Public Comment

The federal Family and Medical Leave Act gives eligible workers unpaid job-protected leave, while paid leave programs are mostly handled by states, employers, or private benefits. In 2026, a House workforce subcommittee held a hearing on paid leave approaches, and policy groups tracking state laws report that 14 states plus the District of Columbia have enacted mandatory paid family leave systems. The debate is whether the country needs a national paid leave standard, federal support for state systems, tax incentives for employers, or a continued state-by-state approach. People should not have to choose between a paycheck and caring for a newborn, a sick parent, or their own recovery. But the design matters because small employers and workers both have to live with it.

What should the federal government do about paid family and medical leave?

Overall results

1
58% support · excluded by 2%
2

States are already building different systems. Federal grants could reduce gaps while letting states adapt benefits, payroll rules, and administration.

1

A grant approach can help smaller employers adjust instead of dropping a fully formed national mandate on them.

2
56% support · excluded by 6%
7

A floor would prevent the weakest coverage gaps while still letting states choose more generous models.

7

A national floor can be phased in, with small-employer rules and state coordination built from the start.

3
47% support · excluded by 8%
1

Paid leave is important, but Washington should not make every workplace fit the same benefit model.

4
39% support · excluded by 10%
1

A worker’s ability to care for a baby or recover from illness should not depend on their ZIP code or employer size.

About the author