Labor committee opts to keep paid family and medical leave program in tact, for now
Heeding the advice from the Maine Legislature's Democratic leadership, the Labor Committee is not endorsing proposals that would make substantial changes to the state's new paid family and medical leave program.
While voting on a series of bills related to the new benefit program Wednesday afternoon, the majority of the committee threw its support behind just two of them. Though a proposal intended to safeguard the future of the program's trust fund drew bipartisan support, Democrats voted down any new exemptions to the program, as well as an effort to make the benefit voluntary.
'If we pull at the threads now, we are going to unravel some really hard-earned consensus,' said House co-chair Rep. Amy Roeder (D-Bangor), noting the years-long process that went into developing the program that was made law by the 131st Legislature.
On several bills, some Republicans on the committee put forth a sizable amendment backed by a minority of lawmakers with a list of 10 recommendations to update the program at-large. It includes clarifications to the undue hardship provision, capping the cost of private plan applications and modifying return-to-work requirements, among other provisions.
While some members, including some Republicans, were hopeful that LD 1712 brought by Rep. Tiffany Roberts (D-South Berwick) could be a compromise to address issues raised with the program, Democrats ultimately voted it down.
The paid family and medical leave program will allow eligible public and private sector workers to take up to 12 weeks of paid leave for reasons such as illness, to care for a loved one or the birth of a new child.
At the start of the year, Maine employers began withholding a portion of wages to pay into the program's fund. Employees are expected to be able to access the benefit starting May 2026.
The committee voted 8-1 in favor of an amended version of LD 1221, which was introduced by Rep. Gary Drinkwater (R-Milford). While the legislation originally proposed a constitutional amendment prohibiting the Legislature from using the program funds for any other purpose, the amendment supported by most members instead directed the Department of Labor to determine ways to further protect the money and report back to the committee early next year.
Luke Monahan, director of the paid family and medical leave program for the Department of Labor, told the committee that there is $75 million in the fund as of Wednesday. Additionally, he said more than 900 applications for employers to use private plans have been approved so far.
The committee also backed the legislation brought by Senate President Mattie Daughtry (D-Cumberland), on behalf of the department. LD 894 wants to make a series of amendments to the current law to create certain enforcement mechanisms and penalties, as well as clarify intermittent leave.
Though Daughtry urged her fellow lawmakers to give the program time to be fully implemented before making substantial reforms, she said the changes in her bill are coming from the people who have been working to implement this program that identified specific refinements to the policy.
During the public hearing, Daughtry opposed every other bill except her own, but told the committee that if she were to support one, it would be LD 1221.
Some of the bills before the committee were duplicative, including two seeking to repeal the program entirely. While all members voted to reject LD 539 for streamlining purposes, three Republicans on the committee voted in favor of one of the repeal bills, LD 406.
Multiple bills were unanimously rejected by the committee, including LD 575, which wanted to remove the undue hardship clause and LD 1249, which sought to delay the payment of benefits.
However, the committee voted along partisan lines on proposals to make the program voluntary (LD 1273), exempt agricultural workers from the program (LD 952), certain public school district employees (LD 1400), along with two measures seeking to issue refunds to employers who had approved private plans (LD 1169) and (LD 1307).
