Support NeoGAF

[Sajjaja]

Senate Republicans voted Wednesday to block the Paycheck Fairness Act, legislation designed by Democrats to mobilize women voters in the midterm elections.

The bill, which would require employers to be more transparent about wages and prohibit them from retaliating against workers who raise concerns about pay, failed to get the 60 votes needed to move forward with debate. The vote comes a day after a well-publicized, coordinated push on equal pay by the White House and congressional Democrats. But the latter aren’t bothered by that failure -- they expected it, and the rejection allows them to keep hitting Republicans on the issue moving toward November.

“For some unknown reason, Senate Republicans do not appear to be interested in closing the wage gap for working women,” Majority Leader Harry Reid said before the vote, which fell mostly on party lines. (Angus King, an independent from Maine who caucuses with Democrats, voted against the bill.)

Republicans, though, seem unbothered by recording a vote against this bill, which they have dismissed as a political ploy to benefit Democrats in an election year. GOP senators argued that it’s already illegal to discriminate against women in the workplace, and that the legislation regarding pay regulation would open the doors to frivolous lawsuits.

GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell has criticized Democrats’ push for the bill as a way to move voters’ focus away from the health care law.

Democrats, on the other hand, believe they have reached a turning point on Obamacare after enrollment numbers hit 7.1 million at the end of last month (polling now shows Americans more supportive of fixing the law than gutting it). As such, the “potency” of the health care law is starting to wear off, Sen. Chuck Schumer said. And that, combined with Republican Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget outline and the Democrats’ “fair shot” issues of pay equity, minimum wage, and others intended to energize key parts of the electorate, will rally Democrats in the midterm, he said.

Women voters helped propel Democrats to victories in the 2008 and 2012 presidential races, and more recently in the Virginia governor’s race.

Following the 53-44 vote, President Obama issued a statement lamenting that “Republicans in Congress continue to oppose serious efforts to create jobs, grow the economy, and level the playing field for working families.”

Republican congressional candidates are likely to hear that theme repeated and will draw flak from Democratic opponents for Wednesday’s defeat -- whether they actually cast a vote or not -- especially in tough races. All Democrats voted for the bill, even though it wasn’t likely to pass, signaling that the most vulnerable ones see it as an advantage. The issue has also energized Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis, as Republican Gov. Rick Perry recently vetoed an equal pay bill passed by the state legislature.

The fact that no Republicans voted for the bill signals they believe they can withstand the coming attacks. But GOP lawmakers also know the issue is a politically delicate one.

“I think it’s really important that Republicans say strongly, we’re against discrimination, we acknowledge that on any number of fronts there is still a problem out there, and that’s why we need good strong laws, but we don’t want laws that would discourage work,” Sen. Rob Portman, a vice chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, told RCP.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/04/09/gop_blocks_equal_pay_bill_in_senate_122224.html

Here are the votes: http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/113/senate/2/103

No Republican voted for it, not even the women.

 

[Fahrenheit]

GOP senators argued that it’s already illegal to discriminate against women in the workplace, and that the legislation regarding pay regulation would open the doors to frivolous lawsuits.

This thing been bouncing around since 09, just a PR stunt.

 

[Particle Physicist]

This thing been bouncing around since 09, just a PR stunt.

Just because Democrats have been trying to pass it since 09 doesn't mean it's a PR stunt.

How long have they been trying to pass the Dream Act? I am pretty sure that is not a PR stunt either.

 

[Fahrenheit]

Just because Democrats have been trying to pass it since 09 doesn't mean it's a PR stunt.

How long have they been trying to pass the Dream Act? I am pretty sure that is not a PR stunt either.

But it is, at best it's redundant.

 

[Fusebox]

Even if it is a toothless PR bill they should still have had the sense to embrace it and support it instead of adding this to their massive pile of bad publicity.

 

[Loofy]

Would this extend to race too?

 

[Particle Physicist]

But it is, at best it's redundant.

Yet disparities between genders still exist. How is it redundant? And if it is redundant why not just vote for it?

