Bush Proposes Alternative to Family Leave Measure : Benefits: President’s plan is voluntary and would offer tax credits to businesses that give workers time off.

President Bush, faced with the political dilemma of vetoing a popular family leave bill, proposed an alternative Wednesday that would provide $500 million in tax credits for businesses that give workers time off for family emergencies or to care for new children.

Two years after he vetoed a family leave bill--and on the eve of the near-certain veto of a similar measure that polls show has overwhelming public support--the White House hastily assembled a substitute that would give companies flexibility in meeting personnel needs but would not force them to grant leaves.

The White House argues that companies compelled to provide the benefits would make up the costs by firing workers.

The timing of congressional action on the legislation, approved by the Senate last month and the House last Thursday, guarantees that presidential politics will play into the debate over family leave. The White House accused Democratic leaders in Congress of delaying action until well into the election season, and the President said the timing was “very peculiar and highly political.”

Also Wednesday, Bush prepared for a campaign rally in Oklahoma today at which he will present the flip side of the economic plan he released last week. He will describe his vision of what Democratic nominee Bill Clinton would do to the economy if elected.

The purpose is “to sharpen the differences intellectually with the other guy,” a senior White House official said. “We’re going to say, ‘Be careful when you ask for change; you may get what you ask for.’ ”

The family leave debate places Bush in a difficult position. He has sought to make “family values” a central theme of his campaign. But his opposition to the “mandated benefits” in the bill means he is almost certain to veto it.

Under the measure, large firms would be required to grant workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for childbirth, arrival of an adopted child, or serious illness of the employee or a child, spouse or parent. Only firms with 50 or more workers would be covered by the bill, a provision that would exclude 95% of all businesses.

Under Bush’s plan, employers could claim tax credits for the costs of continuing health and pension benefits for workers on leave, as well as for hiring temporary workers and granting partial pay for workers on leave.

The tax credit would apply to up to 20% of the employee-benefit costs, a maximum of $100 a week per employee for 12 weeks.

It would cost the Treasury $500 million in fiscal year 1993 and $2.7 billion over five years, the White House estimated. Under federal budget law, Bush must specify programs to cut to make up for the lost revenue. He said any of the $77.7 billion in spending cuts he has recommended to Congress this year “would be acceptable.”

“This is not federally mandated leave,” Bush said in a written message to Congress. “It instead gives employers positive incentives to adopt responsible family leave policies and gives them the flexibility to target the specific needs of their employees.”

In a statement issued by his campaign, Clinton said: “Today, George Bush showed his true colors on family values. Given a chance to help working families, he’s walked away again.

“After four years of denying working Americans the right that people in 72 other nations have, Bush offered a last-minute mandate,” said Clinton, who favors the congressional measure. “His tax credit does nothing to guarantee that workers will have leave or a job if they’re allowed to return.”

The tax credit would be limited to companies with 500 or fewer employees, White House Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater said, because “the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that 89% to 90% of all companies of medium and large size already have family leave policies, and the great need is at the lower end.”

“We think one of the advantages of this is that the Democratic proposal . . . doesn’t apply to companies under 50 people, which are really the people who need this and the ones who most seldom have it,” he said.

In Congress, both Democrats and Republicans criticized Bush.

“White House actions speak louder than campaign trail words,” said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources. “If President Bush believes in family values, how can he veto the family leave bill?”

A bipartisan coalition of congressional leaders urged Bush to approve the legislation, and Sen. Bob Packwood (R-Ore.) called on him “not to miss this golden opportunity--take another look at it.”

Public opinion polls suggest Bush’s opposition to the congressional plan puts him out of step with a large majority of Americans--but the political costs may be limited because the economy is the central campaign issue.

According to a Gallup Poll conducted in April for Life magazine, 83% of those surveyed supported the measure. But family values in general rank as a less important issue for voters than the economy, or such specific economic-related issues as unemployment and the budget deficit.