Editor’s note: This commentary is by Katie Titterton, an independent communications consultant for nonprofits and a writer. She lives in Richmond.
I quit my office job after my son was born, in part because my employer didn’t offer paid leave. So you might guess I support family and medical leave. I do. I think we should have national paid family and medical leave, and frankly, I think it should last a lot longer than 12 weeks.
But I have a specific concern about the new campaign to enact paid family and medical leave in Vermont, and that is about how well we listen to each other.
Earlier this year I wrote an article, based on my own experience and on research and reporting, about the benefits cliffs Vermont families face when balancing the costs of raising young children with the cost of living here, particularly child care and health care costs.
Vermont likes to lead the nation. Issues that affect women, children and families are finally getting a lot of national attention, and I can understand why the time feels right to join fellow early adopters like New York and California in paid leave. But we can’t forget our context: We’re a small state with a small tax base. It takes money to take chances, and over the past several years, we’ve taken some expensive chances.
Paid family and medical leave is the right thing. It makes economic sense by keeping more parents in the workforce, it is a major step toward economic equity for women and it’s good for babies.
But there’s a perception problem here, and deeper, a communication problem. The coalition is made of nonprofits and advocacy groups, not legislators. But they aim to change policy, and with the support of political giants like Gov. Madeleine Kunin and a pledge from gubernatorial candidate Sue Minter, the process can look blurry if you’re on the outside.
There’s also the pervasive myth that the nonprofit sector is a shadow wing of government, that nonprofits take tax dollars and redistribute them to people who benefit from, but do not contribute to, state coffers. Of course, that’s a wild misrepresentation of how nonprofits are funded and of the important work they do and of the working poor and middle class. But if you’re on a budget yourself, and there’s no powerful coalition you know of lobbying for your needs, it probably doesn’t feel good to be asked to pay for benefits you will never reap.
We need to listen to our frustrated neighbors. We need to look around for small leverage points, not just headline causes, that impact working families. We need to accept that growth requires compromises and difficult choices.
The Vermont Issues Poll from the Castleton Polling Institute shows these are the top four issues, in order, that Vermonters think are most important: Cost of living and the economy. Taxes and government spending. The opiate crisis. Health care.
Proposing a payroll tax to fund paid leave sounds like the perceived powers that be aren’t listening to the issues Vermonters are actually saying they care about most. And as proposed, the tax is borne by workers, including working parents, and the businesses — small and large, for profit and nonprofit — that employ them.
So it’s the appearance of not listening that gives me pause. It’s critical to work for valuable policies like paid leave, but if we accomplish social goals by ignoring and alienating our neighbors, we are shortsighted. It segregates us, and it backfires when blame and anger fall back on our vulnerable and voiceless populations.
And if this election is a Democratic sweep, and if that is followed by a triumphant rush to pass partisan legislation, I fear an already frustrated swath of our population will feel even more underrepresented, unheard, isolated and angry.
I believe a living sense of community is Vermont’s greatest asset, and I want my son to grow up knowing the adults in his community value his life, his health and his education. And that they equally value the child born addicted to opiates, the child who is hungry and needs free breakfast and lunch, the child of hardworking parents who just need child care financial assistance for a few years to get by.
I want our economy and policies to clearly and fairly support all our citizens’ needs, so our neighbors feel genuine shared responsibility when asked to support policies that specifically help families.
In any case, there are many, many burdens on Vermont’s working families, and there are small steps our government can take to address them that don’t require new income. For example: right now, child care centers all over the state are closing because they will not or cannot comply with a slate of new regulations from the Child Development Division of the Department of Children and Families. The updates may be well intended, but at a time when child care is more scarce and expensive than ever, this can’t be considered a desired outcome.
A lot of recommendations for making Vermont more affordable for working families are coming due soon, such as the Blue Ribbon Commission for Affordable Childcare and the Dr. Dynasaur 2.0 study. Like other parents, stakeholders and officials, I am eager to see creative and courageous solutions.
Because under different circumstances, both acting and pausing require courage. So as working families and citizens, we need to have the courage to not be driven by any one single issue. We need to listen to our frustrated neighbors. We need to look around for small leverage points, not just headline causes, that impact working families. We need to accept that growth requires compromises and difficult choices. We’re already doing that in our own families every day.
Most of all, we need to come together around what we value as Vermonters. Caring for our children? Living within our means? Living as neighbors within communities? I have not given up hope these goals can coexist.
