Feb. 14—Advocates for a state-run paid family and medical leave program came closer than ever this year to getting something passed in the Legislature but were two votes shy.

The House of Representatives voted 36-34 Wednesday afternoon to kill Senate Bill 3, with 11 Democrats joining Republicans to defeat the measure on the last full day of the 2024 legislative session. It had passed the Senate on a mostly party-line vote last week.

The bill’s House sponsors put on a brave face, noting in a statement after Wednesday’s vote that “big change takes time.”

“We are heartened that we got closer than ever to making sure no New Mexican has to fear losing their paycheck because they are facing a devastating medical issue, growing their family, or caring for a loved one,” the statement said. “We will continue this fight along with communities across our state until we can deliver a paid family and medical leave policy that lives up to our values as New Mexicans.”

Rep. Christine Chandler, D-Los Alamos, was one of the bill’s three House sponsors. In an interview after the vote, she said she and other supporters of the bill will try again next year. This is an election year, so in 2025 the Legislature could have new members “which could be good or bad for the bill,” she said.

“I’m pragmatic,” she added.

Then she said, “I’m not happy. Maybe tomorrow I’ll be really depressed.”

Senate President Pro Tem Mimi Stewart, D-Albuquerque, who sponsored the bill in that chamber, likewise expressed sadness but promised to keep trying.

“I am profoundly disappointed in this outcome, but it does not shake my resolve to deliver this basic human right to New Mexicans,” she said in an email. “My House co-sponsors and I will continue to work with our grassroots coalition to dispel the fearmongering we heard today around our compassionate approach, one which was crafted with small business owners at the table.”

SB 3 would have set up a program to be run by the Department of Workforce Solutions at an estimated startup cost of $36 million and be funded by contributions from all employees and employers with more than five workers.

Advocates have said the program is a needed benefit for workers so they don’t have to lose earnings while they take time off due to medical issues, the birth of a child or to care for an ill loved one.

Opponents argued the program will place an extra financial burden on both businesses and employees, and they feared workers would abuse it.

During the three-hour House floor debate on SB 3, Chandler said it would benefit both employers and employees because it allows “the employee to get wage replacement that is not provided directly by the employer and the time they need for pregnancy leave or to address a medical condition.”

“When employees utilize these programs, they are much more likely to return to the employer,” she added.

Both Republicans and Democrats opposed to the bill countered it could harm small-business owners who cannot afford to pay into the fund or who would have trouble finding replacement workers for employees who take leave.

During the debate, Rep. Alan Martinez, R-Bernalillo, asked Rep. Linda Serrato, D-Santa Fe, one of SB 3’s co-sponsors, whether the bill is “business friendly.”

Serrato acknowledged some entities, like several chambers of commerce around the state, may not support the bill.

“I know people are scared, to be quite frank,” she told Martinez. “We are talking about something very new to New Mexico. The value isn’t new — this is what we do in New Mexico; we take care of each other.”

While the bill may frighten some, she said, “That’s less scary than finding out someone you love has cancer … and finding out there’s no one there to care for them.”

In an interview after the vote, Chandler smiled hopefully as she thought about the tight vote on a bill that never made it so close to the legislative finish line. Last year’s bill also passed the Senate but died in a House committee without making it to the floor.

“We did real well — a two-vote difference,” she said.

But, she added, “We thought we could push it off the floor.”

Versions of a paid leave program have been pursued for years. Days before this year’s session began, advocates, including Chandler and Stewart, said it’s past time to make it law.

As originally written, the bill would have allowed for up to 12 weeks of paid leave. However, it was amended in the Senate to reduce the paid time for medical leave from 12 to nine weeks for the first two years of the program.

During those two years, the state would have looked at the solvency of the fund to see if the leave could be moved up to 12 weeks. People could still have received up to 12 weeks of leave for the birth or adoption of a child.

Another amendment adopted in the Senate would require an employee to work for a company for at least six months, rather than three months, before they were guaranteed their job would be protected during their leave.

Much of Wednesday’s debate revolved around a proposed amendment from Rep. Meredith Dixon, D-Albuquerque, which said private employers would not be required to pay until Jan. 1, 2029, if they are licensed by the state’s Early Childhood Education and Care Department or derive 80% or more of their gross annual revenue from providing personal services under Medicaid.

Among other benefits, Dixon said this would buy those entities time to adjust to likely Medicaid rate differentials that might occur in the wake of the bill. The House rejected the amendment on a 36-34 vote.

A few minutes after the vote, Rep. Tara Lujan, D-Santa Fe, sitting nearly alone in the House chamber, was still fighting back tears.

“There’s a lot of emotion behind a bill that supports our values,” she said.

While she said the concerns voiced by businesses are “valid,” she hopes the bill’s sponsors and advocates can keep working with those businesses to “move it forward” next year.

“What the Paid Family and Medical Leave Act means is protection for our families,” she said.