Login Here[I'm making a plea today on behalf of more and better Democrats: we need more of them in office shaping the policies and actions of the Democratic party. Let's call this another $10 day -- pick a Blue America candidate of your choice and make a donation. Call up their election HQ and volunteer to make calls or stuff envelopes or knock on doors. Do something to help get better people into office in November. And do it today! -- CHS]
Sometimes, you are so angry that you need to just let someone else do the talking:
"Every paycheck, I got less than what I was entitled to under the law. The Supreme Court said that it didn't count as illegal discrimination. But it sure feels like discrimination when you're on the receiving end of a smaller paycheck and you're trying to support your family with less money than what the men are getting for doing the same job.
According to the Supreme Court, if you don't figure things out right away, the company can treat you like a second class citizen for the rest of your career. And that's not right. The truth is, Goodyear continues to treat me like a second class worker to this day, because my pension and my social security is based on the amount I earned while working there. Goodyear gets to keep my extra pension as a reward for breaking the law."
-- Lilly Ledbetter's testimony before the House Committee on Education and Labor, 6/14/07 (YouTube at left)
Yesterday, Republicans in the Senate blocked cloture on the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act because the Republican party's false, obstructionist tactics prevented the vote from going forward in a filibuster in support of corporate discrimination and crime.
At a time when women are being hit hard -- especially single parent moms trying to earn a living for their families and pay the bills and feed them -- now having to wonder if their bosses can get away with paying them less just because they are female? That is unacceptable. And this doesn't just affect women, the Ledbetter case has been applied to arguments on discriminatory practices across the board, helping corporations end run the fairness protections written into law in the 1960s and beyond.
For shame.
The Ledbetter Act will come up for another vote -- Democratic leadership has already said they will bring this up again. In the meantime, take a peek at all the "NO" votes from the GOP on the roll call list, and contemplate giving them a call to tell them how ashamed you are of their failure to stand up for working people in this country. And while you are at it, do like dmac did today calling in to local talk radio, and let your friends and neighbors know about this, too.
If ever there were a case for more and better Democrats being elected into office, this is it. Shame on them. Shame on John McCain for not even bothering to show up to vote, but saying all women need is more education -- because that's going to stop employers from cheating them out of their rightful pay for doing the same damn job as men how, exactly?!? Jeebus, pops, try leaving more than a quarter as a tip, why don't you, because in case you haven't noticed, you ain't exactly buttering your own bread.
Shame especially on Mitch McConnell for lying outright about the bill.
(FYI, the Reid "no" vote was a procedural switch at the end to allow him to bring the bill up later.)
Share This 
Spotlight
Maybe a $$$ focus on the Dem running against McConnell in KY?
Redd
It’s not clear to me from what you wrote what blame the dems have for this (although I’m sure they have some).
“Anthony” Scalia (as Bu’ush once called him):
Life is unfair. Get over it.
It is a mystery why people who are not very wealthy allow thenselves to be fooled into voting for any Republic.
That’s because the Dems worked their asses off on passing this and managed to flip several Republicans along the way. Ted Kennedy has been whipping this bill, and a lot of progressive and legal organizations — like AFJ, ALCU, and others have been helping it along.
The real pressure ought to be on folks like the GOP members of the Gang of 14 — Sununu being at the top of my list. As well as on people like McConnell who outright lied about the bill’s contents.
The reason you don’t see me grousing about the Dems is because they didn’t earn it from my perspective on this one. They really did a lot of work behind the scenes…they just couldn’t overcome the GOP threats on breaking ranks — which means we need to help build more public pressure for more Senators to do so next vote.
…which isn’t to say that all the Dems who voted for cloture on Alito and Roberts aren’t still on my list… *g*
People are substantially “arational” ongoing, minimally.
When the press corps following McCain’s campaign asked him about his missing the cloture vote, what was his response? News reports say that McCain skipped the vote to campaign in New Orleans, but says that he opposes the bill since it would provoke lawsuits [from the affected women, naturally].
