Op-Ed: Wal-Mart is Anti-Woman

Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked a measure intended to overturn a Supreme Court decision limiting pay discrimination suits in a politically charged vote certain to be replayed in the presidential and Congressional campaigns.

By a vote of 56 to 42, the Senate fell four votes short of the 60 required to begin consideration of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, named for an Alabama woman who lost a case against the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company when the court found she not did file her complaint in time. Ms. Ledbetter had been paid as much as 40 percent less than her male counterparts doing the same job, according to her allies.

Looking at the final roll call, the measure had the support of 57 senators (Harry Reid switched his vote for procedural reasons, giving him the ability to bring the bill back to the floor before the end of the session). Every Democrat and both independents (Lieberman and Sanders) supported the measure, along with six Republicans, four of whom (Coleman, Collins, Smith, and Sununu) are facing tough re-election fights this year.

What a remarkable coincidence — Republicans sure do get more moderate on good legislation when they’re worried about losing their seats.

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other Republicans said the bill, which is opposed by the business community and the Bush administration, could create a flood of lawsuits.

“We think that this bill is primarily designed to create a massive amount of new litigation in our country,” said Mr. McConnell, the minority leader.

Well, actually, yes. But therein lies the point — if American workers are facing unjust wage discrimination, they should be more lawsuits. Those are worthwhile lawsuits, challenging an injustice. Ideally, employers would stop discriminating, and in turn, there’d be fewer lawsuits. It’s about creating an incentive.

As for the politics of this, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama came back to the Senate to vote for and speak out on behalf of this legislation. And what about John McCain? He didn’t show up for work (again), but he made a point of telling reporters he’s against the legislation: “In New Orleans today, McCain explained his opposition to the bill by claiming it ‘opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems.’ He added that instead of legislation allowing women to fight for equal pay, they simply need ‘education and training.’”

It’s almost as if he doesn’t want women to vote for him.

One last thought: was this bill really worth filibustering? Was the legislation so offensive to the Republican minority that they couldn’t even allow an up-or-down vote on a measure to protect pay-equality in the workplace?

Or did a bunch of corporate lobbyists show up at Republican lawmakers’ offices, demanding that they shut this down?_____________________________________________________Carpetbagger Report____________________________________________________Hmmmh...corporate lobbyists involved in multimillion $$class action lawsuits invoving gender discrimination,perhaps? WHOA! Expect that McCain response to resonate with WalMart moms-AND -working women,in general!

Alex G.,

I know WMW has to practice diplomacy when mentioning the Senator’s dealings with Wal-Mart (after all, this is an election year)—but that broken link you inserted in your paragraph came-across as a little “suspect"…

I wnder just how much a friend of the working woman Hillary has truly bee. I wonder if she’ll call out John McCain on his dismissive remark(” women simply need more education and training") and his conspicuous abscence when the vote was taken on this Fair Act legislation?

OOPS,hit the key too fast before proofreading. Sorry.

really?how many of you honestly and foolishly buy all this garbage on walmartwatch.com?

Bill Vs. Barack
by Ryan Lizza
May 5, 2008--- When I asked what he was doing on Election Day, a Clinton campaign adviser said, “I think he’s leading a caravan of Wal-Mart greeters to the polls.”_______________________New Yorker Magazine