New paid parental leave proposal would tap Social Security benefits
The Economic Security for New Parents Act was introduced by Sen. Marco Rubio this week, to mixed reviews.
Soon, there will be as many paid leave proposals as there are patchwork regulations. A new paid parental leave bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate Thursday by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), to mixed reviews.
The Economic Security for New Parents Act, if enacted, would create an option for new parents to pull forward a portion of their Social Security benefits to use for paid parental leave after the birth or adoption of a child, according to Rubio’s press release announcing the bill.
Related: Lessons from Estée Lauder’s parental leave settlement
“We live in a time…where America is deeply divided and fighting over just about any issue you can imagine,” Rubio says. “I do believe there is at least one issue on which we all agree, even though we may not agree on the best way to do it…that is we need to do everything we can to help our children.”
The bill allows parents to use the benefit to take at least two months of parental leave, which is enough to finance two months of leave at up to 70 percent of wages for nearly all parents making below median family income. Rubio contends that many parents, especially those with low incomes, will be able to finance three months of leave or longer with the amount of the benefit, which is transferable between households.
The Independent Women’s Forum applauds the release of Rubio’s new bill.
“We’re thrilled Senator Rubio stepped up to address the issue of paid leave in a fiscally responsible way,” the advocacy group’s president Carrie Lukas states. “Unlike the FAMILY Act” introduced by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), “the Economic Security for New Parents Act won’t raise taxes, grow government, or hurt workers’ economic opportunities. But it will help workers and taxpayers.”
However, Shilpa Phadke, vice president of the Women’s Initiative at the Center for American Progress, says Rubio’s proposal was a “sham parental leave-only proposal” saying it was “out of touch with the needs of working families,” according to The Hill, which writes that Gillibrand’s bill would create a paid family leave program that’s paid for through a “slight” payroll-tax increase.
Rubio countered criticism that the bill would force people to choose between their children and their retirement security, The Hill writes.
“It doesn’t do anything to undermine your retirement,” Rubio says. “It keeps the same retirement, it just allows you to use a portion of it at a different stage in your life when you might need it more.”
Rubio’s is also trying to assuage concerns on the right that a paid-family leave proposal that takes the form of early Social Security benefits would hasten the insolvency of the Social Security trust funds, since most people that would collect the benefit in the near term won’t retire until after the trust funds’ expected exhaustion date, according to The Hill.
The office told the publication that the bill addresses this issue by having Treasury provide the Social Security program with a loan that would be paid back later with the savings realized once paid-leave recipients retire.
The Society for Human Resource Management is also weighing in: SHRM “appreciates Sen. Rubio’s focus on this issue, as it is important to have more ideas on the table to address paid family leave, especially those that do not impose a mandate on employers,” says Lisa Horn, SHRM’s vice president for congressional affairs. “This is a new approach, and we look forward to reviewing the legislation to better understand the paid-leave benefit, how it may impact an employee’s retirement security, and how this proposal interacts with other state and federal laws.”