 

[Fahrenheit]

Yet disparities between genders still exist. How is it redundant? And if it is redundant why not just vote for it?

The disparities in pay needs to be investigated more before any legislation is put in place. Furthermore the fact that it is redundant is why it should not be voted for. Labor law is convoluted enough as it is without feel good bills being passed into law.

 

[GrotesqueBeauty]

Thank God, now we can focus on real issues like how hurt Wall Street bankers are that people don't like them after crashing the world economy with no repercussions, or how those pesky gays are trying to ruin the sanctity of marriage.

 

[Intheflorsh]

“For some unknown reason, Senate Republicans do not appear to be interested in closing the wage gap for working women,” Majority Leader Harry Reid said before the vote, which fell mostly on party lines.

Why would he say this and then vote against the bill?

 

[Sajjaja]

Would this extend to race too?

From just briefly looking at the Bill Text
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c113:1:./temp/~c113r36TXf:e1010:

it's targeted at women specifically.

 

[sprsk]

The disparities in pay needs to be investigated more before any legislation is put in place. Furthermore the fact that it is redundant is why it should not be voted for. Labor law is convoluted enough as it id without feel good bills being passed into law.

lol

 

[TheRedSnifit]

Yet disparities between genders still exist. How is it redundant? And if it is redundant why not just vote for it?

This is a kind of out-there analogy, but just because murder still happens doesn't mean we have to pass fifty laws banning murder. It's a PR stunt that wouldn't accomplish anything new.

 

[Dalthien]

Why would he say this and then vote against the bill?

It is a procedural rule within the Senate. He had to vote "no" on the bill if he wants to bring the bill back up again for another vote later. If the bill would have had enough votes to pass, he definitely would have voted for it.

 

[GraveHorizon]

Republican congressional candidates are likely to hear that theme repeated and will draw flak from Democratic opponents for Wednesday’s defeat -- whether they actually cast a vote or not -- especially in tough races. All Democrats voted for the bill, even though it wasn’t likely to pass, signaling that the most vulnerable ones see it as an advantage. The issue has also energized Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis, as Republican Gov. Rick Perry recently vetoed an equal pay bill passed by the state legislature.

That word is as ridiculous as politics is boring. Someone needs to make a political cartoon involving potatoes arguing about arbitrary laws.

 

[comedian]

The disparities in pay needs to be investigated more before any legislation is put in place. Furthermore the fact that it is redundant is why it should not be voted for. Labor law is convoluted enough as it is without feel good bills being passed into law.

The bill, which would require employers to be more transparent about wages and prohibit them from retaliating against workers who raise concerns about pay

This is the new part, unless someone who's doing the same job as you, tells you his/her pay, how would you know that you are being discriminated against ?

 

[kick51]

goober notorious am i rite

 

[TheRedSnifit]

The bill, which would require employers to be more transparent about wages and prohibit them from retaliating against workers who raise concerns about pay

This is the new part, unless someone who's doing the same job as you, tells you his/her pay, how would you know that you are being discriminated against ?

It's already illegal to retaliate when workers oppose unlawful discrimination (unless the opposition itself involves something illegal, obviously).

 

[Fahrenheit]

The bill, which would require employers to be more transparent about wages and prohibit them from retaliating against workers who raise concerns about pay

This is the new part, unless someone who's doing the same job as you, tells you his/her pay, how would you know that you are being discriminated against ?

Could you please tell me how it would it would require employers to be more transparent?

 

[Dead Man]

The bill, which would require employers to be more transparent about wages and prohibit them from retaliating against workers who raise concerns about pay,

Why is this bad?

 

[Fahrenheit]

Why is this bad?

Because the bill itself is nothing but flowery blurbs with no real changes in them. Might as well call it the "Pizza Party Act" for all it will do to change anything.

 

[Fusebox]

Because the bill itself is nothing but flowery blurbs with no real changes in them.

Can you be specific?

 

[Dead Man]

Because the bill itself is nothing but flowery blurbs with no real changes in them. Might as well call it the "Pizza Party Act" for all it will do to change anything.