[I’m thinking of making a career change into stand-up comedy.]
Redd
OK- I’m with you now- when I saw THIS “If ever there were a case for more and better Democrats being elected into office, this is it. “, I thought that you WERE givin the dems hell.
Did anyone watch Boston Legal Tuesday evening? One of the plot settings was before the United States Supreme court. James Spader’s closing statement to the court, in which he fictionally blasted Scalia, Roberts and Thomas, was absolutely wonderful. Wish I had a link (if there is one) because it was precious.
Nah — we were two votes shy of cloture yesterday. Two votes. We needed two more GOP-ers to flip. If they aren’t willing to do so, then we’ll get the needed votes by booting them out of office. It’s that simple.
Christy — and people ask why Hillary won’t fold up her tent and go off into the night? It’s talk like McCain’s women “need more education and training” crap.
and one of those was Chuck Hegel, right?
Ask and you shall recieve.
http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04...../#comments
That’s probably about what we should pick up this year—two to three senate seats…Could be MORE if the gooper president keeps fuckin up.
Hegel didn’t bother to vote, either.
Is that sorta like not thinking at all?
The Philosopher? The existenialist cat?
;)
Exactly - he sat on the fence so that he would not look bad.
Yeha, the “Kinder, Gentler” irrationality. Ever read the book “On Bullshit“?
As I understand the Supreme Court ruling, the person who experienced discrimination has 180 days “from the time the first discriminatory act occurred.” When many new jobs have an attached “probationary period” is it realistic to expect one to be ‘inquiring’ into salaries? I heard that some companies actually have salary non-disclosure clauses in contracts . . . so how could one KNOW when the first event occurred.
As a non-lawyer, much of what comes out of the SC is ‘over my head’. But if even I can recognize gross unfairness, narrow construction, and administrative sycophancy–I expect most others can. Have Justices no shame? Will they smile with pride that their narrow-minded, agenda-driven position will reside in legal annals as representative of the (small-minded, self-serving) “brightest minds” of the day?
Maybe I’m too cynical, Christie, but I have to wonder if the Republican numbers aren’t counted in advance and a certain number of Rs from states with more left-leaning populations allowed to make a show-vote. Would these Republicans have voted Yea if it would have made a difference?
Anybody who doesn’t believe in equal pay for equal work is an asshole.
/patience.
I missed seeing anything that McConnell said about the bill. What was the mischaracterization?
Meanwhile, Liddy Dole is a jerk. Do we have anyone good running against her?
am writing some LTE’s to gooper pigs hometown papers (Why Is Senator _ Voting Against Working People of This District ?) - using these very handy tools
National Media Links
Letters to the Editor Basics - Firedoglake
everytime you write a letter their BP goes up 5 points ! . ok, not really but they really hate this, esp in an election year
?have justices no shame? Well, I think we can say with certitude - no, they don’t.
I can’t emphasize enough how pissed off it makes me watching this video of Lilly Ledbetter. She reminds me so much of so many of the women in my family who worked their asses off to take care of their kids and make ends meet…and who would have been just as disgusted by such dishonorable conduct in the workplace had they found out about it, too.
It’s not the pay, although that’s important certainly. It’s the being treated like you are worth less because you are a woman and the insult that you are never going to find out so they can do whatever they like and get away with it — and that is considered appropriate and tolerable by people in power.
It’s demeaning and dishonest cheating. And they ought to all be ashamed of themselves for saying it’s perfectly okay…
No, but I’ve heard all about it. Just goes to show that critical thinking skills have been sadly neglected in our “modern” society. I’ve often thought that most people let it go on the basis of you don’t challenge mine, I won’t canllenge yours.
Jim Neal 08
Ye-up. But, unfortunately, there’s still a lot of those around.
“unfairness, narrow construction, and administrative sycophancy”
_______
Again, “life is unfair, Get over it.”
