On Friday’s "Good Morning America," for the fourth time this year, the ABC program skewered America for not being generous with paid leave and openly lobbied viewers to support a Democratic, big government initiative. After lumping the U.S. in with countries such as Liberia and Lesotho, as being one of only five countries that don’t provide paid maternity leave, GMA contributor Tory Johnson appeared with Democratic presidential candidate Chris Dodd to promote his legislation.
"First and most important is to make your voice heard, Johnson exclaimed. Openly advocating this government expansion, she added, "On the GMA website, we have links to all the senators’ and congressmen’s offices. Call them. E-mail them. Let them know where you stand." Would GMA promote legislation for family friendly television that a Republican presidential candidate was sponsoring? Also, there was almost no mention of the expensive cost of providing eight weeks of paid maternity leave and how that would effect the U.S. taxpayer. Instead, co-host Robin Roberts mentioned that unpaid leave is already available and wondered, "What's stopping the government from making the law truly family friendly?" Johnson alternatively described paid leave as "government’s relief" and "great benefits" without much consideration of where these "benefits" are coming from.
Roberts did ask a solitary question about cost to Senator Dodd, but most of the coverage had an Orwellian tone to it. The ABC graphic proclaimed, "Take Control of Your Life: Can Government do More?" So, take control of your life by handing over power and responsibility to the government?
Early in the segment, Roberts began by bashing the United States in comparison to the rest of the world. She wondered, "Did you know that among 173 countries surveyed, there are only five countries without a national maternity leave? Lesotho, Swaziland, New Guinea, Liberia and the U.S." Then, she announced that Johnson had been sent to D.C. to "get answers about why Washington is not doing more to help working families." In her next sentence, Roberts mentioned the example of a working mother who is taking 12 weeks of leave. So, America does have a "national maternity leave" program, just not paid leave.
As noted earlier, this is the fourth time in 2007 that GMA has bashed America in relation to paid time off. In June, GMA correspondent David Wright alleged that "the U.S. doesn't make it easy" for working parents and the same references to Liberia and Swaziland were trotted out. Elizabeth Vargas advocated for paid maternity leave in February. Two months later, in April, the program touted Denmark’s generous welfare system.
Finally, Friday’s segment, yet again, provided no context on the difference between the United States and Swaziland. In discussing the June report on leave, I observed some of the distinctions that reporter Wright left out:
The linkage of America to these countries is, perhaps, intended to provoke gasps in the audience. But Mr. Wright left out important differences in quality of life, such as the fact that Swaziland has 40 percent unemployment, almost 70 percent of the country lives in poverty and has a per capita GDP of only $5,200. (Comparatively, the U.S. is at $44,000.)
So, America, unlike Swaziland, must be doing something right.
A transcript of the September 28 segment, which aired at 7:40am, follows:
Tory Johnson: "Hi, it's Tory Johnson on Capitol Hill with a super group of women taking control of workplace politics. And we all want to say ‘Good Morning America!"
Sawyer: "We hear you loud and clear. The final stop on this week's ‘take control of your life’ tour, headed to Capitol Hill to ask tough questions about the issue of family leave. Did you know that among 173 countries surveyed there are only five countries without a national maternity leave? Lesotho, Swaziland, New Guinea, Liberia and the U.S. So we sent workplace contributor Tory Johnson to the capitol to get answers about why Washington is not doing more to help working families. Single working mom Tracy Reed gave birth just three weeks ago. And thanks to the Family and Medical Leave Act, she entitled to 12 week of maternity leave from her government job. The problem, those 12 weeks are unpaid. And as Tracy told our Tory Johnson, she's struggling just to get by."
ABC Graphic: "Take Control of Your Life: Can Government do More?"
Tracy Reed (working mom on maternity leave): "It's hard to be at home on unpaid leave. My loving family and friends, they've been keeping us afloat."
Roberts: "Debra Ness is one of many trying to expand the benefits for working women like Tracy Ness."
Debra Ness (President, National Partnership For Women & Family): "We really need as a nation to face this challenge because our workplace policies are out of sync with the realities of working families' lives."