Can you give some examples?

 

[jchap]

Such an obvious political ploy. I hate election years.

 

[Fahrenheit]

Can you be specific?

"Despite the enactment of the Equal Pay Act in 1963, many women continue to earn significantly lower pay than men for equal work. These pay disparities exist in both the private and governmental sectors. In many instances, the pay disparities can only be due to continued intentional discrimination or the lingering effects of past discrimination.".

 

[Dead Man]

"Despite the enactment of the Equal Pay Act in 1963, many women continue to earn significantly lower pay than men for equal work. These pay disparities exist in both the private and governmental sectors. In many instances, the pay disparities can only be due to continued intentional discrimination or the lingering effects of past discrimination.".

Yes? That is the whole thing? There is no actual legislation there.

Edit: This seems a pretty concrete and useful, although some may see it is as rather minor -

Nonretaliation Provision- Section 15 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 215(a)(3)) is amended--

(1) in subsection (a)(3), by striking `employee has filed' and all that follows and inserting `employee--

`(A) has made a charge or filed any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted any investigation, proceeding, hearing, or action under or related to this Act, including an investigation conducted by the employer, or has testified or is planning to testify or has assisted or participated in any manner in any such investigation, proceeding, hearing or action, or has served or is planning to serve on an industry Committee; or

`(B) has inquired about, discussed, or disclosed the wages of the employee or another employee.';

 

[Fahrenheit]

Yes? That is the whole thing? There is no actual legislation there.

You asked for examples when I said it was all flowery talk. So i'm not sure what your getting at.

 

[Fusebox]

You asked for examples when I said it was all flowery talk. So i'm not sure what your getting at.

Guess I was asking for that...

 

[Dead Man]

You asked for examples when I said it was all flowery talk. So i'm not sure what your getting at.

You said it was ALL flowery talk. It isn't all flowery talk, every bill in existence has flowery bullshit in parts of it.

 

[Fahrenheit]

Just to be clear before this thread turns into a shit show (and it will) I am in no way advocating for a Male–female income disparity. I'm just saying that this bill is nothing but ass kiss for votes. More data is needed before we start trying to figure out the hows and ifs of the issue.

 

[Fahrenheit]

You said it was ALL flowery talk. It isn't all flowery talk, every bill in existence has flowery bullshit in parts of it.

Like I said in this thread, please show me how it will change anything? Please use quotes from the bill.

 

[Dead Man]

Like I said in this thread, please show me how it will change anything? Please use quotes from the bill.

Already posted a small thing it changes, small changes are worthwhile as well.

Edit: Alternatively,l show me how it won't change anything

Edit2:

Just to be clear before this thread turns into a shit show (and it will) I am in no way advocating for a Male–female income disparity. I'm just saying that this bill is nothing but ass kiss for votes. More data is needed before we start trying to figure out the hows and ifs of the issue.

Funnily enough, the bill contains provisions gather data and do research.

 

[Balphon]

The bill, which would require employers to be more transparent about wages and prohibit them from retaliating against workers who raise concerns about pay

This is the new part, unless someone who's doing the same job as you, tells you his/her pay, how would you know that you are being discriminated against ?

Wage disparity is a complicated problem. It isn't caused by sexist HR managers hiring women to do the same jobs as men at 80 cents on the dollar.

The concern over frivolous lawsuits may be trite, but I'm not certain it's misplaced here, especially since the bill expressly provides for uncapped punitive damage awards in FLSA sex discrimination cases.

Either way, the Democrats are set on making fair pay a big issue in the midterms, so expect this to come up again.

 

[highrider]

It's all the narrative the republican are going for. Balance budget, tough choices, take the job and let ' job creators ' handle policy. This, along with the long term unemployment stuff, is just playing right in to the hand of the democratic narrative.

 

[Kazerei]

This is a kind of out-there analogy, but just because murder still happens doesn't mean we have to pass fifty laws banning murder. It's a PR stunt that wouldn't accomplish anything new.

