Senate Republicans Block Paycheck Fairness Act.
luvguins
2012/06/06 15:37:22
|
|
|||||
|
22 votes
|
|
42% | ||
|
7 votes
|
|
13% | ||
|
23 votes
|
|
44% | ||
Just how many more nails are the Republicans going to hammer into their November coffin with this continous war on the women of this country which the right wingers will deny? How can conservative women even defend this?
By Jessica Pieklo:
Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/republicans-block-paycheck-fairne...
By Jessica Pieklo:
With a final vote of 52-47, Republicans blocked the Paycheck Fairness Act once again showing American women that the GOP is not concerned with ideas of fundamental fairness and equality.
The vote was a strict party line vote with the two independent senators voting with Democrats and Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill) abstaining.
The American Association of University Women (AAUW) sharply criticized the vote, especially because the bill has widespread support. But like so many other matters with Republicans, they simply wouldn’t let it get a fair vote. “This was a missed opportunity for the Senate to do the right thing for women and the nation,” said AAUW Executive Director Linda D. Hallman, CAE. “When women are paid less, it hurts them and their families, and it undermines the U.S. economy. How lawmakers can turn down this commonsense economic policy is truly a mystery.”
By some estimates, women could lose up to $1 million over a 40-year career because of the pay gap. In higher-paying fields such as law, the disparity can result in even greater lifetime losses. Individual choices can affect the gender pay gap, but these choices are not the whole story — and, of course, these “choices” themselves are constrained by stereotype and discrimination. AAUW’s report Behind the Pay Gap controlled for factors known to affect earnings such as education and training, parenthood, and hours worked and found that college-educated women still earn less than men — despite having the same major and occupation as their male counterparts.
“Equal pay should not be a partisan issue. In fact, before the Senate took up the Paycheck Fairness Act in 2010, equal pay was something on which we could all agree. Previous bills brought to the floor with the goal of equal pay for equal work passed with bipartisan votes — until now.” said Lisa Maatz, AAUW director of public policy and government relations. “Women feel the sting of unfair pay all the time — at the grocery store, at the gas station, and in retirement. This isn’t political to them; it’s just common sense. And it’s that kind of kitchen-table economics that women will take with them to the polls in November.”
The Paycheck Fairness Act (S. 3220) would have deterred wage discrimination by closing loopholes in the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and barring retaliation against workers who disclose their wages to co-workers. Currently, employers can penalize and even fire employees for talking about their salaries.
Debra Ness, President of the National Partnership for Women & Families called the vote “deeply troubling” and evidence that Congress “cannot pass measure of critical importance to women and families.”
The special interests who pressured Congress to filibuster the Paycheck Fairness Act may have won today, but the nation lost – and women and families will suffer as a result. Today’s vote is deeply troubling, further evidence that this Congress cannot pass legislation that is critically important to the economic security of women and families and to our nation’s economic recovery. The Paycheck Fairness Act would protect women from discrimination in wages and promote basic fairness in our workplaces. It is appalling that politics have once again trumped women and families – but the fight for fair pay is not over.
It’s a disappointing, though not surprising vote and one that will surely haunt Republicans come November
Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/republicans-block-paycheck-fairne...
Luvguins, every leftwinger in the country is on the attack accusing Republicans of blocking this.
True, they did all oppose it but they carried one Democrat with them. Please click the link to see who that one Democrat was...
None other than Democrat Senate Majority Leader... Harry Reid.
You know, the guy whose job it was to negotiate and make deals with Republicans to win at least the few votes needed to pass this through cloture.
Look, i know you hate Republicans but this is past ridiculous as you're attacking them for voting against it when the man needed to win a few votes to get it passed voted it down with them.
At some point m'lady, you have to set your hate aside and allow common sense to take over as that's where you reveal intelligence instead of ignorance.
All you have achieved with this topic is make a lot of leftwingers look like uninformed idiots. Seriously, that's not meant as an attack but a general statement of the obvious as you guys should be furious at this betrayal by Harry Reid as he has once again failed in his duties to win support from Republicans by either voting with them or by attacking them with so much hate none of them are willing to work with him. Republicans understand money and Reid only needed a few vote...