Roberts: "There are paid leave proposals in Congress right now. So, what's stopping the government from making the law truly family friendly? Tory Johnson went to Washington to get some answers from Labor Department official Victoria Lipnic."
Johnson: "Is it troubling that so many people can't take advantage of the great benefits?"
Victoria Lipnic (Assistant Secretary, U.S. Dept. of Labor): "Well, certainly if you are a family who cannot, yeah, that's, you're in difficult circumstances."
Johnson: "As far back as 2000, the Department of Labor's own report showed that nearly 78 percent of those would wanted leave and had to pass it up said it was because they simply could not afford it."
Johnson: "What is the solution for a mother who has a new baby and her only option is to take unpaid leave or to take no time?"
Lipnic: "Again, you know, very difficult situation. It takes a lot of effort on the part of people like myself and all the policymakers."
Johnson: "So no timetable. There's no time frame?"
Lipnic: "I couldn't give you a time frame on it. It takes a long time to, you know, get people who are genuinely interested in trying to solve these issues."
Johnson: "Doesn't that sound like a lot of rhetoric to someone who is that mother or father at home who needs help?"
Lipnic: "Sure, it could. But it's also the reality that we are trying."
Roberts: "A reality that is forcing many working families like Tracy Reed into debt."
Reed: "It's a short amount of time, but it's a long time to be without money."
Roberts: "And for more, joining us live from right there, the Russell Senate Caucus Room, Tory Johnson and a wonderful group of working moms looking for answers. Plus, we have a very special guest next to her. That is Senator Chris Dodd. He is the sponsor of the Family Leave Insurance Act and, of course, a candidate for Democratic nomination for president. Good morning to you all. And Senator Dodd, I know you have been very passionate about this in recent years for many years now. And we saw Tory asking, going into the Labor Department and asking some tough questions. But they, they don't make the laws. They enforce the laws. So why isn't Congress moving a little faster on this issue?"
Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT): "Well, it's a difficult answer to give. We've been very slow on it. I authored the original Family and Medical Leave Act. That took me seven years. I went through three presidents and two vetoes before I could finally enact it in 1993. So, we’ve been slow to move on these issues. 168 countries in the world, only four countries don't provide family medical leave. Three of them are very poor struggling countries and the United States. So we've now had family medical leave, but as you pointed out, it's unpaid leave. And for almost 78 percent, 80 percent of families out there who couldn't take this because they couldn't afford to do it. So, paid leave is what I have introduced, a paid leave program. And we think that could make a huge difference for families in this country. We ought to catch up with the rest of the world on this issue."
Roberts: "As you said, you introduced this plan back in June, I believe. Eight weeks of paid leave. Of course, many people want to know, all right, how much is it going to cost and who's going to foot the bill here?"
Dodd: "It's a shared cost here between employers, employees, and the federal government. And it’s just a minor cost actually when you spread it out that way. It's not borne by any one group, employers or employees. And people say, well, that can be expensive. Well, my answer to that is it's very expensive not to do this. You heard already from families who pay an awful cost here when they have a family crisis. You shouldn't have to choose between the family you love and the job that you need. So many families with both parents working today, the pressures are incredible on them. So, this bill is long overdue. And I’m pleased to announce that Ted Stevens, a Republican here in the Senate is my co-sponsor. We have bipartisan support to begin this and I hope we can attract more support in the coming days."
Roberts: "You can’t see this, Senator Dodd, but a lot of moms behind you, nodding along in agreement to what you are saying. Tory, now, it is obvious the frustration from Senator Dodd and others there trying to get things done. But if you’re a family and you can't wait what can you do now?"
Johnson: "There are a few things that you can do. First and most important is to make your voice heard. Let the presidential candidates know the issues that matter to you. On the GMA website, we have links to all the senators and congressmen’s offices. Call them. E-mail them. Let them know where you stand. You can also talk to your state and find out what’s happening there. California was the first state to pass a leave act and others could be following suit. And most importantly, talk to your employer. Sometimes we can't wait for the government's relief to come. And so you want to talk to your boss right now. Many times if your boss knows that your need is just temporary, they're willing to work with you. So, be creative about creating a win-win and avoiding a lose-lose. So, if you say, ‘Work with me. Maybe you can give me alternative work, prorated pay. Give me an advance on vacation time that I haven't yet accrued, just for this temporary time, you'll help me and you won't lose me either.’"
