2008 COMMENTARY

January 24, 2008

Testimony of Scott Dilley on Paid Family Leave (SB 6280, HB 2665 & HB 3305)

By Scott Dilley

Madam chair and members of the committee, for the record my name is Scott Dilley from Evergreen Freedom Foundation.

I am here today at the invitation of Sen. Holmquist. EFF is neutral on this bill, but we have concerns about the implementation and funding of this paid family leave program.

We are thankful that the task force was open to the opinions of others. Many of the suggestions by the business community regarding administrative improvements and accountability should be seriously considered.

Our greatest concern at this time is with the lack of clarity on the long-term funding for the program. While the task force was able to reach some consensus on recommending short-term funding from the general fund, the issue of long-term funding casts a long, dark shadow over the policy side of the discussion.

Establishing this new government benefit raises serious concerns about individual liberty, and establishing it in a piecemeal fashion raises serious concerns about government efficiency and effectiveness.

Our office has already received comments from people questioning the wisdom of this program and its long-term funding. Some type of tax will have to be imposed or increased—at the expense of people who cannot or choose not to use this program. People are already discussing their opposition to government possibly taking anything else out of their paychecks. These people want to exercise the rights they have over their own money and plan their lives around their own family choices, not subsidize someone else’s.

As for government efficiency and effectiveness, promising benefits while not really knowing how many people will apply for those benefits, how much money the program will cost, and where the money will come from is an unwise policy decision that will haunt this body for several years to come. It is similar to going to Costco, buying everything you think you want, and then hoping there is enough money in your checking account to cover the purchase. In keeping with this analogy, how much will the state have to pay in overdraft charges if the uncertainties in this proposal lead to disastrous unintended consequences?

EFF suggests that legislators reconsider both the policy and fiscal implications of this new program. For the benefit of the public and elected officials, all aspects of a new program should be thought out and planned for before promises are made and expected.

The task force recommendations are a starting point for further discussion, but common sense dictates that any issue needs to be fleshed out in its entirety before any further action is taken.

Thank you.

Nothing in this publication should be construed as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any legislation or ballot measure.

Scott Dilley is a policy analyst for the Labor Policy Center. Scott came to EFF from Washington Farm Bureau, where he worked in the government relations department. Scott holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in government from Center College in Danville, Kentucky, and a Master of Arts degree in theological studies from the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary in Springfield, Missouri.

+ Send EFF your comments

  Send this Article to a Friend