But we do pass legislation in an effort to reduce murders, like laws and penalties specifically targeting gang activity, or VAWA which aims to curb domestic violence. Those aren't a bunch of laws banning murder, they are a bunch of laws to deal with murder and other crimes. Just as this bill isn't simply banning pay discrimination (which is already illegal), it's a bill to deal with pay discrimination.

 

[Particle Physicist]

Just to be clear before this thread turns into a shit show (and it will) I am in no way advocating for a Male–female income disparity. I'm just saying that this bill is nothing but ass kiss for votes. More data is needed before we start trying to figure out the hows and ifs of the issue.

How much more data? At which point would we have enough data? Because we already have quite a bit of data. What exactly are you looking for? Also how do you propose we gather data? Who is going to fund that data gathering? This bill sets up provisions for data and research. What do you suggest?

 

[HerbertFish]

It's a pr stunt by the Democrats. Can't complain here

 

[The Librarian]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/04/09/gop_blocks_equal_pay_bill_in_senate_122224.html

Here are the votes: http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/113/senate/2/103

No Republican voted for it, not even the women.

GOP senators argued that it’s already illegal to discriminate against women in the workplace, and that the legislation regarding pay regulation would open the doors to frivolous lawsuits.

They used this same reasoning to oppose ENDA.

Why would he say this and then vote against the bill?

It's a procedural maneuver so Reid can bring it up again at a later time.

Yes? That is the whole thing? There is no actual legislation there.

How dare you bring up the text of the bill, Dead Man!

 

[PhoenixDark]

The bill doesn't do anything to fix unequal pay.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Just to be clear before this thread turns into a shit show (and it will) I am in no way advocating for a Male–female income disparity. I'm just saying that this bill is nothing but ass kiss for votes. More data is needed before we start trying to figure out the hows and ifs of the issue.

If it's a flowery language PR stunt that changes nothing, and the time has already been wasted to bring it to a vote, why vote no?

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

Oh man. I'm not ready for election year politics yet. I need to tune out.

 

[Stet]

It's a pr stunt by the Democrats. Can't complain here

You should be complaining. Even if it's a PR stunt by the Democrats, by voting against it unilaterally the Republicans have fallen right into the PR stunt trap.

 

[HerbertFish]

You should be complaining. Even if it's a PR stunt by the Democrats, by voting against it unilaterally the Republicans have fallen right into the PR stunt trap.

Why should I complain about that then?

I guess this kind of bullshit politics should be done away with all together

 

[Tripon]

If it's a flowery language PR stunt that changes nothing, and the time has already been wasted to bring it to a vote, why vote no?

Because it will the democrats to score political points. That is the real reason.

 

[Particle Physicist]

If it's a flowery language PR stunt that changes nothing, and the time has already been wasted to bring it to a vote, why vote no?

Exactly. If it is a PR stunt that does nothing, why not vote for it and not make it a PR stunt?

I asked this earlier but is the DREAM act a PR stunt as well? Democrats have been trying to pass that for a while as well.

I think the framing of these bills by Republicans is quite telling. They seem to think that Democrats only do this stuff as a PR stunt for votes instead of actually believing in equality and stuff. I guess that is why their outreach to minority groups always seems to fail hard.

 

[Stet]

Why should I complain about that then?

I guess this kind of bullshit politics should be done away with all together

Because your Republicans are now fucked?

 

[Deleted member 13876]

Republicans, though, seem unbothered by recording a vote against this bill, which they have dismissed as a political ploy to benefit Democrats in an election year.

Can't approve something that will bring about positive social change lest it makes the opposing party look good.

 

[The Librarian]

I guess this kind of bullshit politics should be done away with all together

It's not bullshit when you consider the one of the goals of political parties is to regain or keep their majority so they can enact their policy goals. This is a way they can do that.

Because it will the democrats to score political points. That is the real reason.

It's also a policy goal of the Democrats.

 

[HerbertFish]

Because your Republicans are now fucked?

They are my republicans?

 

[Stet]

They are my republicans?

Sue me if I'm wrong, but it sounded an awful lot like you were framing the democrats as the others.