“Anthony” Scalia
(Paraphrasing closely. He once said essentially that, that the role of the Supremes was not about “justice/equity/fairness” broadly, it was about textually interpreting the Constitution, period. You don’t like the unfairness. Tough shit. Change the Constitution.)
man, i am NEVER gonna get outside if you keep posting these pertinent posts!!!!!
i’ll be back in a while, gotta do a few things…
called harry reid’s office to voice support to bring it up again asap, told julia there that voinavich’s office was saying he voted nay due to procedural issue that blocked amendments, she said she hadn’t heard that and asked me all about it, wants copy of letter i get from voinavich about it.
and i brought up my comment about how people talk about women in burkas in other countries, what is happening here? second class citizens again…..
and diane rehm show did a show about the bill today, can get it on podcast, was a good show……although i am peeved that she waited until after the bill to do it…
1-800-450-8293 switchboard
===============
epu’d
just did one last thing before going outside, it was buggin’ me–
voinavich said he voted nay because of procedural issues, democrats wouldn’t allow amendments-
i just called his office (edit-back) and said i want a written answer—
when the republicans were in control of the senate and did the same thing to the democrats, how many times did he vote nay because it ’wasn’t correct procedure’?
bbl
ya might want to visit here as well - lots of reality based talking points
But, but Christy - businesses now absolutely count on being able to get skills at the ’sex discount’ rate. It has nothing to do with education. It has nothing to do with training. It has nothing to do with the fact that women have babies and may be out of the workforce for periods of time - it’s getting those skills and only having to pay a cut rate for it so that they can maximize their profitability. We need to just think of ourselves as “third world outsourced staffing” ..only we get to live here.
I would point out that both Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) voted against equal pay for women. I would also point out that Lamar Alexander (R-TN) who is supposed to be a moderate voted against. Warner (R-VA) is leavng the Senate. He voted against showing that his rep as a statesman is vastly overblown. He is, was, and will be always and foremost a loyal Republican hack. Hagel (R-NE) is another supposed moderate who was one of the two non votes. Naturally, the guy who wants to be the Maverick in Chief couldn’t get his straightshooter up sufficiently to vote either.
Well, y’know, I’ve taught “Critical Thinking” recently, and have a book in progress (two actually) expanding greatly on the topical coverage, based on the deficiencies I’ve found in the required texts (I also served as a manuscript reviewer for Allyn & Bacon).
Bottom line on my voluminous book research: We are chronically irrational in the aggregate, we frequently decide and act against our own “rational” interests, and are easy prey for manipulators.
Much of this goes to our primitive brain area neurobiology.
Voinovich’s staffer said “He’s very much against discrimination but he was very upset at the way the Democrats handled the voting.”
Bullshit, I told him. That really helps the women that would be helped by this act, doesn’t it? That Sen. Freaking Voinovich was “very upset at the Democrats” doesn’t do a fucking thing for women in the work force. I won’t forget this ever.
Hey dmac, I see I’m not the only one who called Voinovich today. ;)
Yeah!
It reminds me of what John Lennon wrote about who women are:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MD7of6trC-U,
except, ironically, Dr. Rice.
and lilly ledbetter worked for goodyear, my uncle worked for goodyear……first for the guggenheim institute that was housed there, then for goodyear……
keep in mind that there still is a research hangar there that is used/on hold by the defense department, so big it has it’s own atmosphere, it rains indoors…..one of the only ones in the world, so they keep it up and ready to use……akron, ohio…..
it’s at goodyear. think about it. interesting, huh?
signs from someone besides me:
http://freewayblogger.blogspot.....diego.html
peace y’all - i’m in the garage painting.
yay margot!!!!!
funny thing is, i had to wait a while every time i called this week!
today was a loooooooong wait every time i called…..
i’ll be back in a little while….
IANAL either but I think it is worthwhile to read some of the SCOTUS opinions or even the syllabi (condensed versions). If you do, I think you will see that a lot of the arguments are sloppy and biased. And if you compare reasoning among different cases, you will find that they are wildly contradictory.
And, he wrote that way back (ha) in 1972.
