Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
By Steve Benen Monday Jul 30, 2007 7:20pmThere were quite a few offensive Supreme Court rulings this year, but one of the more surprising decisions was in Ledbetter v. Goodyear, in which the court ruled 5 to 4 (natch) that workers who face wage discrimination only have 180 days to challenge the initial discrimination in court. (Slate’s Richard Thompson Ford explained the case quite well a couple of months ago.)
Goodyear Tire intentionally shortchanged Lilly Ledbetter, a female employee, for two decades. The court majority (Justices Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy) said if Ledbetter wanted to challenge the discrimination, she needed to sue within 180 days of her first unfair paycheck — even though she continued to receive unfair paychecks for 20 years.
Today, the House took up legislation — the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — that would put into law a clarification — wage disparity based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, and disability is not a one-time occurrence. Every discriminatory paycheck represents an ongoing violation. Employees would still have 180 days to challenge the discrimination, but from the last check, not the first.
The good news is the House passed the measure. The bad news is Bush plans to veto.
Login or Register to post comments.
MUST SEE TV
Rumsfeld to appear and testify about Pat Tillman's death tomorrow, 10am est.
Second!
Of course he'd veto this. God... what a piece of shit.
FUCK BUSH.
Are there enough votes to override a veto?
Are there enough votes to override a veto?
not if they use the diebold touch screens.
Bush plans to veto legislation barring discrimination.
Is there anything else that needs to be said about this man?
Ok, there is:
Torture
Lying
War without end and for no good reason
Corpsing Habeas Corpus
Wiretapping
Thinking he talks to God
Saying he talks to God
Wanting to be a dictator
Trying to be a dictator
Smirking at all the inappropriate moments
Vacationing with the Iraqi Government but in a place far far away from them
Supporting a Toad in the Justice Department
Eating with his mouth op...
Wow.. Bush is planning on vetoing this?
On what possible leg can they prop-up the "we must continue to discriminate" argument on?
This should really boost Bush's approval rating.
Let the ass wipe veto it. More ammo for the dems in 2008!!
If he didn't veto, it would "serve to impede justice" -- like in the Scooter Libby case? Chimpie didn't mind impeding that justice. Of course he had something to gain, and he doesn't out of this case. Evil bastard.
Captain Kangaroo @ 10:
While i may agree with your rationale don't you think it would be better if this ass finally saw the fucking light and started doing just a little something right?
JudyLou @ 11:
Actually, he does. If you understad his world view people like us (the working class) are here for no other reason than to provide defense and labor to the liesure class in which he has resided all of his life.
12 xoites defends Constitution Says:
"While i may agree with your rationale don’t you think it would be better if this ass finally saw the fucking light and started doing just a little something right?"
don't you remember, bush did see the light a couple of weeks ago when he had a tube shoved up his bum to look for cheney's hand holds.
xoites defends Constitution @ 12:
Impossible, it's not in his DNA. Remember his dad and grandad.
xoites defends Constitution @ 12:
YES!
This is the bottom line: the Dems need to bring this legislation back when we have a Democratic president. Bush is too much of a stinking pile of sh*t to waste time on this stuff.
I think there is really no point in the government doing ANYTHING right now. Table all legislation, shelve all decisions by *any* government department. No congressional bills, no FCC decisions about radio spectrum, no FAA decisions about airlines, no FDA decisions about drugs, NOTHING. Everything that changes right now always changes for the worst under this maladministration. Every decision is made in favor of huge corporate profits uber alles. Just shut this government down until we can get a reasonably non-corrupt administration back in office.
Jo @ 5:
Nope. 225-199 Largely on party lines.
Role call:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll768.xml
Kick 'em when they're up, Kick 'em when they're down. Kick 'em when they're up, Kick 'em when they're down. Kick 'em when they're up, Kick 'em when they're ...
the ass'll probably veto it with a golden pen
Ron @ 15:
Dad: CIA director and Iran-Contra Director. Grandad: backer of a plot to overthrow the US government in 1933 under FDR and supporter of Nazi Germany during World War II.
Well...this certainly shows how they view the working middle class.......Let them eat cake.....the last time some one said that it worked out great for the middle class....granted it wasn't much of a middle class.....but we're heading down the same road.
mudshark @ 22:
There are TWO classes in the US, not three. There is the working class and the leisure class. The whole "middle class" and "lower class" mumbo jumbo is bullshit. You either produce wealth for the wealthy or you are the wealthy.
What a fucking asshole Bush is. And what a narrow, cynical interpretation of the law by the SC. Shame on them.
It takes 2/3 of both House and Senate to override a presidential veto, right? How many Republicans voted for it? Any chance for an override?
Things are really going downhill fast. And picking up speed.
xoites defends Constitution @ 23:
Well put X...but you see I'm neither...but i see where your coming from...