Luvguins, every leftwinger in the country is on the attack accusing Republicans of blocking this.
True, they did all oppose it but they carried one Democrat with them. Please click the link to see who that one Democrat was...
None other than Democrat Senate Majority Leader... Harry Reid.
You know, the guy whose job it was to negotiate and make deals with Republicans to win at least the few votes needed to pass this through cloture.
Look, i know you hate Republicans but this is past ridiculous as you're attacking them for voting against it when the man needed to win a few votes to get it passed voted it down with them.
At some point m'lady, you have to set your hate aside and allow common sense to take over as that's where you reveal intelligence instead of ignorance.
All you have achieved with this topic is make a lot of leftwingers look like uninformed idiots. Seriously, that's not meant as an attack but a general statement of the obvious as you guys should be furious at this betrayal by Harry Reid as he has once again failed in his duties to win support from Republicans by either voting with them or by attacking them with so much hate none of them are willing to work with him. Republicans understand money and Reid only needed a few votes he could have gotten if he had tried anything... he did the opposite.
Please, it's not my intent to always attack you guys... but these attacks on the right are ignorant and it makes you look ignorant when you ignore something this important to attack Republicans... when the one man responsible for representing the Democrats to negotiate deals with Republican leaders is the one Democrat who actually backed the Republicans in voting against this.
LMAO!
Neither do you. The one Democrat who was supposed to represent you and try to win a few Republican votes actually voted with them to kill this legislation... Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid!
Without him, it's almost impossible to win Republican votes as he's the one whose supposed to be representing you in getting them.
And why are you ASSuming I support what Reid does?
See I get it that BOTH sides are screwed up... but you're clueless on that fact.
If women could expect equal pay that would level men and women.
I as a man feel it would be good to level the pay. If I do better because the game is rigged then I don't want to win that way.
Fact, Senate Democrats pay their female staff much less than Republicans do and fact, Harry Reid is the Democrat Majority Leader whose job it is to negotiate with Republicans to get the votes he needs to pass legislation like this... he instead voted with Republicans to kill this.
Tell me something... Obama keeps stabbing you guys in the back caving to the right and Reid keeps screwing you guys over like this making your sincere views look like complete stupidity. If the game was rigged... Harry Reid rigged it.
Matt, notice the one Democrat who sided with the Republicans as these guys didn't. Please explain to them the role of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid representing the Democrats negotiating with Republicans.
When you compare apples to apples, the so-called wage gap disappears. Young, childless, single urban women earn 8 percent more than their male counterparts. Women who have never had a child earn 113 percent of what men earn. Unmarried college-educated males between the ages of 40 and 64 earn nearly 15 percent less than their female counterparts.
making things up to try to distract women from saying, hey, Obama is burring our children in debt, destroying jobs, and stripping us of our freedom. Democrats think that women are dumb and can be fooled or bought off with $9 per month birth control.
1. A greater number of women than men work part time. Nearly 25% of all female workers are classified as part time, meaning less than 35 hours of work per week. Most people would agree that part time jobs do not carry the same wage levels that full time jobs do. Only 10% of all male employees are classified as part time.
As they get older, many women elect to work less so they can spend time with their children. A decade after graduation, 39 percent of women are out of the work force or working part time -- compared with only 3 percent of men. When these mothers return to full-time jobs, they naturally earn...
When you compare apples to apples, the so-called wage gap disappears. Young, childless, single urban women earn 8 percent more than their male counterparts. Women who have never had a child earn 113 percent of what men earn. Unmarried college-educated males between the ages of 40 and 64 earn nearly 15 percent less than their female counterparts.
making things up to try to distract women from saying, hey, Obama is burring our children in debt, destroying jobs, and stripping us of our freedom. Democrats think that women are dumb and can be fooled or bought off with $9 per month birth control.