Roberts: "Now you have Senator Dodd along nodding along with you."
Dodd: "Absolutely. I love that."
Johnson: "And these women, too. They're going to make their voices heard."
Roberts: "All right. That is the pledge all week long. Senator Dodd, thank you so much. Tory and all the women there, have a great weekend. We certainly do appreciate it."
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
They never discuss where
September 28, 2007 - 12:50 ET by robert108They never discuss where the "benefits" will come from; it's you and me, the American taxpayer.
When Dems/lefties want to push something on us, they only talk about the benefits, without discussing the costs. When they want to kill something, they talk about the costs without discussing the benefits.(example: the Iraq portion of the war on terrorism)
It's an old mind trick.
Ok....
September 28, 2007 - 13:05 ET by heldmywLet's force business to pay for, oh, say 12 weeks of maternity leave.
Do you think that will have any impact on the hiring of women of child-bearing age? Women just out of college, hoping to start on an executive track? Young women trying to help support a new family? A single mother?
And what about women with hispanic or Irish surnames? (Catholicism and the injunctions on birth control).
A business, (particularly a small business) could literally be gutted by legislation like this.
Sorry. You want kids? Plan for them. They're your choice and your responsibility. Don't expect to tax the world for their (and your) upkeep.
Run the numbers...
September 28, 2007 - 13:33 ET by c5thenIn 2002 there were just over 4 million births. Lets try and stick with round numbers to ball park the cost of this legislation...
The median income in the US is abiout $44,000 per year. that is about $1800 per week. The cost to business is roughly double that with the taxes and benefits, so per worker is about $3,600 per week. 12 weeks at $3,600/week is $43,200 per person. Multiply that by the 4 million births in 2002 and you get an annual cost of $172,800,000,000 per year! That right, about $173 Billion per year as a direct drain on the GDP, because these are totally non-productive hours by definition. Using the currently "in vogue" method of calculating legislative costs by projecting them out 10 years... we get $1.73 Trillion as the bottom minimum cost. Why bottom minimum? Well, we used 2002 birth rates and current median income levels, both can be expected to rise over the next 10 years...
Gee, this was so hard to do. I have to wonder why ABC news didn't try and ball-park the costs and at least mention them?
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Fred08.com
in addition,
September 28, 2007 - 15:39 ET by be_objectiveHeadlining on Drudge right now Hillary wants to give every baby 5,000, thats another 20,000,000,000.
It seems the libs love to talk about how somone's "rights" are being violated because they aren't being given a free handout, but they never talk about those who's rights are truly being violated by having there earned money forcibly taken (taxes) from them to support the recipients (moochers) of such socialist welfare programs. The government does not have the right to subjugat the rights of any individual citizen to the percieved "needs" of another. Although I realize in practice this is the SOP of the government, it is not the premise this country was founded on.
"In any compromise between good and evil, only evil can profit." Ayn Rand
Tee Shirts
September 28, 2007 - 13:05 ET by mattmNotice the slogan "It's My Life..." This is typical of the slogans of the Left - They actually contradict themselves.
"It's my life so we ask the government to force our employer to give us time off." What about the employer's life? What about their own responsibility for managing their own lives?
This is just like "keep your laws and morality off my body" ...except when giving me 'free' healthcare and government funded abortions, foodstamps, etc.
Mattm: I also like the
September 28, 2007 - 14:33 ET by bassndudeMattm: I also like the "take control of your life" bit while asking goverment to do it for them. I wonder if they see the stupidity of that caption? I mean, its just plain stupid. Im at a loss for words.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
I was so stunned by the
September 28, 2007 - 15:59 ET by mattmI was so stunned by the utter stupidity of "It's My Life" that I totally missed the even more ridiculous "Take Control Of Your Life" caption.
I think they meant "Let the Democrats take control of your life."
mattm, you misunderstand...
