Weekly Opinion Editorial
FEEL GOOD PROGRAMS!
by Steve Fair
On Wednesday, Oklahoma Congresswoman Stephanie Bice (R-OK), and
Pennsylvania Congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan, (D-PA), introduced the More
Paid Leave for More Americans Act.(MPLMAA) The legislation attempts to chart
a path toward a national paid leave policy in the U.S. According to the
Bipartisan Policy Center, the U.S. is one of just six countries in the
world without a national paid parental leave policy. If it passes both chambers and is signed by President
Trump, it would establish a competitive grant program run by the U.S.
Department of Labor (USDOL). It would
create a modest ‘incentive’ for states to establish their own paid family leave
program.
“We’ve had conversations with leadership, but more importantly, we’ve
had conversations with committees and with the White House. We have really done
our due diligence to make sure everybody knows the importance of this,” Rep.
Bice said. Bice and Houlahan are
confident they can get the bill through Congress and signed into law. Three observations:
First, who pays the bill for MPLMAA?
Obviously, the federal grant portion will be paid by taxpayers. The private portion will be paid by the end
user consumer of the good or service provided by the business. Business must ‘pass on’ any costs to stay in
business. They aren’t sponges- they can’t
absorb increased costs. When government
mandates taxpayer empathy and charity to fellow citizens, it always requires
money. To fund sensitivity programs, government
has to take from the needy and give to the greedy.
Second, MPLMAA has unintended consequences. Here are two: first, small businesses will reduce
the number of full-time workers so they do not have to provide the benefit. Business has to adapt to survive and avoiding
government overreach is a viable solution.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), enacted in 1990, provides an illustration
of ignoring unintended consequences. The effect of ADA was the reverse of the
intent- which was to protect the disabled in the workplace. Within five years
of ADA's passage, employment for disabled men fell to 49 percent, compared with
60 percent before the law was enacted. Employers, faced with the cost of
accommodation and the threat of litigation, chose the rational option: they cut
back on hiring the disabled. When the cost of hiring a worker rises, demand for
that worker falls. Second, MPLMAA will affect employee morale and
productivity. When employees go on paid
leave and their position must be held open, those left at work have to take up
the slack, usually with no extra compensation.
When multiple employees simultaneously take leave or take unannounced
vacations, it disrupts a business operation.
Third, MPLMAA is socialism. It takes away individual incentive and gives government more authority in a family’s life. Instead of mandating paid family leave, the feds should look for ways to reduce regulations on employers so they can experiment with alternative work arrangements. Congress should change the tax code to reflect the social importance of family. Implementing feel-good schemes, like MPLMAA, which are meant to protect the vulnerable is not conservative policy. Well-intentioned, misguided government mandated safety nets are bankrupting America.
No comments:
Post a Comment