1. A greater number of women than men work part time. Nearly 25% of all female workers are classified as part time, meaning less than 35 hours of work per week. Most people would agree that part time jobs do not carry the same wage levels that full time jobs do. Only 10% of all male employees are classified as part time.
As they get older, many women elect to work less so they can spend time with their children. A decade after graduation, 39 percent of women are out of the work force or working part time -- compared with only 3 percent of men. When these mothers return to full-time jobs, they naturally earn less than they would have if they had never left.
2. A greater number of women leave work to take care of their children often meaning large gaps in employment and less experience.
3. Women are far less likely to work overtime and value spending more time with their families. This not only means that they earn less because of working less overtime, but they are also less likely to get promoted or accept promotions that would require them to work more hours. Men are twice as likely to work over fifty hours a week than women. As promotions and raises tend to go to those who put in the most overtime this dramatically effects the disparity of wages between men and women.
4. Women are more likely to take jobs that have greater flexibility in hours.
5. A study of the job negotiations of graduating professional school students found that male students were eight times more likely to negotiate starting salaries and pay than female students. A survey by the same researchers found that more than twice as many women than men said they felt "a great deal of apprehension" about "negotiating". Some studies of simulated salary negotiations have also found that men on average negotiated more aggressively than women.
6. Men are more likely to prioritize jobs that make higher money, while women are more likely to gravitate towards jobs that they like better or have some other sort of fulfillment factor. Men are more likely to major in engineering, mathematics, and computer science in college. These overwhelmingly male-dominated majors are highly profitable. Conversely, the top college majors for women are education, English, and psychology. Women tend to be interested in the social sciences which normally pay less money. More women than men are enrolled in college and all of them are free to major in whatever they please.
Harvard economist Claudia Goldin if there is sufficient evidence to conclude that women experience systematic pay discrimination. "No," she replied. There are certainly instances of discrimination, she says, but most of the gap is the result of different choices. Other hard-to-measure factors, Goldin thinks, largely account for the remaining gap -- "probably not all, but most of it."
3. Women are far less likely to work overtime and value spending more time with their families. This not only means that they earn less because of working less overtime, but they are also less likely to get promoted or accept promotions that would require them to work more hours. Men are twice as likely to work over fifty hours a week than women. As promotions and raises tend to go to those who put in the most overtime this dramatically effects the disparity of wages between men and women.
4. Women are more likely to take jobs that have greater flexibility in hours.
5. A study of the job negotiations of graduating professional school students found that male students were eight times more likely to negotiate starting salaries and pay than female students. A survey by the same researchers found that more than twice as many women than men said they felt "a great deal of apprehension" about "negotiating". Some studies of simulated salary negotiations have also found that men on average negotiated more aggressively than women.
6. Men are more likely to prioritize jobs that make higher money, while women are more likely to gravitate towards jobs that they l...
3. Women are far less likely to work overtime and value spending more time with their families. This not only means that they earn less because of working less overtime, but they are also less likely to get promoted or accept promotions that would require them to work more hours. Men are twice as likely to work over fifty hours a week than women. As promotions and raises tend to go to those who put in the most overtime this dramatically effects the disparity of wages between men and women.
4. Women are more likely to take jobs that have greater flexibility in hours.
5. A study of the job negotiations of graduating professional school students found that male students were eight times more likely to negotiate starting salaries and pay than female students. A survey by the same researchers found that more than twice as many women than men said they felt "a great deal of apprehension" about "negotiating". Some studies of simulated salary negotiations have also found that men on average negotiated more aggressively than women.
6. Men are more likely to prioritize jobs that make higher money, while women are more likely to gravitate towards jobs that they like better or have some other sort of fulfillment factor. Men are more likely to major in engineering, mathematics, and computer science in college. These overwhelmingly male-dominated majors are highly profitable. Conversely, the top college majors for women are education, English, and psychology. Women tend to be interested in the social sciences which normally pay less money. More women than men are enrolled in college and all of them are free to major in whatever they please.
