Sen. Vance's new bill would protect mothers who exit the workforce to care for their babies from undue health care costs



Republican Sens. J.D. Vance (Ohio) and Marco Rubio (Fla.) introduced legislation Tuesday that would ensure that mothers "who choose to prioritize their child's early development and recover rather than return to work" after giving birth won't be retroactively stripped of their health care premiums for having done so.

Currently, the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 requires covered companies with over 50 employees to give their workers 12 weeks of unpaid medical leave in a 12-month period for the birth of a child as well as in cases of adoption. Furthermore, it requires the "continuation of their group health benefits under the same conditions as if they had not taken leave."

The bill, entitled "Fairness for Stay-At-Home Parents Act," would amend the FMLA to "prohibit an employer from recovering any health care premium paid by the employer for an employee if the employee fails to return to work due to the birth of a child, and for other purposes."

In addition to preventing clawbacks, the legislation would have employers continue their health premium contributions for the duration of the 12-week leave.

"Our laws should not penalize new parents who choose to stay home to care for their newborn babies," Vance said in a statement. "We should celebrate and promote young families, not punish them. This legislation would relieve a serious financial burden for working families all over America and steer Washington in a more pro-family direction."

America appears to be in dire need of a "pro-family direction."

The U.S. Census Bureau revealed in November 2022 that less than 24% of children under the age of 15 living in normal families had a stay-at-home mother. Only 1% had a stay-at-home father.

The Pew Research Center indicated that as of 2021, 26% of mothers stayed home with their children and 7% of fathers stayed home with their children.

According to the Mayo Clinic, over half of women return to work after their maternity leave.

Not only are fewer people staying home to raise their children, but fewer Americans are having children.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicated in a June report that the provisional number of births in the U.S. for 2022 was just over 3.6 million, a decline from the previous year. The fertility rate was 56.1 per 1,000 women ages 15-44. This figure is roughly half of what the rate was in the 1960s and more or less on par with the rate in 2020, which was the lowest rate on record.

The New York Times noted in 2018 that one of the key drivers behind Americans having fewer or no children is financial insecurity.

A poll conducted by USA Today last year confirmed that was still the case. About 46% of respondents suggested their personal financial situation influenced their planned or current childlessness; 40% indicated work-life balance was at least partly to blame.

The Washington Examiner noted that financial struggles hit parents straight out the gate. The national average cost of child delivery in a hospital exceeds $18,000, or $3,000 out of pocket for those with insurance.

The 12-week reprieve that some parents might find as a result of Vance's bill could go a long way.

"The Fairness for Stay-At-Home Parents Act supports mothers' and parents' invaluable role in raising the next generation," said Rubio, the original co-sponsor of Vance's bill. "This legislation stops employers from imposing harsh financial penalties if a parent decides not to return to work after unpaid leave, and it empowers families to make choices that prioritize the well-being of their children."

Rubio, like Vance, appears keen on bolstering the family. Following the Supreme Court's Dobbs ruling, Rubio released a pro-family framework, stressing the "need to adopt pro-life policies that support families, rather than destroy them."

Among the proposals in the Florida senator's framework were an expansion to the child tax credit; an allowance for new parents to pull forward up to three months of their Social Security benefits to finance paid parental leave; tax relief for adoptive parents; expanded support for pro-life crisis pregnancy centers; and the establishment of a grant program funding integrated mentoring services for poor mothers.

Following the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the Manhattan Institute's Brian Riedl prophesied to the Washington Post that Republicans would likely take a stronger lead on bolstering the family beyond just sparing the unborn from mass extermination.

"I could see if Republicans decide that abortion politics are working against them, there could be a push for child-care benefits, more maternal health care, and better adoption services to make it easy and more affordable for more mothers to carry the babies to term," said Riedl. "It would put their money where their mouth is when challenged on making it easier for mothers to afford their children and get their health care."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

People push back after Jill Filipovic claims that 'Men with stay-at-home wives are more sexist than men with working wives'



Jill Filipovic asserted in a tweet on Tuesday that men who have stay-at-home wives are more sexist compared to husbands whose wives work a job.

"More mothers at home makes for worse, more sexist men who see women as mommies and helpmeets. Men with stay-at-home wives are more sexist than men with working wives; they don’t assess women’s workplace contributions fairy; and they are less likely to hire and promote women," tweeted Filipovic, who says in her Twitter biography that she is a writer, lawyer, and author.