I wonder what he’d be writing today if it weren’t for that gun shot in NY?
Is this the monkey brain psychology, where most of the group reacts with fear and a few outliers attempt to explore new phenomenon
Especially when the ‘probationary period’ is 6 months.
I’d like to see the reaction of men in Congress if they were treated the same way as many women. There’d be reform bills hitting the floor so fast the paper would be red hot.
Ding.
Yes. Once you’re a Supreme, you can contradict your Bad Self all you want. There’s no recourse.
The mother of one of my daughter’s friends was an attorney who argued a disability rights case at Orals before the Supremes once. I asked about it, “what an honor, ‘eh?” She replied that it was the most infuriating and humiliating experience of her life, that she would never do it again. That the justices were rude as shit, interrupting sarcastically at will, and condescending to her. Orals are nothing but a requisite dog & pony show.
btw- This “Boston Legal” bullshit makes for good TV entertainment, but no attorney would ever throw down combatively and snidely at Orals like portrayed.
This is the law that’s designed to reverse a supreme court decision that narrows that span of time a person has to file a discrimination charge- right?
It’s complex. Read Robert Burton’s “On Being Certain: Believing You’re Right Even When You’re Not.“
I’m furious over this vote. What can possibly justify it?
But, I’m also baffled. Why do our bills always need 60 votes and repub bills get an ‘up-or-down’ vote?
I would repeat again that this op-ed in the NYT on Baze v. Rees the lethal injection case is worth a look. It was something I noted in my entry 341 of my scandals list. What is egregious in the SCOTUS opinion is the citation of death penalty cases that show just how wrong SCOTUS has been on death penalty cases being used to support their decision affirming lethal injection in executions.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04.....038;st=nyt
What really, really galls me about this is that I’ve worked at a hospital and one of the prime directives was “Do not ask anyone what they make or you may be fired.”
They were paying new techs more than they were paying techs who had been there for a long time.
I’ve never watched Boston Legal but I’ve heard several supreme court “orals” sessions- and they DO make it clear that their shit don’t stink.
I heard about this on national republican radio. good that it was covered but they did not use the word filibuster. they said it failed on a procedural vote.
did they ever fail to call it by the f-word when Frist was on and on about up-or-down votes?
and how would the Senate women who voted against this like it if they opened their pay envelope to find $132,054 vs $169,300 their male counterparts receive ?
Put that up for a vote.
They’re Republicans. Hypocrisy is mother’s milk to them. As long as they get theirs, they don’t care about anyone else.
But little Normy Coleman (R-MN) didn’t mind breaking ranks to try and shore up his chances against Al Franken this fall. He’s been the poster child of Bush policy water carriers for nearly six years and all of a sudden he’s got his shorts in a bunge over an issue he wouldn’t have blinked at last year. I’ve got to laugh, except he’s hurt my state.
while not fully clear on all the details of this…. if people are performing the same tasks arent they supposed to be equally paid? and have the unions been involved?
And they don’t care if they have turn on rhetorical dime to justify it.
Coleman was a big Clusterfuck victory when he scraped his way in- would love to see him get scraped back out.
and how would the Senate women who voted against this like it if they opened their pay envelope to find $132,054 vs $169,300 their male counterparts receive ?
I’m sure there are millions of single mothers making minimum wage opening up a much smaller envelope. I say make the women who voted against this legislation live on minimum wage for a while. Bet it would change their minds in a hurry.
This isn’t really a bill about whether or not it’s legal to discriminate against women in pay- that’s been settled. It’s a vote about how long a period a person has to file a discrimination suit (I think). It’s about the DETAILS- not the issue per se.
One plane crash and one “rude funeral” as I recall. Let him eat cake.
Yes, but by making it nearly impossible to sue over such discrimination, this detail effectively guts equal pay.
69% of americans now think that Bush’s presidency has been a “failure”.
Welcome to the land of reality americans- now about that OTHER 31% !!!!
