FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
December 22, 2010
Contact: Scott Westbrook Simpson, 202.466.2061, Simpson@civilrights.org
Commissioners Berrien, Feldblum, and Lipnic Earn Bipartisan Support
Wade Henderson and Nancy Zirkin, president and executive vice president for policy of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, issued the following statement regarding the confirmation of the three commissioners to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC):
“The Senate’s bipartisan confirmation of the EEOC’s three commissioners is a welcome development. Since their recess appointment in March, Chair Jacqueline Berrien and Commissioners Chai Feldblum and Victoria Lipnic have worked together successfully and skillfully to lead the EEOC.
Under Chair Berrien’s stewardship, the EEOC has significantly reduced the growth in backlogged cases and conducted the largest sustained training effort within the agency in more than a decade. It’s no wonder that their confirmation earned the support of a diverse range of stakeholders, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Society for Human Resource Management and a broad coalition of civil rights organizations.
We are confident that these nominees will continue to draw on their extensive experience and exercise their authority thoughtfully and effectively to provide the kind of leadership necessary to guide the federal government's enforcement of employment discrimination protections and equal employment opportunity programs.”
###
Wade Henderson is the president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and Nancy Zirkin is the organization's executive vice president for policy. The Leadership Conference is charged by its diverse membership of more than 200 national organizations to promote and protect the rights of all persons in the United States. The Leadership Conference works toward an America as good as its ideals. For more information on The Leadership Conference and its 200-plus member organizations, visit www.civilrights.org
Showing posts with label Senate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Senate. Show all posts
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Monday, December 13, 2010
Paycheck Fairness Act stalls in the Senate
Lexology
Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP
Donald F. Bayer
USA
December 3 2010
One of the first pieces of legislation signed by President Obama after his inauguration was theLilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 (Ledbetter). The purpose of Ledbetter was to make iteasier for a plaintiff to bring suit on a wage discrimination claim by making it less likely that thestatute of limitations would bar a claim. Additional proposed legislation designed to facilitatewage discrimination claims was set forth in the proposed Paycheck Fairness Act of 2009.When Ledbetter passed, the Paycheck Fairness Act (the Act) was still in committee. OnNovember 17, 2010, the Senate failed to obtain the 60 votes necessary to close debate on theAct, meaning it could not be brought up for a vote. It now appears the Act will not be passedinto law in the foreseeable future given the upcoming change in the composition of the Senateas a result of the midterm elections.
Full Story: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e8d8b8cb-813d-4548-8cb6-6204f75db8c3&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+Federal+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2010-12-10&utm_term=
Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP
Donald F. Bayer
USA
December 3 2010
One of the first pieces of legislation signed by President Obama after his inauguration was theLilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 (Ledbetter). The purpose of Ledbetter was to make iteasier for a plaintiff to bring suit on a wage discrimination claim by making it less likely that thestatute of limitations would bar a claim. Additional proposed legislation designed to facilitatewage discrimination claims was set forth in the proposed Paycheck Fairness Act of 2009.When Ledbetter passed, the Paycheck Fairness Act (the Act) was still in committee. OnNovember 17, 2010, the Senate failed to obtain the 60 votes necessary to close debate on theAct, meaning it could not be brought up for a vote. It now appears the Act will not be passedinto law in the foreseeable future given the upcoming change in the composition of the Senateas a result of the midterm elections.
Full Story: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e8d8b8cb-813d-4548-8cb6-6204f75db8c3&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+Federal+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2010-12-10&utm_term=
Friday, August 7, 2009
American Association for Affirmative Action Applauds Justice Sonia Sotomayor, First Latina and Third Woman to Serve on the Supreme Court
AAAA News Release
August 7, 2009
Association commends the President and the Senate for acting “affirmatively” to promote equal opportunity in the selection of the 111th Justice of the Supreme Court
Washington, D.C. – The American Association for Affirmative Action (AAAA), an association of equal employment opportunity (EEO), diversity and affirmative action professionals founded in 1974, hailed the Senate confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to serve as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
AAAA’s President, ReNeé S. Dunman, stated that, “The President and the Senate have selected a person who is eminently qualified to serve and who comes from a group that has been historically underrepresented on the Supreme Court of the United States.” Dunman added, “Judge Sotomayor has cracked one of the most persistent glass ceilings in the legal profession.”
Judge Sotomayor is widely admired as a judge with a sophisticated grasp of legal doctrine and a keen awareness of the law’s impact on everyday life. She understands that upholding the rule of law means going beyond legal theory to ensure consistent, fair, common-sense application of the law to real-world facts.
AAAA commends the Senate for confirming the nomination of Judge Sotomayor civilly, respectfully and by a wide margin. “We know that Justice Sotomayor will execute her Constitutional responsibility fully and fairly in the years to come.” Ms. Dunman added: “We look forward to seeing a Court that is more diverse and represents all Americans on the First Monday in October.”
Founded in 1974, the American Association for Affirmative Action (AAAA) is a national not-for-profit association of professionals working in the areas of affirmative action, equal opportunity, and diversity. AAAA helps its members to become more successful and productive in their careers. It also promotes understanding and advocacy of affirmative action to enhance access and equality in employment, economic and educational opportunities.
