SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Senate Republicans: No Pay Equity for Women
In procedural vote, Paycheck Fairness Act again fails to move forward
Sep 16, 2014
For the second time this year, Senate Republican have blocked the Paycheck Fairness Act from moving forward.
In a procedural vote on Monday, the Act, which would help women achieve protections from gender-based wage discrimination, failed to earn the 60 votes needed.
Joining all the Republicans in issuing a "no" vote was Senator Angus King (I-Maine), who also helped block the measure in April.
Though enough Republicans voted last week to allow the measure to proceed to debate, Steve Benen writes at the MaddowBlog that it was "not because they supported it, but because they were trying to waste time, eating up the clock on the Senate's limited pre-election schedule. If the GOP had killed the measure quickly, it would have meant moving on to something else Republicans don't like, so they dragged out the fight on the Paycheck Fairness Act, simply because they could."
"The Senate's continued failure to give the Paycheck Fairness Act an up or down vote lets down millions of American workers," stated Deborah J. Vagins, ACLU senior legislative counsel and co-chair of the National Paycheck Fairness Act Coalition.
"Pay equity is not a partisan issue, and paying women what they have already rightfully earned is good for them, for the nation's economy, and for American businesses' bottom lines," she said.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid criticized the outcome as well, saying, "In 2014, more than 50 years after the passage of the Equal Pay Act, it is simply unacceptable that American women take home on average 77 cents for every dollar their male colleagues earn for doing the same work. But Republicans do not see this as a problem."
"Not only is the wage gap in our country unfair, but it also hurts our economy. Pay inequality will cost the average working woman $464,320 over her lifetime," Reid stated.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
For the second time this year, Senate Republican have blocked the Paycheck Fairness Act from moving forward.
In a procedural vote on Monday, the Act, which would help women achieve protections from gender-based wage discrimination, failed to earn the 60 votes needed.
Joining all the Republicans in issuing a "no" vote was Senator Angus King (I-Maine), who also helped block the measure in April.
Though enough Republicans voted last week to allow the measure to proceed to debate, Steve Benen writes at the MaddowBlog that it was "not because they supported it, but because they were trying to waste time, eating up the clock on the Senate's limited pre-election schedule. If the GOP had killed the measure quickly, it would have meant moving on to something else Republicans don't like, so they dragged out the fight on the Paycheck Fairness Act, simply because they could."
"The Senate's continued failure to give the Paycheck Fairness Act an up or down vote lets down millions of American workers," stated Deborah J. Vagins, ACLU senior legislative counsel and co-chair of the National Paycheck Fairness Act Coalition.
"Pay equity is not a partisan issue, and paying women what they have already rightfully earned is good for them, for the nation's economy, and for American businesses' bottom lines," she said.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid criticized the outcome as well, saying, "In 2014, more than 50 years after the passage of the Equal Pay Act, it is simply unacceptable that American women take home on average 77 cents for every dollar their male colleagues earn for doing the same work. But Republicans do not see this as a problem."
"Not only is the wage gap in our country unfair, but it also hurts our economy. Pay inequality will cost the average working woman $464,320 over her lifetime," Reid stated.
For the second time this year, Senate Republican have blocked the Paycheck Fairness Act from moving forward.
In a procedural vote on Monday, the Act, which would help women achieve protections from gender-based wage discrimination, failed to earn the 60 votes needed.
Joining all the Republicans in issuing a "no" vote was Senator Angus King (I-Maine), who also helped block the measure in April.
Though enough Republicans voted last week to allow the measure to proceed to debate, Steve Benen writes at the MaddowBlog that it was "not because they supported it, but because they were trying to waste time, eating up the clock on the Senate's limited pre-election schedule. If the GOP had killed the measure quickly, it would have meant moving on to something else Republicans don't like, so they dragged out the fight on the Paycheck Fairness Act, simply because they could."
"The Senate's continued failure to give the Paycheck Fairness Act an up or down vote lets down millions of American workers," stated Deborah J. Vagins, ACLU senior legislative counsel and co-chair of the National Paycheck Fairness Act Coalition.
"Pay equity is not a partisan issue, and paying women what they have already rightfully earned is good for them, for the nation's economy, and for American businesses' bottom lines," she said.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid criticized the outcome as well, saying, "In 2014, more than 50 years after the passage of the Equal Pay Act, it is simply unacceptable that American women take home on average 77 cents for every dollar their male colleagues earn for doing the same work. But Republicans do not see this as a problem."
"Not only is the wage gap in our country unfair, but it also hurts our economy. Pay inequality will cost the average working woman $464,320 over her lifetime," Reid stated.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.