Can we ask Dole and Murkowski to take a pay cut? How about ALL the female congresscritters? Save a few bucks here and a few bucks there . . . and heck, we might be able to fund another Middle East occupation.
Yes, I was just clarifying.
thanks rw - as i said i wasnt clear on that….. so dems couldnt muster up enough support to pass this particular bill? dont wish to appear this dense - legal things just throw me for a loop…… sighhhhhhhhhh
McCain on why he didn’t support the bill:
“”I am all in favor of pay equity for women, but this kind of legislation, as is typical of what’s being proposed by my friends on the other side of the aisle, opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems,” the expected GOP presidential nominee told reporters. “This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system.”
The bill sought to counteract a Supreme Court decision limiting how long workers can wait before suing for pay discrimination
If any doubt that McBush is Bush reincarnated- one only has to read this bullshit.
I am not a lawyer, but I think if you allow employers to do this and at the same time you remove the ability of people who have been treated this way to sue, it is akin to making pay inequity based on sex legal.
Dems couldn’t get 60 votes to overcome a republican filibuster. They had a majority for the bill.
The filibuster rule makes it possible for a minority to hold up legislation.
The failure of seven members of the Supreme Court to understand the outlawing of discrimination and collusion to discriminate as well as the ridiculous Republican argument that enforcing the law might lead to a lot of people seeking redress for the criminal behavior of Republican supporters is just a continuation of the Republican success in obstructing justice.
If we’re going to elect more Democrats they must be better than Reid, Pelosi, Costello, et. al., or the conspiracy to deny justice in this country will continue.
A plague on their houses.
I think that it’s important that we be clear about exactly what the bill was and what it was not- or else some women might get the impression that they no longer have the right to sue for pay discrimination.
in effect repugs STILL control congress it seems….. can dems do ANYTHING? just asking - this is disheartening
Reid handled this well. Please don’t criticize dems when they are doing the right thing. It’s counterproductive.
Yes — that’s the point of using “better” in the “more and better Democrats” phrase. If we wanted the same old, same old, we’d be Bob Shrum and company.
It’s a long standing senate rule that has been used for good purposes and bad. Dems used it (but not as frequently as they should have) when goopers controlled the senate- now goopers can use it. The antidote is at least sixty seats filled with right thinking dems..
The filibuster rule doesn’t exist in the house- it’s strictly a senate issue.
The net effect of the filibuster rule is to provide support for the status quo- making it more difficult to act than to not act.
Ledbetter like several other controversial decisions last term was 5-4.
Not disagreeing but as we have seen over the last 7 years, it has been a much more effective tool in the hands of Republicans than Democrats.
Yes it has been.
When dems were in the minority- they were scared shitless that if they appeared to be “obstructionist” they’d lose even more seats….
Goopers are still full of themselves and believe that they’ll keep their seats no matter WHAT they do.
If they lose another election- they are likely to regain some humility..
Can’t wait to read all the “what’s wrong with the republican party?” books..You can bet they’re on the way. Then we’ll see the breast beating and agononizing reappraisal.Can’t wait.
i should know that…. just forgot - the lake is keeping my mind on full blast lol
rw at 63
this IS making it legal to discriminate every day of a woman’s life, except for 180 days of it.
A few more election victories and humbris may change sides and live with the dems for a while. They have shown the ability to behave arrogantly in the past.
This is one case where I think it’s important to describe the bill accurately. If working women walk away thinking that they can no longer file pay discrimination suits- it would be VERY unfortunate- even if it is only ONE woman.
You’d have to prove that it’s the same work and that you were supposed to be getting the same pay … which is a bit difficult when the pay rate is a secret.
I’m glad that the company I work for doesn’t seem to do this.
Oops- that was supposed to be “Hubris”. Is there such a word as “humbris”? Looks like a word.
Hey new words have to be invented somehow.
Yes, Nancy Pelosi’s statement that she’s about leadership while we are about advocacy still grates. Then there are the Harry Reids, Steny Hoyers, and Rahm Emanuels. These are guys that are better at expressing hubris than acting on Democratic principles.