September 28, 2007 - 18:19 ET by motherbeltWhat it means is, "It's my Life"....so how dare my employer mess with it by making me work when I don't want to?????
<sarc off>
I'm going to always use that sign now, because I got taken seriously too many times.
The law of unintended consequenses...
September 28, 2007 - 13:16 ET by c5thenIf these laws actually pass and don't get vetoed (GOD forbid!) one possible unintended consequense will be that it sets up a HUGE incentive to not hire women, since they will be the most likely partakers of these new "benefits".
It seems that "single working mom Traci Reed" can not afford to have the baby, and why is she engaging in an activity that she can't afford and expecting the Government to pick up the tab?
Why is it that liberals think that the government should pay for everything and at the same time think that the funds the government has are "free"?
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Fred08.com
Why is it that liberals
September 28, 2007 - 18:24 ET by motherbeltWhy is it that liberals think that the government should pay for
everything and at the same time think that the funds the government has
are "free"?
Because they went to public schools and have no knowledge of economics, and they think the government has a huge magic stash of money that they just grab from whenever they want some. You know, like little kids that think the ATM is a magic money machine ..you put your card in and money comes out.
your money for nothing and your checks for free
September 28, 2007 - 13:25 ET by acumenDid Dodd's campaign pay for this political ad?
Regardless, did ABC happen to mention if they currently "give away" any of their billions in large annual corporate profits to their employees on maternity leave?
If ABC corporate acknowledges this reportedly dire situation is "a reality that is forcing many working families like Tracy Reed into debt", then why at the least is ABC not being proactive and paying their own employees on maternity leave instead of waiting for a legislative solution?
I'm sure ABC wil address the above questions when they have someone on with an opposing position.....and pigs fly.
"Take Control of Your Life:
September 28, 2007 - 13:41 ET by PeskyDane"Take Control of Your Life: Can Government do More?"
This hit me as soon as I saw it... proving once again that libs have zero capacity for irony.
AMEN!! Pesky... Save a
September 28, 2007 - 14:34 ET by bassndudeAMEN!! Pesky...
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
I had the opposite reaction...
September 28, 2007 - 14:38 ET by sarcasmoRead both lines, again. Clearly, some network-employee has quite a wry, Orwell-influenced sense of humor!
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
The same
September 28, 2007 - 16:05 ET by well99I was going to put it up.I dont think journalist are required to have common sense and it shows.
Gee, ever notice the
September 28, 2007 - 13:43 ET by dabalGee, ever notice the liberal trolls and lurkers never post on threads like this?
Telling.
List of names of those present. How many married? etc.
September 28, 2007 - 14:04 ET by PawpawNCould we get a list of the names of the women with the t's on? How many are employed[other than by this project!], how many are mothers, how many can not afford the time off, etc? I would bet that some of those women were being paid to be there this morning and at Congress, just like most, not all, protesters at other events.
"So we sent workplace
September 28, 2007 - 14:21 ET by sublight68"So we sent workplace contributor Tory Johnson to the capitol to get answers about why Washington is not doing more to help working families."
To help "working families" by forcing employers to provide paid maternity leave, taxes and costs of goods for those same working families will dramatically increase.
If your family is already in place, you now have to pay more out of your check to support the paid time off for those just getting started. So to help working families, we're going to tax them more? Makes perfect sense.
As long as goodies are being handed out, I want 12 weeks of paid time off, too. I'm male and have no kids, but could make do with a 3 month sabbatical. I keep paying in have yet to fall into any group that reaps the benefits.
This is such a sad story. I
September 28, 2007 - 14:30 ET by bassndudeThis is such a sad story. I think I will fire all the women that work for me out here. Except the old ones. These young women today are so mistreated, and I dont want to continue mistreating them. Be right back...pink slips await, or is a text message the way to go?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Will the free lunch line
September 28, 2007 - 14:48 ET by the_red_stateWill the free lunch line never end?
Rush Limbaugh predicted
September 28, 2007 - 15:32 ET by motherbeltRush Limbaugh predicted this years ago. When the FMLA (unpaid leave) passed during Clinton's term, he said this was just the camel's nose in the tent, and it wouldn't be long before people would say: wait a minute, parents with a new baby can't afford to go without a paycheck for 12 weeks. And they would want partial pay. Then they would want full pay.