Harvard economist Claudia Goldin if there is sufficient evidence to conclude that women experience systematic pay discrimination. "No," she replied. There are certainly instances of discrimination, she says, but most of the gap is the result of different choices. Other hard-to-measure factors, Goldin thinks, largely account for the remaining gap -- "probably not all, but most of it."
The stats that show wimmin make less are loaded, just like all stats. The stats take into consideration all jobs from all professions. It is not a one-to-one correlation.
The fact is that there are discrimination laws in place already that prevent discrimination against anyone but white straight males. Women can sue if they match the qualifications and performance. This is nothing but the democrats yet again destroying businesses and jobs, drastically increasing compliance and litigation costs that hurt small businesses the most, feeding fodder to corrupt trial lawyers, and democrats thinking that women are too dumb to know any better. Just as the democrats think women are dumb enough to ignore the democrats horrible policies to simply be bought off with birth control. It is clear that in reality, democrats do not think highly of women at all.
"From 2000 to 2008, under President Bush, Federal spending rose by $1.3 trillion, from $1.9 trillion a year to $3.2 trillion a year. From 2009 to 2011, meanwhile, under President Obama, federal spending has risen by $600 billion, from $3.2 trillion a year to $3.8 trillion a year. It has also now begun to decline."
http://articles.businessinsid...
The majority of the monies spent since President Obama has been in office was to keep the country out of a second great depression through stimulus programs, unemployment extensions, tax cuts, and interest on the debt. Since President Obama has been in office, there has been over $1.6 trillions added to the debt in interest on that debt. President Obama is not responsible for a dime of those monies. When he took office, the national debt was at $10.6 trillions, and the interest on that massive debt was more than a billion dollars a day.
$383 billions in 2009
$414 billions in 2010
$454 billions in 2011
$272 billions YTD
http://www.treasurydirect.gov...
"From 2000 to 2008, under President Bush, Federal spending rose by $1.3 trillion, from $1.9 trillion a year to $3.2 trillion a year. From 2009 to 2011, meanwhile, under President Obama, federal spending has risen by $600 billion, from $3.2 trillion a year to $3.8 trillion a year. It has also now begun to decline."
http://articles.businessinsid...
The majority of the monies spent since President Obama has been in office was to keep the country out of a second great depression through stimulus programs, unemployment extensions, tax cuts, and interest on the debt. Since President Obama has been in office, there has been over $1.6 trillions added to the debt in interest on that debt. President Obama is not responsible for a dime of those monies. When he took office, the national debt was at $10.6 trillions, and the interest on that massive debt was more than a billion dollars a day.
$383 billions in 2009
$414 billions in 2010
$454 billions in 2011
$272 billions YTD
http://www.treasurydirect.gov...
1. The Financial Services Modernization Act repealed Glass-Steagall, aka the the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, authored by Senator Phil Gramm (R, Texas), Rep. Jim Leach (R, Iowa), and Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R, Virginia).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
2. The Commodities Futures Modernization Act authored by Rep. Thomas Ewing (R-IL).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"These derivatives, especially the credit default swap, would be at the heart of the financial crisis of 2008 and the subsequent Great Recession."
http://online.barrons.com/art...
Boy that is pathetic.
The only thing you have to blame the republicans for
this mortgage mess was signed into law by clinton. It
gets even better after that.
The law was also heavily supported by Lawrence
Summers. Summers Is one of Obama's head economic
advisors, and he was even int he running for Obama's
pick at Secretary of the Treasury.
Summers who most vehemently pushed for congressional
passage of that drastic deregulation measure, the
Financial Services Modernization Act, which eliminated
the New Deal barriers against mergers of commercial
and investment banks as well as insurance companies
and stock brokers. Standing at his side as President
Bill Clinton signed the legislation, Summers heralded
it as "a major step forward to the 21st century" --
and what a wonderful century it's proving to be.
It was also Summers who worked in cahoots with Enron
and banking lobbyists, and who backed the Commodity
Futures Modernization Act.
Obviously if Clinton and Obama did not force banks to
lower their credi...