It looks like it should means something like “false modesty”.
Hey yeah- it does…has a funny sound to it as well. I think I LIKE it.
Humbris = false modesty, I like it
Paging Oxford English Dictionary…
I put the link in so they’ll follow it back here, and pick up your new word.
Fuck John McCain sideways.
Most positions have broad salary ranges which provides some cover for management.
Plus, I believe in Ledbetter’s case, she and the men in question were considered supervisory/management staff so the union would have no bearing, assuming it were a union facility.
My take on this issue is that those supreme court justices who voted down Lilly’s case have indeed broken the law. By upholding Goodyear’s case they have violated the basic principles of the constitution of fairness and equality as the constitution tries do uphold. They all should be impeached for disregarding the constitution and taking the side of the rich corporations… what fucking kind of assholes are they? If it was their wife or daughter I wonder how they would have voted? Talk about liberal judges legislating from the bench WTF do you call what they have done? These issues needs to be plastered everywhere for all to see just how important it is to have Democratic control of the white house!!! The rethuglian party does not have the good of the country or it’s people in mind when they do any thing, only how to line their and their corporate buddies pockets with cash. Fuck them!!
Ewwwww…think of all the things one could catch.
Or not.
I agree with the comments Christy cites, but Ialso feel that one problem with the liberal movement/community/wing is that it has never adequately answered the criticisms leveled at it by Howard Jarvis, Ronald Reagan and even Newt Gingrich. To this day we don’t have a good rationale for the kind of changes we want.
For example: confronted with the meme that Big Government is a Bad Thing, Democrats either laugh, sneer, or turn self-righteous; or, if they’re politicians they pretend that they think Big Government is a Bad Thing, too.
It’s the same with health care, the environment, the abrogation of the Bill of Rights, the wars, our never-ratified alliance with Israel–almost any liberal agenda item. The grassroots just know they’re already in the right, and the politicians pretend the changes we want aren’t really outside the so-called main stream. No one has really been able to put a dent into the conservative-Right premisses that see our agenda as dangerous, expensive, too big, too weak, or what have you. We have specific arguments for specific things, but we don’t have real answers to the Reagan critique–at least none that our political leaders and spokespersons have been willing to enunciate in public.
You can’t just blame the media, or the dumb southerners that everybody here takes such pleasure in mocking, just chalk it up to better and more organized zealots on the other side. It’s us, too. We don’t have an real answer to the Reagan. It’s not enough to say “Just look around,” or roll our eyes. What is our reply?
Big government can be a bad thing if it is done badly — look at the way the Department of Justice has been misused for political purposes by Rove for starters. But good government, done well — no matter its size — can be a benefit, both in terms of service, efficiency and overall benefit to society when done well.
There are a lot of answers to Reagan and Gingrich, starting with the Head Start program and the Birth To Three program for early intervention to help disadvantaged children or to help children with learning or other disabilities catch up early in life when the differences are, in fact, correctable because the child’s brain is still developing and can be sometimes helped to work past — or at least learn to better manage — severe autism and other developmental delays or societal disadvantages due to family or neglect or other issues that may be in play.
Chronically underfunding thes programs so that they can’t advertise and can’t help children the way they are intended is guaranteed to make them fail — and, as a consequence, fail the children they are meant to serve. Funding them properly, with a budget that allows them to advertise the miracles they can perform for children from birth forward, helps to educate parents, medical providers and childcare providers on how they can guide parents and children into programs that can help get them on a better track.
And that’s just a single issue where things could be better with a program that works — and works well — and saves the state and federal government money in the long run in terms of children’s special needs services in schools.
It isn’t that we don’t have answers. It’s that people inevitably refuse to listen to them. Just because we do things back-assward in this country doesn’t mean we cannot do them better. And just saying that big government is the bogeyman misses the point entirely: bad government is always a bad thing. But good government — especially coupled with individual responsibility and community support — can work miracles for all of us. The more we all remember that we are all in this together, the better off we all are.