WASHINGTON -- Here’s how area members of Congress voted in the week ending June 5.
HOUSE
FAMILY LEAVE: Voting 258 for and 154 against, the House on June 4 passed a bill (HR 626) providing federal employees with additional benefits under the Family and Medical Leave Act. The bill would entitle civil servants to four-to-eight weeks of paid leave to care for a newly born, adopted or fostered child. Such leave is now available to civil servants without pay.
Enacted in 1993, the FMLA provides private-sector, federal and other government workers with 12 weeks’ unpaid leave for personal medical reasons; to attend to an ailing spouse, child or parent, or to care for a newly born, adopted or fostered child. The law also provides family members with 26 weeks’ unpaid leave to care for an injured or seriously ill member of the armed forces. In all cases workers are entitled to the same job or its equivalent when they return from leave.
The bill awaits Senate action.
Gerald Connolly, D-Va., said the bill “would allow federally employed mothers and fathers to spend time with their newborn children without sacrificing their income. Surprisingly, the minority party objects to such a notion.”
Aaron Schock, R-Ill., said: “I don’t know how we can honestly vote for more benefits, for more pay and for more cost to the federal budget at the expense of taxpayers and of those people who are cutting back and losing their jobs.”
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
MASSACHUSETTS Voting yes: John Olver, D-1, Richard
Neal, D-2, James McGovern, D-3, Barney Frank,
D-4, Niki Tsongas, D-5, John Tierney, D-6, Edward
Markey, D-7, Stephen Lynch, D-9, William Delahunt,
D-10
Voting no: None
Not voting: Michael Capuano, D-8
GOP LEAVE PLAN: Voting 157 for and 258 against, the House on June 4 defeated a Republican amendment to strip HR 626 (above) of its new category of paid leave. Instead, federal workers could use accrued sick leave to care for new family members. New federal workers could receive advances against future accruals of sick leave.
Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said the amendment makes it clear “that no federal worker would ever have to choose between being with their newborn and receiving a paycheck.”
Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., said that by eliminating the new category of paid leave, the amendment “actually guts the bill.”
A yes vote backed the GOP plan.
MASSACHUSETTS Voting yes: None
Voting no: Olver, Neal (MA), McGovern, Frank
(MA), Tsongas, Tierney, Markey (MA), Lynch,
Delahunt
Not voting: Capuano
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY: Voting 397 for and 25 against, the House on June 4 approved a two-year budget of $15.7 billion for the Transportation Security Administration, the majority of which is for screening airline passengers, baggage and cargo and securing airport buildings and boundaries. The bill (HR 2200) awaits Senate action.
In part, the bill improves security for seaports and trains as well as airports; adds the office of ombudsman to check the work of federal air marshals; authorizes demonstration programs in the use of full-body biometric screening of transportation personnel and requires self-defense training for airline workers.
Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., said the bill takes steps “to put surface- transportation security on an equal footing with aviation security” and “also addresses the long-unattended issue of airport perimeter security.”
Paul Broun, R-Ga., objected to the bill’s omission of his proposal that Guantanamo Bay prisoners be automatically placed on the Transportation Security Administration’s “no fly list” and thus barred from the United States.
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
MASSACHUSETTS Voting yes: Olver, Neal (MA),
McGovern, Frank (MA), Tsongas, Tierney, Capuano,
Lynch, Delahunt
Voting no: Markey (MA)
Not voting: None
ETHICS DISPUTE: Voting 270 for and 134 against, the House on June 3 directed its ethics committee to report within 45 days on any action it has taken regarding “any misconduct” by House members in dealing with a former lobbying firm known as the PMA Group. The resolution (H Res 500) does not name any person. Rep. Peter Visclosky, D-Ind., a member of the Appropriations Committee, has sponsored earmarks for the benefit of PMA, and federal investigators have issued subpoenas to obtain some of his files.
Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., sponsored the measure, which was a privileged motion and therefore not debatable. Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, called it “worthless” because it does not require action by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.
A yes vote backed the resolution.
MASSACHUSETTS Voting yes: Olver, Neal (MA),
McGovern, Frank (MA), Tsongas, Tierney, Markey
(MA), Capuano, Lynch, Delahunt
Voting no: None
Not voting: None
SENATE
TOBACCO REGULATION: Voting 84 for and 11 against, the Senate on June 2 agreed to take up a House-passed bill (HR 1256) that would begin federal regulation of tobacco products. Under the bill, the Food and Drug Administration would regulate cigarette ingredients; require public disclosure of those ingredients; restrain cigarette marketing to children; require health warnings to cover at least half of each side of a cigarette package, and require manufacturers to verify health claims. The bill remained in debate.
Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said: “In the next year, 400,000 Americans will die from smoking-related illness.... Every day, 3,500 kids pick up a cigarette for the first time. Even those who do not smoke still pay a price -- $96 billion each year in public and private health expenditures to treat illness caused by smoking.”
Richard Burr, R-N.C., said that that even with the bill’s self-funding mechanism, the FDA “may have to divert funds from its other programs, such as addressing the safety of drugs and food, to begin implementing this program.”
Comments from users with registered accounts will post at once. Comments from unregistered accounts will post after being reviewed by a site moderator. Posts that do not meet site standards, which can be found here, will be removed.