Many women find fulfillment by choosing to be a stay-at-home mom. Unsurprisingly, Filipovic's comments lead to pushback from people on Twitter.

Kimberly Ross tweeted, "…And here I was, excited to leave FT employment outside the home to become a SAHM (by choice!) who also writes on the side. It was and continues to be a great decision for me and my family. I absolutely do not regret it."

\u2026And here I was, excited to leave FT employment outside the home to become a SAHM (by choice!) who also writes on the side. It was and continues to be a great decision for me and my family. I absolutely do not regret it.https://twitter.com/jillfilipovic/status/1513862962297163781\u00a0\u2026
— Kimberly Ross \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6 (@Kimberly Ross \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\udde6) 1649779900

"I see my wife as a mother (among other things.) I think that job is a thousand times more difficult and more important than writing a substack. But apparently that makes me sexist," National Review senior writer David Harsanyi tweeted.

"My husband is a VP at a bank and hires and promotes women all the time. I have been a SAHM for 31 years and none of what you say is true," another person tweeted.

"My husband is far from sexist and I am joyed with this life the Lord has given me. Women are *nothing more* than an easy to replace number in the working world. At home, they are someone's world. They are irreplaceable. More moms at home creates a healthier & stronger society," someone else tweeted.

"She got all wrong. It's a JOY to be a homemaker & serve my husband, but again these people don't know the Lord. God created women to be a helpmate and it says in Titus 2 that women are the keeper of the home. Culture does not rewrite the bible. And my husband is far from sexist," another individual tweeted.

Filipovic also said that moms who have jobs fare better emotionally and psychologically than women who opt to stay at home.

"Stay-at-home mothers are psychologically and emotionally worse off than working mothers by just about every measure, from depression to anxiety to anger; they are much more likely than working mothers to say that they are struggling, and less likely to say that they are thriving," she tweeted.

Stay-at-home mothers are psychologically and emotionally worse off than working mothers by just about every measure, from depression to anxiety to anger; they are much more likely than working mothers to say that they are struggling, and less likely to say that they are thriving.
— Jill Filipovic (@Jill Filipovic) 1649768072

Vaxxed Infectious Disease Experts Are Still Too Panicked About COVID To Leave Home

While many people have resumed normal in-person activities, infectious disease experts still appear to be too panicked about COVID-19 to leave home.

'It's time to cancel everything': Left-wing LA mayor talks even tougher about COVID-19 lockdown — then gets smacked right back



Left-wing Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti hit his constituents with even tougher talk about his coronavirus lockdown orders late Wednesday night, even going so far as to say "it's time to cancel everything."

But if the livid reactions to his Twitter video are any indication, it would appear Garcetti doesn't have a lot of support.

What are the details?

While the city revised its "Targeted Safer at Home Order" late Wednesday, KABC-TV reported that it matches what Los Angeles County issued last week and that there are no additional restrictions.

But L.A.'s order comes with more extreme language than before, the station said.

Thousands of city residents received a text message with a link to the city's new emergency order that contains the line "all persons living within the City of Los Angeles are hereby ordered to remain in their homes," KABC reported, adding that the text message caused a stir and sparked confusion over its meaning.

However, the order includes numerous exceptions, such as buying food, obtaining medical care, and traveling to use other essential businesses, such as car repair shops, the station said. Film production and fitness centers that operate outdoors are allowed to remain open, KABC added.

But Garcetti's video doesn't say any of that. In fact, his words in the clip of 23 seconds — if that's all anyone within the city limits saw — sound quite extreme: "My message couldn't be simpler. It's time to hunker down. It's time to cancel everything. And if it isn't essential, don't do it. Don't meet up with others outside your household. Don't host a gathering. Don't attend a gathering. And following our targeted Safer at Home order, if you're able to stay home, stay home."

The new year brings hope –– for vaccines and for stopping this pandemic.But here's the truth: we're in for a long… https://t.co/boTrgJuheA
— MayorOfLA (@MayorOfLA)1606968575.0

L.A. County reported another 5,987 coronavirus cases Wednesday, one day after reporting a record-high 7,593 new cases, KABC said, adding that county officials said hospitalizations are putting a growing strain on the region's health care system.

"If cases continue on this pathway, if they continue to increase at the pace that we've seen, the county expects we will run out of hospital beds here in Los Angeles by Christmastime," Garcetti also said, according to the station.

He added that violating the order is a misdemeanor, subject to fines and imprisonment, KABC reported, adding that Garcetti also asked police and the city attorney's office to enforce it. Home utilities also can be shut off for violations, the station added.

