This week, the House is expected to bring the Paycheck Fairness Act to the floor for a vote, legislation that would help close the wage gap between working men and women and “close loopholes that have allowed employers to avoid responsibility” for discriminatory pay. In an official statement, the White House said it would veto the bill:
The bill would unjustifiably amend the Equal Pay Act (EPA) to allow for, among other things, unlimited compensatory and punitive damages, even when a disparity in pay was unintentional. It also would encourage discrimination claims to be made based on factors unrelated to actual pay discrimination by allowing pay comparisons between potentially different labor markets. In addition, it would require the Department of Labor (DOL) to replace its successful approach to detecting pay discrimination with a failed methodology that was abandoned because it had a 93 percent false positive rate. Thus, if H.R. 1338 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.
Topic Cloud
Archives
So would McPain...why would anyone vote for these morons.
July 30th, 2008 at 8:42 pmThis is where you get your "facts" Winkie? From a bunch of admitted reich wing snot nosed college kids?
FLAG the lying sack of crap.
July 30th, 2008 at 8:46 pmW want to veto the bill, BRING IT ON!
July 30th, 2008 at 8:46 pmEvery woman who votes for any of these thugs betrays her daughters and grand daughters.
July 30th, 2008 at 8:54 pmSo in other words..... it's ok if the little missus wants equal pay.... but since we're in the racket of protecting our corporate donors, we can't risk one of you little phillies getting your period and trying to SUE us retroactively.
Shit, we already did that for the telecoms this year.
Now be a good girl and go make me a sandwich.
george bush, champion of the working class.
July 30th, 2008 at 8:59 pmThis is not gonna make W popular with the ladies, now is it?
Hi Jim. Nice try on your first post. Doh!
July 30th, 2008 at 9:06 pmDim Jim is at it again. Since jim has not commented on the thread one can only assume that he agrees with bush that women should be paid less than their male counterparts, just like he agrees with toby that blacks don't think obama is black. I guess he isn't paid to have opinions, he's paid to post crap on this website that makes grampa simpson look good. Whether it's true or not.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:23 pmare the clintonites really still crying?
that said, does anyone know (because I don't feel like googling) about the 93% false positive rate? is that true or a bunch of bull? If its false, then thats business as usual for dubya... if its true, then it seems almost like sabotage to include it in the frickin' bill to begin with.
also, I love when people get riled up when someone else cites a source that doesn't agree with their viewpoint. While I don't necessarily think they can infer hypocrisy from the data, I don't know if iusbvision is right or not about their actual numbers until I verify them - but I CERTAINLY can't assume they're lying just because they aren't liberal. I guess we shouldn't reference anything on this site when talking to conservatives, either. I think I should flag YOU for lowering the discourse.
Really, people. we can't stop the conservative trolls - they're trying to throw a wrench in the works. But lets try not to stoop to their level.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:24 pmDon't waste your time responding to Jim "Dim" Wilke...he is a troll and a waste of time...
I really don't understand why some around here say "Hi Jim" to this moron or post back to this idiotic, lying sh|t.
JUST IGNORE THE TROLL BASTARD!
July 30th, 2008 at 9:32 pmChris...
July 30th, 2008 at 9:46 pmHonestly, what does Jim's post add to the discourse? All Jim is trying to do is say, 'Ohh, Ohh Obama is baaadddd... he's just the same!' When anyone with half a brain knows that not only would Paycheck Fairness Act fair better under almost ANY other president, women would fair better as well.
Jim is a shill... and a shrill shill at that.
Belac...
I'm not defending Jim... I'm just saying we can't say his argument's crap because his source doesn't share our ideological viewpoint. C'mon.. "snot-nosed college kids"? If it were a college-level blog that supported our arguments and viewpoints, they would be the "progressive muckrakers of tomorrow" or something similar. Its better to refute his argument on its merits.
Off the top of my head, you can argue that since they didn't factor in the employees who made $23K a year, their numbers are skewed. You could also argue that since we don't know the exact distribution of gender in the hierarchy of each camp, its unfair to average. You could even take the time to verify the figures they're using in case they made them up. To dismiss the argument because the authors are young punks is transparently lazy.
July 30th, 2008 at 9:58 pmJim DimWit will always be stupid here, he can't help it...it's in his jeans (hahhhaaahaha)
Ignore the bass.turd
July 30th, 2008 at 10:00 pm@lawr
true, except:
doesn't suddenly negate every truth uttered on this site. They perceive us as marxists-while we perceive them, to a degree, to be fascists. They could say "We believe Obama is the Antichrist", and it would not logically follow that everything they said is false. We'd still have to do at least the smallest bit of due diligence.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:06 pmJim Wilke Says:
The question is not what McSame pays his interns or what Obama pays his staff.
