Bush Warned by GOP Leave-Bill Backers : Benefits: The President is told that a veto would be in conflict with the Republicans’ past pledges to protect ‘family values.’

Responding to a White House veto threat, Republican supporters of a family and medical leave bill Tuesday warned President Bush that a veto of the legislation would hurt their party because of its past pledges to protect “family values.”

The legislation, which is strongly backed by the House Democratic leadership and a group of GOP moderates, is expected to pass the House easily today or Thursday but fall short of a veto-proof two-thirds majority. It then will be sent to the Senate, where approval appears likely.

White House Chief of Staff John H. Sununu said Monday that Bush would veto the bill, which is strongly opposed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups, on grounds that it would mandate a fringe benefit--unpaid leaves to deal with family emergencies, personal illness or the birth of a child--that should be left to employers’ discretion.

Rep. Marge Roukema (R-N.J.), however, urged the President to sign the legislation that she said would establish minimum standards of decency in the workplace.

“This bill is about family values,” Roukema said. “As a mother who cared for my own son when he was terminally ill with leukemia, I know the importance of this legislation.

“This is a defining issue for the Republican Party,” she added. “The organized business lobby is out of step with the real world. . . . For two-thirds of Americans workers, this is an economic necessity.”

Her views were echoed by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), who said the bipartisan compromise was designed to protect legitimate business concerns while extending family and medical leave to millions of American workers who need it.

“This is right for America--right for the Republican and Democratic parties,” Weldon said. “This legislation is necessary in a world where so often both parents must work, when parents cannot afford to take off full-time to care for a child . . . they need to know their jobs will be waiting for them when they return.”

Rep. Bill Green (R-N.Y.) even read from the GOP platform adopted in 1988 about the importance of parents in raising children in urging that Bush sign the bill.

The legislation, originally introduced five years ago, has been bottled up in committee because of strong business opposition. Republican backers of the measure, however, said changes were made to overcome many business objections. The co-sponsor of the compromise, Rep. Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.), is a conservative Southerner who has business support.

Meanwhile, White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater contributed to the debate with some advice for workers who cannot persuade their employers to grant them time off to deal with family medical crises or newborn children: “Look for other jobs.”

Fitzwater’s remark was retracted quickly. Before his briefing ended, he said: “I did not intend to suggest that individuals seek other employment if they don’t have adequate parent leave. . . . Compromise means give and take, and we urge all employers to find sensitive and flexible leave policies, but the government should not dictate it.”

The top three Democrats in the House--including Speaker Thomas S. Foley, Majority Leader Richard A. Gephardt and Whip William H. Gray III--also urged Bush to sign the bill, which Foley termed one of the most significant pieces of legislation in the 101st Congress.

Under the bipartisan compromise, companies or government agencies with more than 50 employes would be required to grant unpaid medical or family leave for up to 12 weeks a year. During a leave, employers would have to continue health benefits and provide a job when the worker returned.

“We’re asking the President to sign this bill and stand up with the working families of America,” said Gephardt, a Missouri Democrat.

“After the legislation has been passed . . . and the President has a chance to reflect on its importance to families and preserving the family as an institution . . . the President will sign the bill,” added Foley, making a rare public statement on a bill before it came to a vote in the House.