsement of the idea in his State of the Union address, Rubio is trying to marshal Republicans behind a plan that would neither impose a mandate on employers nor raise taxes to pay for it — two hurdles that have long halted the GOP from embracing paid family leave.

. . .

Rubio has barely started drafting a paid leave bill, much less a broader legislative strategy. But he envisions an idea that has recently gained traction in conservative circles: allowing people to draw Social Security benefits when they want to take time off for a new baby or other family-related matters, and then delay their checks when they hit retirement age.

The question is whether Democrats will get on board.

As you may remember, during the tax-reform fight, Senate Democrats shot down an amendment from Rubio and Mike Lee that would have given more of the bill’s benefits to low-income working parents and less of the benefits to corporations — the kind of policy that has traditionally needed support from both pro-family conservatives and anti-poverty liberals to pass. The Left’s resistance in this case was purely a political move, notwithstanding some Democrats’ preposterous claims to have voted against the amendment because it didn’t go far enough. One does not turn down a little of a good thing because a lot would be better . . . but one might turn down a good thing to keep the other side from getting credit for it.

It’s easy to imagine a repeat performance with paid leave. ThinkProgress is already on the case with a piece saying the idea is “actually just cutting Social Security,” an odd way to describe a system in which people can choose to receive some of their Social Security benefits early.

Most Popular

U.S.

The Gun-Control Debate Could Break America

Last night, the nation witnessed what looked a lot like an extended version of the famous “two minutes hate” from George Orwell’s novel 1984. During a CNN town hall on gun control, a furious crowd of Americans jeered at two conservatives, Marco Rubio and Dana Loesch, who stood in defense of the Second ... Read More
Film & TV

Why We Can’t Have Wakanda

SPOILERS AHEAD Black Panther is a really good movie that lives up to the hype in just about every way. Surely someone at Marvel Studios had an early doubt, reading the script and thinking: “Wait, we’re going to have hundreds of African warriors in brightly colored tribal garb, using ancient weapons, ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Science & Tech

Set NASA Free

The Trump administration has proposed shifting the International Space Station from a NASA-exclusive research facility to a semi-public, semi-private one. Its plan would nix all government funding for the ISS by 2025 and award at least $150 million per year to NASA to help with the transition. This would be a ... Read More