Boy that is pathetic.
The only thing you have to blame the republicans for
this mortgage mess was signed into law by clinton. It
gets even better after that.
The law was also heavily supported by Lawrence
Summers. Summers Is one of Obama's head economic
advisors, and he was even int he running for Obama's
pick at Secretary of the Treasury.
Summers who most vehemently pushed for congressional
passage of that drastic deregulation measure, the
Financial Services Modernization Act, which eliminated
the New Deal barriers against mergers of commercial
and investment banks as well as insurance companies
and stock brokers. Standing at his side as President
Bill Clinton signed the legislation, Summers heralded
it as "a major step forward to the 21st century" --
and what a wonderful century it's proving to be.
It was also Summers who worked in cahoots with Enron
and banking lobbyists, and who backed the Commodity
Futures Modernization Act.
Obviously if Clinton and Obama did not force banks to
lower their credit restrictions to force them to lend
to people that were not qualified under standard
underwriting restrictions, then we would not be in
this mess at all.
http://readthebill.org/cases/...
Bringing up the CRA is as weak an argument as you can make. That is as absurd as trying to blame the housing crisis on Fannie and Freddie.
"Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis"
http://www.businessweek.com/i...
The whole fiasco was pushed by Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, while you are correct about Larry Summers and Robert Rubin having a hand in it along with Alan Greenspan, the fact remains that it was the Republicans that forced the bill through, and they have vowed to go back to the same policies that got us into the financial mess in the first place by repealing the Dodd-Frank Act that reinstated parts of the Glass-Stegall Act. The Republicans are also fighting the passage of the Volcker Rule, which would allow the big banks to gamble in high risk derivatives markets - a...
http://readthebill.org/cases/...
Bringing up the CRA is as weak an argument as you can make. That is as absurd as trying to blame the housing crisis on Fannie and Freddie.
"Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis"
http://www.businessweek.com/i...
The whole fiasco was pushed by Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, while you are correct about Larry Summers and Robert Rubin having a hand in it along with Alan Greenspan, the fact remains that it was the Republicans that forced the bill through, and they have vowed to go back to the same policies that got us into the financial mess in the first place by repealing the Dodd-Frank Act that reinstated parts of the Glass-Stegall Act. The Republicans are also fighting the passage of the Volcker Rule, which would allow the big banks to gamble in high risk derivatives markets - and count on taxpayer bailouts if their gambles fail AGAIN.
BTW, I never said it was Bush's fault. It has been the Republican mantra of deregulation of the financial industry and of corporations that led to the financial meltdown.
"Obviously if Clinton and Obama did not force banks to
lower their credit restrictions to force them to lend
to people that were not qualified under standard
underwriting restrictions, then we would not be in
this mess at all."
President Obama had NOTHING to do with the financial crisis.The recession had gone on for 13 months BEFORE President Obama was inaugurated.
What about Barney Frnak:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
What about Maxine Waters, Gregory Meeks, Lacy Clay, Arthur Davis, Barney Frank, and other Democrats fighting regulation of the mortgage industry, as the Republicans fight for it. Bill Clinton is even in it saying that it was the Democrats fault for resisting measures by the Republicans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
They also talk about Raines income as CEO. He now works for Obama.
Look at these videos and see it for yourself. I also challenge you to find any of my above statements to be false. You can not. The republicans have some blame in this,. but their blams primarily lies in Not sticking the democrats asses to the wall for blocking regulations and using the race card.
Another Good Article
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Daniel Mudd Fannie Mae CEO Calling the Illinois Black Caucus his family (Obama included)
Obama is the Number 2 Recipient of Funds from Fannie and Freddie even though he was only in the Senate for two years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
What about Barney Frnak:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
What about Maxine Waters, Gregory Meeks, Lacy Clay, Arthur Davis, Barney Frank, and other Democrats fighting regulation of the mortgage industry, as the Republicans fight for it. Bill Clinton is even in it saying that it was the Democrats fault for resisting measures by the Republicans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
They also talk about Raines income as CEO. He now works for Obama.