13 Xoites, u r right. It's part of the Neocon "dominate women/keep 'em barefooted and pregnant" agenda. I'm reminded of:
"I ask no favors for my sex. I surrender not our claim to equality. All I ask of our brethren is that they will take their feet off our necks, and permit us to stand upright on the ground which God has designed us to occupy."
- Sarah Grimké, Letters on the Equality of the Sexes and the Condition of Women; Boston, 1838.
Democrats not supporting it:
Cramer (D-AL-5)
Mahoney (D-FL-16)
Boyd (D-FL-2)
Boren (D-OK-2)
Boyda (D-KS-2)
Lampson (D-TX-22)
Republicans supporting it:
Shays (R-CT-4)
and strangely Young (R-AK)
JudyLou @ 27:
To that i must add that the Equal Rights Amendment went down to defeat almost entirely because Phylis Schaffley and others of her ilk argued that if we had the short sightedness to grant women equal rights they would end up in combat.
They are in combat but still do not have equal rights.
The Democrats should make a point of forcing the Repugnants to show their true colors.
Every single day that Congress is in session they should introduce at least one bill that is supported by the majority of the American people. Unlike the GOP, they should avoid controversial and devisive issues like gay marriage and abortion intended only to motivate their base.
They should instead focus on popular, mainstream issues like ending the war in Iraq, campaign finance reform, healthcare and environmental protection. And they shouldn't water the bills down in response to calls by the media and so-called political advisors to "compromise" with the GOP.
Make the GOPers go on record voting against popular bills. Let the GOP Senators try to prevent the bills from ever getting voted on. If, by some miracle they manage to pass one, let Bush veto it, and then let the GOPers vote against a veto override.
Then let those GOP slugs explain themselves to the voters.
My prediction? If the Democrats do what I propose, the GOP, with or without lil' george, will suddenly remember the true meaning of bipartisanship and we can get some important and meaningful legislation passed.
And if I'm wrong? Then after 18 more months of gridlock the GOP will cease to exist as a viable political party.
Now that's what you call a win-win situation.
typical. fuckin boosh wants to use his veto pop gun again.
myiq2xu @ 30:
I am sitting here trying to figure out a hole in your argument.
I can't.
In fact they should pass a bill for Universal Health Care and let Bush veto it.
What other bills do you suggest?
My husband has probably one of the redest necks that you can find in America, but even he agrees that if a woman is doing the same job a man is doing, she should be paid the same wage that a man is paid.
In the C&L narrative above, be sure to click on the portion dealing w/"House
passed"....and see if your representative voted "nay" and if so, do as I did and
call and write his/her office and let her/him know how you feel about such a
disgraceful vote....I tried(really) to be nice and diplomatice, but must admit
I did sort of unleash my wrath on my Repig Rep. who voted "nay".
I want to go on record saying that i hate the term "red neck."
xoites defends Constitution @ 32:
psst, it's been said that he is a very good linguist. oh, and he's a lawyer to boot. /whispering.
AND HE'S ON OUR SIDE. WOOHOO.
:)
myiq2xu @ 30:
I agree 100%. That's what the first 100 hours was about, and I think they should just keep on keeping on.
xoites defends Constitution @ 36:
I hate getting a red neck when I forget the sunscreen.
xoites defends Constitution @ 36:
I don't much care for it either, but, try classifying someone who is proud of being a "red neck" as anything differently and you will have your ass handed to you, whether it be from the male or the female of the species.
I didn't mean to offend you.
myiq2xu @ 30:
Right on. I am wondering if we here at C&L(or at least the majority) are the only ones
with any intelligence as to how the Dems should proceed in both Houses??? Do we have
to draw them a picture of what they need to do? I thought that they represent WE THE
PEOPLE, but it's rather evident that they are either stupid or dumb or stupid or dumb, or.....
Old Billy @ 40:
The thing of it is "red neck" has its origins in defining people who work out in the sun. Apparently they are supposed to be too stupid to understand the things people who work in air conditioned offices can grasp. This is just one more way to divide the working class so that the leisure class can keep us at each other's throats. On the other hand if we point out that the priveledged have a whole lot more than they need and are paying far too little in taxes we get accused of starting "class warfare." The people who provide the nation with its wealth are apparently guilty when we get upset with the people who are stealing the nation's wealth. Meanwhile we are left holding the gas nozzle.
One thing that the Democrats in Washington need to figure out is that they cannot be the party of big business AND of the people at the same time. The money will always go to the GOP unless the Dems sell-out.
But the Democrats can keep their integrity (and their souls) by enacting genuine campaign finance reform. We need to get the corrupting influence of money out of our politics and government, even if it takes a Constitutional amendment to do it.
Once the money is gone, it will be the will of the majority of the people vs a bunch of Luddites and Flat Earth Society types. The rich and super-rich will still get to vote, they just won't get to buy votes anymore. And we won't have industry lobbyists writing environmental regulations anymore either.
