State legislative agendas to be shaped by budget woes - Brief Article

With budget deficits plaguing all levels of government, state legislators in 2003 will devote most of their attention to finding and preserving revenue sources and to protecting the nation's social safety net, observers say.

But some issues of historic interest to employers--including health care costs, family leave mandates and the minimum wage--will remain top priorities in the state capitols, they add.

R. Scott Elliott, immediate past president of the Legislative Action Committee of the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), predicts that state and local lawmaking bodies will continue to debate proposals to establish or increase minimum wages, including "living wages," taking inflation and living costs into account.

Elliott, HR manager for a Bridgeton, N.J.-based frozen-vegetable producer, Seabrook Brothers and Sons Inc., and David Namura, state affairs manager in SHRM's Governmental Affairs Department, expect state legislatures to venture into a few relatively new issue areas despite their budget woes.

For example, Congress's failure to enact measures designed to protect health care patients' rights and control health care costs is forcing state legislatures to step into the void, Namura and Elliott say.

Also, other states cannot ignore the fact that the California legislature created a paid family and medical leave program last year, at a time when that state faced a crushing budget deficit, they add. Elliott believes California lawmakers' decision to tax employees, rather than employers, for the cost of the new program reduced the business community's opposition enough that the legislation could be enacted.

"Certainly, the paid family leave [issue] is big. California is already there, so they've broken the barrier in a sense," says Elliott. In states where family and medical leave is a "hot-button issue," including New Jersey, the California action will provide "some impetus to move forward" even during troubling economic times, he explains.

Namura says the desire of workers for paid family and medical leave, in addition to the 12 weeks of unpaid leave required under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act, may cause that issue to be addressed differently than other issues of interest to HR managers.

When state treasuries are flush, state legislators often watch their counterparts in other states--particularly populous states such as California, Texas, Florida and New York--for guidance about legislative priorities. In tough times, such copycatting may be less likely. However, Namura says family leave may be the exception because of its growing popularity.

Also, with a number of surveys finding that group health insurance premiums are increasing at an annual clip of 15 percent or more, health care costs will be a major concern at state capitols, many observers say.

Although much of the work to contain health care costs may occur in Washington, D.C., Elliott and Namura say the states also will seek to play a large role.

They expect legislation to limit the malpractice liability of doctors to be introduced in many state legislatures. The state legislatures, they added, also will tackle prescription drug costs, in the wake of funding problems affecting state-administered Medicaid programs.

Two other issues where state legislatures may play a significant part this year are safeguarding the use of individuals' genetic information, and combating discrimination against gays and lesbians.

Elliott said preventing discrimination based on sexual orientation is such an emotionally charged issue--similar to abortion rights--that Congress has essentially ducked the issue for years. "No matter what stand you take--if you take a strong stand for or against [anti-bias proposals]--you're going to get a strong backlash from the opposite side;' he says.

Some states have already been active in seeking to prevent discrimination against gays and lesbians. "I think that's one [issue] where you're going to see a lot of chipping away at the local level for a long time," Elliott says.

Namura and Elliott say protecting personal privacy has become such a hot topic that state legislatures may become involved. One potential area is ensuring that results from DNA testing and other means of determining a person's genetic makeup are used for valid purposes, such as assessing health care needs--not for discriminating against employees and potential employees who maybe at risk for certain diseases and conditions.

Elliott says the technology for analyzing DNA is evolving so rapidly that federal regulations to safeguard use of the information maybe outdated as soon as they are issued. He predicts that once the federal government sets standards for genetic testing, states will enter the debate about combating discrimination.

ROBERT W. THOMPSON, A FREELANCE WRITER AND EDITOR BASED IN ANNAPOLIS, MD., IS FORMER MANAGING EDITOR OF HR NEWS.

COPYRIGHT 2003 Society for Human Resource Management
COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale Group