Look at these videos and see it for yourself. I also challenge you to find any of my above statements to be false. You can not. The republicans have some blame in this,. but their blams primarily lies in Not sticking the democrats asses to the wall for blocking regulations and using the race card.
Another Good Article
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Daniel Mudd Fannie Mae CEO Calling the Illinois Black Caucus his family (Obama included)
Obama is the Number 2 Recipient of Funds from Fannie and Freddie even though he was only in the Senate for two years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://online.barrons.com/art...
"1999: The Financial Services Modernization Act repealed Glass-Steagall, a law that had separated the commercial-banking industry from Wall Street, and the two industries, plus insurance, came together again. Banks became bigger, clumsier, and hard to manage. Apparently, risk-management became all but impossible, even as banks had greater access to larger pools of capital."
This bill allowed banks to become "too big to fail", requiring taxpayer bailouts when they did fail.
Blaming Fannie and Freddie and Dodd and Frank and the CRA is just Republican propaganda to shift the blame away from their own deregulation practices. It was Wall Street GREED that is the basis for the 2007-2009 great recession and the meltdown of the financial industry, and the Republicans were behind the process with their policies.
In October 1982, President Reagan signed into law the Garn–St. Germain Depository Institutions Act, which provided for adjustable-rate mortgage loans, which began the process of banking deregulation, and contributed to the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980s/early 1990s.
In 2004, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission relaxed the net capital rule, which enabled investment banks to substantially increase the level of debt they were taking on, fueling the growth in mortgage-backed securities supporting subprime mortgages. The SEC has conceded that self-regulation of investment banks contributed to the crisis.
As early as 1997, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan fought to keep the derivatives market unregulated. The Congress then allowed the self-regulation of the over-the-counter derivatives market when they enacted the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2...
In October 1982, President Reagan signed into law the Garn–St. Germain Depository Institutions Act, which provided for adjustable-rate mortgage loans, which began the process of banking deregulation, and contributed to the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980s/early 1990s.
In 2004, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission relaxed the net capital rule, which enabled investment banks to substantially increase the level of debt they were taking on, fueling the growth in mortgage-backed securities supporting subprime mortgages. The SEC has conceded that self-regulation of investment banks contributed to the crisis.
As early as 1997, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan fought to keep the derivatives market unregulated. The Congress then allowed the self-regulation of the over-the-counter derivatives market when they enacted the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. Derivatives such as credit default swaps (CDS) can be used to hedge or speculate against particular credit risks. The volume of CDS outstanding increased 100-fold from 1998 to 2008, with estimates of the debt covered by CDS contracts, as of November 2008, ranging from $33 to $47 trillion. Total over-the-counter derivative notional value rose to $683 trillion by June 2008. Warren Buffett famously referred to derivatives as "financial weapons of mass destruction" in early 2003.
From 2004–07, the top five U.S. investment banks each significantly increased their financial leverage, which increased their vulnerability to a financial shock. These five institutions reported over $4.1 trillion in debt for fiscal year 2007, about 30% of USA nominal GDP for 2007. Lehman Brothers was liquidated, Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch were sold at fire-sale prices, and Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley became commercial banks, subjecting themselves to more stringent regulation. With the exception of Lehman, all these companies required or received government support and bailout loans.
Examples pertinent to the crisis included the adjustable-rate mortgage, the bundling of subprime mortgages into mortgage-backed securities or collateralized debt obligations for sale to investors, a type of securitization, and a form of credit insurance called credit default swaps. The usage of these products expanded dramatically in the years leading up to the crisis.
This was pure and simple greed driven by Wall Street and the big banks, and backed by the Republican party all the way. They were doing it then and they are still trying to do it today, and if by some miracle Romney gets elected in November, they'll do it again next year, and the country won't dodge the bullet of another great depresion like they did in 2009, only it won't take 8 years to happen because the economy was strong in 2001 and the national debt was low (under $6 trillion). Today the economy is weak and the debt is almost $16 trillion.