The question is if the corrupt, inept, thug, W is going to veto another bill. Get your head out.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:12 pmChris-
July 30th, 2008 at 10:15 pmI would agree, but Jim's post is not related to the merits of the Paycheck Fairness Act or even defending Bush's veto... he is only here to misdirect and throw mud... and I think it's fair to call BS on that.
I often will argue with the Trolls, not because I think I can convince them but because I think we need practice re-focusing our arguments for the coming election.
Engaging Jim in this instance does not do that- he advances no argument, only an imagined and biased 'GOTCHA'
It's BS
If Wilke had a brain he would take it out and play with it.He must be a friend of of Dead Beat George.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:19 pmJust thinking aloud here...
If dubya vetoes this bill, wouldn't that help us in November?
(Republicans = bush = veto on equal pay)
And then we can try it again in 2009 with a better person in the captain's chair, because let's be real: its more or less in the bag for Obama.
Granted, it'd suck for women to have to wait another year for what they deserved years ago, but do we really expect Bush's partisan hacks to enforce this once its passed anyways? This might help some close races for house seats (rep. republiclone voted against the equal pay act that bush vetoed... show picture of republiclone and bush)
Trying to find a silver lining :)
July 30th, 2008 at 10:21 pmDo IT! MOFO! And the first order of business for President Obama will be to sign off on it.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:22 pmYou're arrogant ass will guarantee a Democratic landslide.
Keep up the chympin, mofo!
So, it's kind of disgusting to know that the Republicans believe women aren't equal to men. Sounds like an 1800's philosophy they haven't let go...Just like most of their ideas.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:39 pmYou forgot to add, Doc, that such a woman would be betraying herself as well.
Does anyone remember Dumbya's 2004 campaign slogan of "W stands for Women," or some BS along that line?
Doc Rock Says:
Every woman who votes for any of these thugs betrays her daughters and grand daughters.
July 30th, 2008 at 10:53 pmBUSH: Always wrong, all the time.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:05 pm"Thus, if H.R. 1338 were presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill."
"Here's this weeks bill, sir, we recommend you veto it..."
"What is it about?"
"Don't trouble yourself sir, it's nothing much"
"Heh heh, you're the adviserer, at least I get to be the deciderer, heh heh..."
July 30th, 2008 at 11:15 pmI suspect that even Republicans would vote to override a veto on this one. This is an election year, and no candidate wants to explain to women voters why they deserve no legal recourse if they are being paid unfairly against the law.
July 30th, 2008 at 11:21 pmSee, if the sides were flipped, and we liberals opposed the equal pay for women, you would see EVERYDAY until the next election, how liberals HATE women and want them in slavery or just about...how liberals are anti-women...
we should hit them on this issue, but knowing the Democratic Party, they won't do a thing...except issue an obscure press release that will disappear because the media is too damn lazy to report on it...
July 31st, 2008 at 12:00 amJesus christ...why don't we just close down the government until after the election. Between Republicon obstructionism, Bush obstructionism and Bush making new law by executive orders, nothing good will come out of the next 6 months other than electing a Democratic president.
July 31st, 2008 at 12:21 ammisshusseinmolly Says:
I suspect that even Republicans would vote to override a veto on this one. This is an election year, and no candidate wants to explain to women voters why they deserve no legal recourse if they are being paid unfairly against the law.
I think you may be right. After all, the head honcho Republicon at the RNC did say, "save yourself guys, vote however you want".
It's the first time I have heard of the Republicons being released from their lemming behavior. But, they may be opening Pandora's Box. Who knows, some Republicons may get used to thinking for themselves and continue the practice.
July 31st, 2008 at 12:28 amcabbinbagger: another "I've got mine, to hell with you" conservative. Just another whiney "let big business regulate itself" Repub. Yeah, look how great that philosophy has done the last eight years. Apparently, despite what these dellusional conserves preach, big business most definitely DOES need the government looking over it's shoulder and creating legislation when needed to correct injustices in the work place. While he seems proud of his wife's luck in being in the minority of workplaces where a woman can make a competitive wage, apparently she's not allowed to use his computer so he'll do the talking for her. Typical knee-jerk Repub reaction to the prospect of regulation. Go back to sleep loser. We'll wake you in a few years after President Obama has set the economy back on track and starts reining in corrupt business practices.