What was the reaction?

Reactions on Twitter to Garcetti's "cancel everything" video were overwhelmingly hostile:

  • "Good idea," one commenter quipped back. "You're canceled."
  • "Open the city," another user wrote. "Open the city now!"
  • "Spoken like a true communist," another commenter said.
  • "You and every other Democrat should be howling at Democrats in Washington to get people money to stay the f*** home," another user declared. "The pressure for them to give a significant, sustained and continuing *all cash stimulus* direct to everyone should be coming from you and [California Gov.] Gavin [Newsom]."

Even former "American Idol" finalist Danny Gokey joined the fray: "You're an absolute fool! The recovery rate of Covid is about 99.95%; over 38 million people have recovered from this. Domestic abuse, child abuse, suicide cases all have skyrocketed to an almost 1000% increase. Children that depend on meals at school now can't get it. Foolish!!!"

Anything else?

Garcetti's coronavirus responses have made numerous headlines — and not all of them positive:

Mollie Hemingway: Democrats Violating Their Own Public Health Restrictions Are ‘Tyrannical’

"It's unclear if they just think that the rules don’t apply to them ... or whether they don’t think the rules actually matter at all in terms of public health."

When Austin, Texas, mayor warned residents to 'stay home' due to COVID-19, he was vacationing in Mexico with family, others



The mayor of Austin, Texas, acknowledged to KVUE-TV that when he made a video last month warning residents to "stay home" to slow the coronavirus spread, he was on vacation in Mexico with family members and others.

What are the details?

In the warning video posted to his Facebook page Nov. 9, Mayor Steve Adler said, "We need to stay home if you can…We need to keep the numbers down. Now is not the time to relax," the station reported.

But Adler confirmed to KVUE that when the video was recorded, he was on vacation in Cabo San Lucas with eight people, including immediate and extended family, after flying from Austin on a private jet.

Here's the clip:

Two days earlier, Adler hosted a wedding and reception at an Austin hotel for his daughter with 20 guests, the station said, adding that the city at the time was under Stage 3 guidelines, which suggest no gatherings of more than 10 people.

More from KVUE:

Adler told KVUE Senior Reporter Tony Plohetski that he did not violate his own order or orders by Gov. Greg Abbott and took multiple steps to ensure the safety of his guests, including rapid COVID-19 testing.

But the private actions are from a public official who has been front and center urging Austinites to take COVID-19 precautions -- and he even did so while he was out of the country.

Adler also told the station he consulted with Austin's top health authority — Dr. Mark Escott — and the event was held outdoors, guests had to maintain social distancing and had to have received a COVID-19 test prior to attending, and the bride and groom gave out masks.

But KVUE said several wedding attendees flew to Austin from across the U.S., including a Seattle-based wedding photographer.

"It's not perfect," Adler told the station in an interview this week. "Obviously there are infections that could happen. But what we did was stay compliant with the rules."

Then eight wedding attendees — including Adler and immediate and extended family members — jetted off to Cabo, KVUE said. They stayed for a week at a family timeshare, the Statesman reported.

Timing is everything

The station added that the day after Adler & Co. departed, Escott issued a public warning: "If you are going to go out to a restaurant, go out with your family, the people who live in your household, not the family or friends who don't live in your household. And start to decrease those travels outside of your home that are not necessary."

But the week after Adler returned, KVUE said COVID-19 cases spiked — and on Nov. 19 the city raised the threat level to Stage 4, with recommendations against travel and gathering with people outside of your household.

What else did the mayor have to say?

Adler released a statement Wednesday, the station said:

"Every day since March, I repeat that being home is the safest place for people to be. Only at our most trying moments, like around Thanksgiving, have I asked people not to travel as part of extra precautions. Several weeks ago, when my daughter cancelled her planned wedding to replace it with a COVID appropriate more private ceremony and when my family traveled, we consulted with health authorities and worked hard to model the kind of behavior I've asked of the community. We were in a lower risk "Yellow" level than now. It is always safest to stay home. However, we aren't asking people never to venture out. We ask everyone to be as safe as possible in what they do. My family and I are no exception and we'll continue to do as I ask of our community. During Thanksgiving and as anticipated for Christmas and the New Year, we should all be especially mindful."

While Adler holds a nonpartisan office, he endorsed Democrat Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 as well as Democrats Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden over the course of the most recent presidential campaign.