Unfortunately for us, Rahm Emmanuel, Old Weird Harold Ford and those DLC types are actually proud of how much special interest money they are raising.
I need more beer.
Jeannie See @ 41:
You did not offend me. See my above comment. :)
myiq2xu @ 44:
I totally agree. I also need a beer as well.
xoites defends Constitution @ 38:
Thanks xoites, I went to your blog and am now watching War made easy. I had been looking for the video.
On the bright side - our Presidential candidates are attending YearlyKos and skipping the DLC Debutante Ball
OT: But where is Larry Flynt with his list of 30 who visited one cat house in D.C.?
Anyone seen anything regarding Flynt's alleged "list"?????
Ron @ 47:
You are quite welcome, Ron. :)
That's why the whole netroots movement is so incredible and the cause of so much optimism here in Left Blogistan.
We went from non-existent in 2000 to infancy in 2002 to adolescence in 2004 when Howard Dean rode net support to prominence.
But 2006 is when we really made a difference. That's why the right-wingers are attacking us so hard -they are scared shitless. A genuine grassroots populist movement that they can't control.
Remember how the right was going to put their organizing power to work and create their own netroots organization? But the righty blogosphere is just an extension of the GOP Noise machine. It's a top-down organization that simply disseminates GOP talking points.
But here on the left it isn't really an organization - it's the closest thing to true democracy this country has ever seen. Nobody tells us what to think or believe. The bloggers that rise to prominence do so not because someone hired them and gave them a show, but because we like what they say and agree with them, at least most of the time anyway.
We're a bottom-up group. But we're not a lynch mob, or even a mob. We're a bunch of people trying to make a difference.
Right now, even the Democrats aren't too sure about us. But if we keep growing the way we have been then in 2008 we will prove we are force to be reckoned with.
And if that happens, then by 2010 we can demand that any candidate wanting netroots support refuse any special interest money. BTW: Unions are not special interests.
Ome-cay ere-hay. Ome-cay ere-hay.
Et-lay e-may ell-tay ou-yay
Omething-say at-thay ou-yay oughta-way ow-knay.
Ome-cay ere-hay. Et-lay e-may
Ell-tay ou-yay....
XuYu @ 52:
I don't speak pig latin. I do know a little sheep greek though.
I truely understand exactly what this woman is going through because I am just now winding down on a case like wise, after ten years of littigation and hell that you suffer attempting to correct wrongs done to you.
I really hope she gets the justice she truely deserves, because I know if I had to do it over again, I would do it, even if it did not benefit me, but other black women that will come after us and have to face this kind of injustice, which is exactly what the powers that be will set you up for.
Can someone explain how Nancy Boyda could have found it within herself to vote against this measure?
I know her district is conservative but this corrects a grievous that impacts EVERYONE.
I am not so suprised that Lampson and Mahoney opposed it. Still disappointed nonetheless.
the caveman in chief's wrist atrophied while the repubs ran the congress but he vetoes everything now.
Annoyed Canuck @ 24:
This'll be a nice campaigning point for the '08 elections. Anyone who votes against the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act obviously does not support American workers, has no desire to oppose already illegal discrimination, and on top of that, would deny relief through litigation for those American workers who have been discriminated against.
myiq2xu @ 51:
BTW: Unions ARE special interests. Anything that has a small contingent of people who want special protection/legislation/funding constitutes a special interest. That doesn't make it bad, that's just the definition.
BTW: The progression of netroots media/campaign control can be used against democratic interests just as easily as for it. We live in a transition period where digital media in the hands of citizens is competing/replacing the monolithic machinery of mainstream media. That may sound good now, but I remember how people were talking positively about a new TV network that was going to provide alternative entertainment and news. It was challenging the big 3 + CNN. It was called FOX.
So before you get all ego-inflated-bug-eyed-high with yourself, look out for the places where big money will creep in and buy the process. Because it will. It always does. Even if they have to pay 100, 1000, 10,000 moles to sit at home and pretend to be lefty blogers. When you are dealing in sums of trillions of dollars, there will always be interested parties, most of them quite unscrupulous.
It could of been a much worse ruling by the judges. They might have ruled that she can only sue by the first full moon and have the burdon of proof to provide evidence that her employers new for a fact she was truely female and her employers did not try and hide the pay rate indifference.
Blue Buddha @ 3:
You called the spade a spade... Bu$h is a honking huge piece of shit!
God was watching. Notice Justice Roberts with his health problem yet no wife at his side during or after his seizure. Yes the power of hurting people the Supreme Court has but the resolves no one could imagine. Let's hope Roberts does some soul searching as he was given a second chance to correct his mistakes. No one knows when they will be called and age or position has nothing to do with it.
Login or Register to post comments.