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Buzz Feed
28 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
18 Trump Supporters Share Thoughts On Epstein Files
Tension surrounding the Trump administration's handling of information about Jeffrey Epstein and his crimes has been bubbling over the past couple of weeks — and it looks like it's not settling anytime soon. Between US Attorney General Pam Bondi claiming the Epstein files were sitting on her desk awaiting review (and then suddenly backtracking), the House GOP blocking an amendment that would force the Justice Department to release additional information about Epstein, and most recently, The Wall Street Journal reporting that Bondi told Trump back in May that his name appeared "multiple times" in the Epstein files, Donald Trump has, once again, found himself in hot water. But does Trump's potential connection to Jeffrey Epstein and his sex trafficking crimes have Trump supporters second-guessing their vote? Recently, Redditor u/Effective-Cream492 asked Reddit community members to share what their MAGA family members think about the Trump administration's handling of the Epstein files, and I'm disappointed but not entirely shocked: "I heard one of my MAGA uncles claim that Obama is actually the one in the files, and Trump is trying to preserve the dignity of the presidency by not releasing them. He said that Obama should be thanking Trump! Not sure why my uncle didn't say Clinton instead, but it's not my conspiracy." —TogarSucks "They're suddenly very quiet for people who used to scream about 'the list.'" "My dad doesn't care. He still think that it's Democrats trying to make Trump look bad." "'I don't love how they're handling the files, but overall, I stand by my vote.' Cue the eye roll." —grippysockgang "I have three MAGA family members who've touched on the subject. The first one didn't want to talk about it, the second one was like, 'Man, I don't know, we'll see,' and the third was like, 'Just put Vance in." So, out of a very narrow sample pool, I'd say they know how it all looks, even if they won't admit it." "They don't think it's a big deal. Like, they genuinely don't care." "They've been rather quiet lately." "'We were tricked, but so were you about Harris.' I'm not going to spend any time with Aunt Sherri anytime soon." —DarrenEdwards "My uncle won't call me back. Every time I call them, they refuse to answer. I told him I just want to talk about the Epstein case, but won't. That says it all." "Most of them are desperately trying to bury their heads in the sand. A few are in agreement that the list should come out, and that proven pedos should be buried under the prison, party be damned. But there are a few that don't know what's even going on since it's not an election year and they've already pulled the ladder up behind themselves." "My family believes Trump. They think all the Epstein stuff is a Democratic hoax. I try to provide facts and evidence, but any source I provide to them is either 'fake news' or 'out to get Trump.' It's exhausting." "They don't care. Trust me, Trump supporters don't care about anything — including each other." —indefilade "Some have come to their senses. Others are trying to make sense of it, but can't make the leap. I'm waiting to engage with others so that I can corner them into 'panic mode' and catch them saying some dumb shit they have to live with. I honestly spend way too much mental bandwidth having fictitious debates that never materialize. It's not healthy, but I need to find some way to productively contribute to slowing the collapse of our culture." "A person I know says that Trump is still better than a Democratic president. He doesn't really care about Trump scandals, including this one. I choose not to talk about this at all because they're clearly delusional." "I was told to leave Trump alone and 'let him have his four years' because 'they didn't pick on Biden this bad.' I'm fucking over these people." —nimrod823 "They're doing what they always do: turning their attention toward Obama/Clinton/Biden at the behest of the current administration and its allies in the media. They're taking the bait because it's a great opportunity for them to distract themselves from the actual controversy that may implicate their beloved president in heinous crimes." "My MAGA parents are suddenly acting like they don't watch the news; my MAGA husband suddenly doesn't care about politics and thinks that ALL the news channels reporting anything bad about Trump are compromised; my MAGA in-laws haven't said a word online, though we aren't speaking anyway, so I don't know. I thought this would be a wake-up call, but I guess it needs to get worse for some people to actually wake up." Lastly: "My dad believes that Trump is covering up for other people, not himself. He believes that Trump could be on the list, but that he never actually did anything. Like, Trump may have known what was going on, but never agreed with it or participated. And, according to my dad, if he never agreed, then it's fine." —cantyoukeepasecret If you have Trump-supporting family members, what do they think about how the Trump administration is handling the Epstein case? Let us know in the comments, or you can anonymously submit your response using the form below.