July 31st, 2008 at 8:29 amcabbinbagger Says:
------------------------------------------------------------
My wife’s stand on laws such as this are that she doesn’t need government’s help to succeed in her career,
All you are saying is that your wife is a typical Republican in that she got hers and screw the rest of the women who get paid 3/4 of a man's salery for doing the same job.
We already understand that you right-wing extremists couldn't give a crap about anyone else, as long as you get taken care of.
July 31st, 2008 at 8:32 amcabbinbagger Says
July 31st, 2008 at 5:53 am
My wife works at a well known retailer that’s been around for over 100 years. The whole upper management staff are women, and many of their bosses above the store level are women. As a result, my wife already has a higher salary than 90 percent of the men there, and she’s only been there two years. The only men who work there and have a higher salary are those that have been there longer, and those on commission. But I know for a fact the highest paid commissioned salesperson in her store is a women as well, and often, on a good sales month, she makes more than any of the store management.
________________________________________________________
I'm happy for your wife, and I'm glad that she works for one of the companies that obeys the law and pays its employees fairly.
The Equal Pay Act guaranteed that women would be paid the same as men for doing the same work, and this was signed into law way back in 1963. However, the Supreme Court pretty much took the teeth out of this law when they denied Lilly Ledbetter the right to sue her employer because she was earning significantly less than the MEN who were doing the EXACT SAME job she was, and several of them hadn't even been doing it as long as she had. Even though this was obviously a gross violation of the Equal Pay Act, the SCOTUS basically said she didn't have a leg to stand on, and this is now a wink, wink, nudge, nudge to the rest of the business world that they can thumb their nose at the law without penalty. The Paycheck Fairness Act is basically to correct these wrongs.
How would your wife feel if she had been working for the same employer for 20 years, been doing an excellent job, and then found out that the men who were doing the SAME job were getting paid an average of 50% more? Maybe she'd be OK with this. Maybe she would even think that as a woman, she deserved this. But she shouldn't presume to speak for the rest of us.
July 31st, 2008 at 9:01 amDo it, W. Seal the deal: Veto Equal Pay!
Even the so-called PUMAs (whatever and whoever they are) may see the light.
And certainly real women will!
July 31st, 2008 at 9:46 amLet the Chimp veto it. Just one more nail in his coffin.
July 31st, 2008 at 2:48 pmI hope those former HRC supporters who are threatening to vote for McCain as a protest are reading this. What a bunch of slime this administration is and McCain will follow suit because he has already sold out to the devils
July 31st, 2008 at 6:05 pmcarpetbagger sounds just like my nephew-in-law from Texas on a recent visit - he says the last 8 years have been great for him - this guy is making $70,000 a year with a wife and two kids and he thinks life is good. This is how bad these repugs have been brainwashed and willing to vote against their own self-interests - just like the yahoos in Ohio who are still favoring McCain after 8 years of their state being in the toilet, losing jobs, losing everything and they are still voting republican.!!!!!
July 31st, 2008 at 6:08 pmHey carpetbagger. Just what company is this that your wife works for. Please share so we can all apply????
July 31st, 2008 at 6:09 pmRepunklicans. Had enough yet, America?
July 31st, 2008 at 6:32 pmW. Stands for WANKER.
July 31st, 2008 at 6:33 pmWhy would the Bush women care about equal pay? With all of money that the Bush men have looted and been paid by their Saudi friends, they will never have to think about a paycheck.
July 31st, 2008 at 7:15 pmcabbinbagger Says
July 31st, 2008 at 5:53 am
My wife works at a well known retailer that’s been around for over 100 years. The whole upper management staff are women, and many of their bosses above the store level are women. As a result, my wife already has a higher salary than 90 percent of the men there, and she’s only been there two years. The only men who work there and have a higher salary are those that have been there longer, and those on commission. But I know for a fact the highest paid commissioned salesperson in her store is a women as well, and often, on a good sales month, she makes more than any of the store management.
________________________________________________________
So your wife married down and took you (on a bet or dare?) as her husband...I guess she "settled" for something not in her IQ range.
She's got a BIG heart for marrying you. And you need her brain to survive.
July 31st, 2008 at 8:08 pmthank you so much!.
estetik bursa
March 20th, 2009 at 11:04 amsinema bursa
thnaks for you.
April 10th, 2009 at 5:50 ambursa
ramazan
April 28th, 2009 at 2:29 pm