These people are just so predictable!
Wait Motherbelt, Are you
September 28, 2007 - 15:35 ET by LeonWait Motherbelt,
Are you really saying you don't support FMLA?
That is the strangest thing I've ever heard.
So if my wife (if I had one) dies, I shouldn't get any pay during my period of grieving?
Whoa. That's hardcore.
Most companies have policies
September 28, 2007 - 15:41 ET by motherbeltLeon, your "Are you really saying? etc" questions are getting a little old. I did not say I was against family leave.
Most companies have policies in place for things like that. They don't need the federal government telling them how long and how much.
Sen. Dodd says: You shouldn't have to choose between the family you love and the job that you need.
So, Senator Dodd, why stop at eight weeks? Why not twelve? Why not twenty-four? Why not until the child is a year old?
Motherbelt, The point is
September 28, 2007 - 15:42 ET by LeonMotherbelt,
The point is that yes, most do, but some don't.
FMLA was intended to address those companies that didn't have those policies.
You stop at 8 weeks (isn't it 12 weeks?) b/c that's a reasonable amount of time to be off work.
Hey Leon, shouldn't unpaid
September 28, 2007 - 15:39 ET by MightyMouthHey Leon, shouldn't unpaid leave be between you and your employer? What makes you think the govenment should stick it's nose in business between you and the guy you work for? If he doesn't offer unpaid leave then... well... leave! Find an employer who can give you what you want.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
MM, If Leon can find one...
September 28, 2007 - 17:36 ET by Conservative_in_mass."Find an employer who can give you what you want."
MM, he would except most if not all of them eventually go out of business. Gee, I wonder why that is?
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. ~ Unknown
Every company I have ever
September 28, 2007 - 18:54 ET by american-americanEvery company I have ever worked for have given paid leave for death of a family member, usually 3 to 5 days.
I got 5 days paid leave when my mother died, and 5 days paid leave when my father died.
Maybe you should discuss things like that as part of your benefits package, and choose your employment based on the benefits packages?
That is the strangest thing I've ever heard. LOL... really? the strangest? You don't get out much do you?
Who decides what is
September 28, 2007 - 16:21 ET by motherbeltYou stop at 8 weeks (isn't it 12 weeks?) b/c that's a reasonable amount of time to be off work. -Leon
Who decides what is "reasonable"?? It used to be thought that unpaid leave was "reasonable."
For the rest of my reply, just reread MightyMouth's
I ditto that.
"On the GMA website, we
September 28, 2007 - 17:40 ET by Conservative_in_mass."On the GMA website, we have links to all the senators’ and congressmen’s offices. Call them. E-mail them. Let them know where you stand."
Well all I have to say is, with all the legislative "recesses" these grade schoolers get, you'll be lucky if anyone gets an E-mail. How long til the 'Holiday" recess in Washington. Didn't we just complete the "summer recess". hmmm.
Again with the left and its love of all things communist in nature. Lets look at a shining example in Europe, like France. Guaranteed jobs for life, lots of paid time off, 35 hour weeks...which gets you high unemployment, a stagnant economy, a huge tax burden.
Yup, looks like the plan is really working well out there. I'll pass. If I want to work 51 weeks a year to get ahead, thats MY business, and not the "governments" concern.
The left Loves big Government. Is it any wonder why they wish to destroy free market enterprise as we know it? So its performance can sink to the level of big government...a.k.a. Socialism.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. ~ Unknown
Photo's on-screen caption = contradiction?
September 28, 2007 - 18:37 ET by american-americanI can not get past the on screen caption in that picture.
Take Control of Your Life
Can Government Do More
The second line is in direct contradiction to the first line. To me, taking control of my life means, well, me being responsible for my own well being. Maybe it is just me....
Edit: oops... I see it has been discussed already. My apologies for not reading the comments before commenting myself.
Am Am
September 28, 2007 - 20:11 ET by Conservative_in_mass.Excellent observation. You summed up the discussion with that one.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. ~ Unknown