Obama and McCain: Contrasting Positions on Equal Pay
For the last eight years, and for the dozen years before the Clinton administration, the conservative movement has been shockingly successful in pursuing a key agenda: stocking the federal courts with pro-business judges. "Pro-business" meaning, in large part, judges who think they need to protect businesses from juries, who view lawsuits by consumers and employees against businesses as a nuisance, who want to cap or eliminate punitive damages, etc.
The pro-business agenda was advanced in a distressing way last year when the Supreme Court ruled that women who are denied equal pay must bring a claim within 180 days (in some states, 300 in others) after their pay has been established -- even if they don't know about the discriminatory pay within that time period. The Supreme Court's interpretation encourages businesses to conceal disparate salaries or raises; if they do so successfully, they insulate themselves from accountability for their illegal actions. A more reasonable interpretation of the law, one that is faithful to its purpose of prohibiting discrimination, would start the clock running again with every new discriminatory paycheck. But the Court ruled against that position by a 5-4 majority. [More...]
The presidential candidates have very different views about the wisdom of that decision. In short, Barack Obama wants to change the law so that it becomes an effective remedy against discrimination in pay, while John McCain likes the law as it now stands.
"I'll continue to stand up for equal pay as president — Senator McCain won't, and that's a real difference in this election," Obama said.
The Fair Pay Restoration Act would rectify the Supreme Court's mistake. Obama supports it; indeed, he is a co-sponsor. A similar bill passed the House but the measure has gone nowhere in the Senate thanks to a Republican filibuster. McCain didn't bother to vote on the cloture motion because he buys into the notion that amending the law will breed more litigation -- and there's nothing Republicans hate more than a business being held accountable in court when it violates a civil rights law. But using litigation to redress discrimination is exactly why we have civil rights laws.
From remarks that Obama made today:
"It starts with equal pay. 62 percent of working women in America earn half – or more than half – of their family’s income. But women still earn only 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. In 2008, you’d think that Washington would be united in its determination to fight for equal pay. That’s why I was proud to co-sponsor the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, which would have reversed last year’s Supreme Court decision, which made it more difficult for women to challenge pay discrimination on the job," Obama said. ..."Senator McCain thinks the Supreme Court got it right. He opposed the Fair Pay Restoration Act. He suggested that the reason women don’t have equal pay isn’t discrimination on the job – it’s because they need more education and training. That’s just totally wrong… John McCain just has it wrong. He said the Fair Pay Restoration Act 'opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems.' But I can’t think of any problem more important than making sure that women get equal pay for equal work. It’s a matter of equality. It’s a matter of fairness."
Would you rather have a president who supports equal pay, or a president who thinks women just need more "training" and equal pay will magically follow?
| < Hillary 's New Video Seeking Contributions to Retire Campaign Debt | Hillary and Obama to Jointly Campaign in Unity, N.H. > |