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
House panel approves subpoenas of DOJ for Epstein files
A House Oversight subcommittee on Wednesday approved several subpoenas, including one directing the Department of Justice to turn over materials relating to the Epstein files. The federal law enforcement subcommittee also approved a motion to subpoena several high-profile Democratic officials, including former President Clinton, for their testimony. The panel approved the Epstein motion, offered by Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.), in an 8-2 vote, with Republican Reps. Nancy Mace (S.C.), Scott Perry (Pa.), and Brian Jack (Ga.) joining Democrats in favor. 'Today, Oversight Democrats fought for transparency and accountability on the Epstein files and won. House Republicans didn't make it easy, but the motion was finally passed to force the Department of Justice to release the Epstein files,' Rep. Robert Garcia, ranking member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said in a statement. 'Let's be clear: this is a huge win for the American people. The public deserves to know who was complicit in Epstein's heinous crimes, including people with immense power in our government. Today's vote was just the first step toward accountability, and we will continue pushing for the truth.' An amendment to Lee's motion from Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) to include the release of all communications between President Biden or Biden Administration officials and the Department of Justice related to Jeffrey Epstein was adopted by voice vote. And an amendment from Mace to redacting the names of victims and any personally identifiable information of victims, as well as any possible material depicting child abuse, was also adopted by voice vote. The committee also approved by voice vote a motion from Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) to 'expand the full committee's investigation' into the Epstein matter by also issuing subpoenas to a number of high profile former Democratic officials: Former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former Attorney General Eric Holder, former Attorney General Merrick Garland, former FBI Director and Special Counsel Robert Meuller. Perry's motion also called to subpoena three former GOP officials: Attorney General Bill Barr and former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who served under Trump; and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush. The motions for subpoenas come after the full Oversight committee on Tuesday approved a subpoena for Epstein's ex-girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, who is in prison for aiding Epstein in child sex trafficking. House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) officially issued that subpoena on Wednesday. The flurry of subpoenas come as House GOP leaders moved to send members home for August recess a day early after disputes about the Epstein matter — and an unwillingness to face Democratic votes trying to squeeze Republicans on the Epstein issue in the House Rules Committee — stymied the House. But Democrats are seeing success in getting Republican support for their Epstein-related amendments in the Oversight panel.
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
WSJ: DOJ told Trump his name was in Epstein files
Attorney General Pam Bondi informed President Trump in May that his name appeared multiple times in files related to the late financier and sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein, according to a new bombshell report in the Wall Street Journal. Bondi and her deputy told the president that Justice Department officials reviewed what she described as a 'truckload' of documents on Epstein and discovered the president's name appeared multiple times, according to the report, which cited senior administration officials. Bondi also told Trump that many other high-profile individuals were named in the files — which alone is not a sign of wrongdoing. One official familiar with the documents told the Journal that the files contain hundreds of names. Trump was told at the meeting that the DOJ did not intend to release any more files on Epstein because the material included child pornography and personal information of Epstein's alleged victims, the Journal reported. DOJ officials also saw the documents as containing unverified hearsay about Trump and others, Bondi told Trump. Officials told the Journal that the information was disclosed during a routine briefing at the White House, and that the Epstein files were not the focus of the meeting. A source confirmed to The Hill's sister network NewsNation that Bondi informed Trump during a May briefing that his name was mentioned in the files. Bondi said publicly in February that Epstein's alleged client list was 'sitting on my desk right now to review.' On July 7, the Department of Justice released a memo concluding there was no 'client list' and said officials did not plan to disclose additional files. The memo set off a torrent of criticism from the president's own base of supporters — who had long called for the release of documents on Epstein — and from Democrats, who seized the opportunity to add to the president's negative coverage. Trump has expressed his frustration at the public's continued focus on the Epstein story and has encouraged his party to move on to other priorities. But the story has divided the Republican party to such an extent that Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) canceled votes in the House on Thursday and sent the chamber home a day early to avoid holding a vote on calling for the release of documents. Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche referred back to the July memo in response to the Journal's reporting. 'The DOJ and FBI reviewed the Epstein Files and reached the conclusion set out in the July 6 memo. Nothing in the files warranted further investigation or prosecution, and we have filed a motion in court to unseal the underlying grand jury transcripts. As part of our routine briefing, we made the President aware of the findings,' they said in a joint statement. 'The memo released on July 6th is consistent with the thorough review conducted by the FBI and DOJ. The criminal leakers and Fake News media tries tirelessly to undermine President Trump with smears and lies, and this story is no different,' FBI Director Kash Patel said in a statement. Trump and Epstein had acknowledged running in similar circles but reportedly had a falling out years ago. 'The fact is that The President kicked him out of his club for being a creep. This is nothing more than a continuation of the fake news stories concocted by the Democrats and the liberal media, just like the Obama Russiagate scandal, which President Trump was right about,' White House communications director Steven Cheung said in a statement responding to the Journal's reporting.
