Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

No simple solution for paid leave issue

No simple solution for paid leave issue
Getty Images

Adkins is graduate student journalist for Medill on the Hill, a program of Northwestern University in which students serve as mobile journalists reporting on events in and around Washington, D.C.

On Wednesday, October 25th the Senate Finance Committee held a hearing on the need for guaranteed paid leave to better support American workers and families.


At the hearing, experts told a Senate committee that a federal mandate to provide paid leave could do more harm than good to employers and employees, alike.

“There is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all policy that works for every business, or every industry,” said Elizabeth Milito, Senior Executive Counsel with the National Federation of Independent Business. Milito went on to say that the National Federation of Independent Business opposed leave requirements due to the cost and rigidity of a federal mandate.

“Flexibility is so important because parental leave for the birth of a new child is one thing that is relatively predictable,” she said. “But most leaves are not predictable, and you need access to those benefits quickly.”

Rachel Greszler, research fellow in economics at the conservative Heritage Foundation said her sister could not meet the demands of her paid leave application process when caring for her daughter undergoing cancer treatment. Personal discussion with her employer is how her family kept their jobs in an unpredictable time. Greszler also testified that if a federal regulation over paid leave would place a similar burden on the employee, it would prevent special circumstances like this.

Paid leave accessibility has increased in recent years with bipartisan support, but only for certain types of leave. The 2023 National Bureau of Labor Statistics report indicated paid sick leave was accessible to 86% of union workers and 77% of non-union workers, but family leave was only accessible to 23% of union workers and 27% non-union workers.

“Imposing a one-size-fits-all paid leave program could actually limit employers’ ability to offer paid leave policies that meet the unique needs of their workforce, or significantly diminish existing employee-provided paid leave altogether,” said Sen. Mike Crapo.

As of this year, 13 states have mandated paid family and medical leave, plus the District of Columbia. In the state of Oregon, there is a policy that allows for 16 total weeks of leave where 12 of those weeks can be paid, for reasons such as family leave for a newborn child, medical leave, funeral leave, sick leave or safe leave for domestic abuse. This is an extension of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act, which only requires 12 weeks of unpaid leave.

For farmer and small business owner, Ben Verhoeven, Oregon’s policy is helping him save money and increase retention. Oregon’s program is funded with taxes collected per paycheck, from both employers and employees. “Paid family leave costs me less per year than truck repairs, and has a much greater effect on the lives of the people I work with,” said Verhoeven.

While this works for his business, those that want to pursue their own paid leave program must file a $250 application fee and await approval to opt-out. Other state policies, such as New Hampshire’s, require employers to opt-in, instead.

“The issue of flexibility that’s indisputable,” said committee chair Sen. Ron Wyden, D-OR. “We want to recognize that different parts of the country are different.”

Both Wyden and Senator Mike Crapo, R-ID, said for any federal policy to work well, it would have to provide flexibility for different types of businesses and different types of leave.

“Let’s continue this conversation and find a path to the action of actually making things happen on our watch,” said Wyden.

A testimony is delivered about a cancer patient’s lack of support during paid leave requests for treatment, by Rachel Greszler, Senior Research Fellow, Budget And Entitlements, Grover M. Hermann Center For The Federal Budget The Heritage Foundation. (Kelly Adkins/MEDILL NEWS SERVICE)


Read More

Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses
black video camera
Photo by Matt C on Unsplash

Congress Must Stop Media Consolidation Before Local Journalism Collapses

This week, I joined a coalition of journalists in Washington, D.C., to speak directly with lawmakers about a crisis unfolding in plain sight: the rapid disappearance of local, community‑rooted journalism. The advocacy day, organized by the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Partnership (HTTP), brought together reporters and media leaders who understand that the future of local news is inseparable from the future of American democracy.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Keep ReadingShow less
People wearing vests with "ICE" and "Police" on the back.

The latest shutdown deal kept government open while exposing Congress’s reliance on procedural oversight rather than structural limits on ICE.

Getty Images, Douglas Rissing

A Shutdown Averted, and a Narrow Window Into Congress’s ICE Dilemma

Congress’s latest shutdown scare ended the way these episodes usually do: with a stopgap deal, a sigh of relief, and little sense that the underlying conflict had been resolved. But buried inside the agreement was a revealing maneuver. While most of the federal government received longer-term funding, the Department of Homeland Security, and especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was given only a short-term extension. That asymmetry was deliberate. It preserved leverage over one of the most controversial federal agencies without triggering a prolonged shutdown, while also exposing the narrow terrain on which Congress is still willing to confront executive power. As with so many recent budget deals, the decision emerged less from open debate than from late-stage negotiations compressed into the final hours before the deadline.

How the Deal Was Framed

Democrats used the funding deadline to force a conversation about ICE’s enforcement practices, but they were careful about how that conversation was structured. Rather than reopening the far more combustible debate over immigration levels, deportation priorities, or statutory authority, they framed the dispute as one about law-enforcement standards, specifically transparency, accountability, and oversight.

Keep ReadingShow less
ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You
A pole with a sign that says polling station
Photo by Phil Hearing on Unsplash

ICE Monitors Should Become Election Monitors: And so Must You

The brutality of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the related cohort of federal officers in Minneapolis spurred more than 30,000 stalwart Minnesotans to step forward in January and be trained as monitors. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s demands to Minnesota’s Governor demonstrate that the ICE surge is linked to elections, and other ICE-related threats, including Steve Bannon calling for ICE agents deployment to polling stations, make clear that elections should be on the monitoring agenda in Minnesota and across the nation.

A recent exhortation by the New York Times Editorial Board underscores the need for citizen action to defend elections and outlines some steps. Additional avenues are also available. My three decades of experience with international and citizen election observation in numerous countries demonstrates that monitoring safeguards trustworthy elections and promotes public confidence in them - both of which are needed here and now in the US.

Keep ReadingShow less