888 16th Street, NW, Suite 800 * Washington, D.C. 20006 *202-349-9855 ex 1857 *
Fax: 202-355-1399 * http://www.affirmativeaction.org/
August 7, 2009
Association commends the President and the Senate for acting “affirmatively” to promote equal opportunity in the selection of the 111th Justice of the Supreme Court
Washington, D.C. – The American Association for Affirmative Action (AAAA), an association of equal employment opportunity (EEO), diversity and affirmative action professionals founded in 1974, hailed the Senate confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to serve as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
AAAA’s President, ReNeé S. Dunman, stated that, “The President and the Senate have selected a person who is eminently qualified to serve and who comes from a group that has been historically underrepresented on the Supreme Court of the United States.” Dunman added, “Judge Sotomayor has cracked one of the most persistent glass ceilings in the legal profession.”
Judge Sotomayor is widely admired as a judge with a sophisticated grasp of legal doctrine and a keen awareness of the law’s impact on everyday life. She understands that upholding the rule of law means going beyond legal theory to ensure consistent, fair, common-sense application of the law to real-world facts.
AAAA commends the Senate for confirming the nomination of Judge Sotomayor civilly, respectfully and by a wide margin. “We know that Justice Sotomayor will execute her Constitutional responsibility fully and fairly in the years to come.” Ms. Dunman added: “We look forward to seeing a Court that is more diverse and represents all Americans on the First Monday in October.”
Founded in 1974, the American Association for Affirmative Action (AAAA) is a national not-for-profit association of professionals working in the areas of affirmative action, equal opportunity, and diversity. AAAA helps its members to become more successful and productive in their careers. It also promotes understanding and advocacy of affirmative action to enhance access and equality in employment, economic and educational opportunities.
888 16th Street, NW, Suite 800 * Washington, D.C. 20006 *202-349-9855 ex 1857 *
Fax: 202-355-1399 * http://www.affirmativeaction.org/
Sotomayor Confirmed by Senate, 68-31
The New York Times
August 7, 2009
By CHARLIE SAVAGE
WASHINGTON — The Senate on Thursday confirmed Judge Sonia Sotomayor as the nation’s first Hispanic Supreme Court justice, concluding a 10-week battle with a resounding victory for the White House.
The largely party-line vote, 68 to 31, brought Judge Sotomayor, 55, to the threshold of one of the United States’ most prestigious institutions, completing an extraordinary narrative arc that began in a Bronx housing project where the Puerto Rican girl was raised by her widowed mother.
In brief remarks at the White House, President Obama hailed her confirmation as “breaking yet another barrier and moving us yet another step closer to a more perfect union.”
“With this historic vote,” he said, “the Senate has affirmed that Judge Sotomayor has the intellect, the temperament, the history, the integrity and the independence of mind to ably serve on our nation’s highest court.”
A White House spokesman said the judge watched the vote on television in her chambers in New York City, and she released no statement. But when Judge Sotomayor returned to her West Village home Thursday night, she beamed and waved at neighbors who lined the sidewalks to clap and shout encouragement.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. is expected to swear the new justice in at a private ceremony at the Supreme Court on Saturday morning, a court spokeswoman said.
Leaders of conservative groups had tried to delay the confirmation vote, but Democrats pushed it through to ensure that Judge Sotomayor would be installed by September, when the court takes up a campaign-finance case left over from its last term. She is not expected to alter the balance of the court on most issues, as her views appear to be similar to those of David H. Souter, the retired justice she is succeeding.
Full Story: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/07/us/politics/07confirm.html?th&emc=th
August 7, 2009
By CHARLIE SAVAGE
WASHINGTON — The Senate on Thursday confirmed Judge Sonia Sotomayor as the nation’s first Hispanic Supreme Court justice, concluding a 10-week battle with a resounding victory for the White House.
The largely party-line vote, 68 to 31, brought Judge Sotomayor, 55, to the threshold of one of the United States’ most prestigious institutions, completing an extraordinary narrative arc that began in a Bronx housing project where the Puerto Rican girl was raised by her widowed mother.
In brief remarks at the White House, President Obama hailed her confirmation as “breaking yet another barrier and moving us yet another step closer to a more perfect union.”
“With this historic vote,” he said, “the Senate has affirmed that Judge Sotomayor has the intellect, the temperament, the history, the integrity and the independence of mind to ably serve on our nation’s highest court.”
A White House spokesman said the judge watched the vote on television in her chambers in New York City, and she released no statement. But when Judge Sotomayor returned to her West Village home Thursday night, she beamed and waved at neighbors who lined the sidewalks to clap and shout encouragement.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. is expected to swear the new justice in at a private ceremony at the Supreme Court on Saturday morning, a court spokeswoman said.
Leaders of conservative groups had tried to delay the confirmation vote, but Democrats pushed it through to ensure that Judge Sotomayor would be installed by September, when the court takes up a campaign-finance case left over from its last term. She is not expected to alter the balance of the court on most issues, as her views appear to be similar to those of David H. Souter, the retired justice she is succeeding.
Full Story: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/07/us/politics/07confirm.html?th&emc=th
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Senate Backs Apology for Slavery
The Washington Post
Resolution Specifies That It Cannot Be Used in Reparations Cases
By Krissah Thompson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 19, 2009
The Senate unanimously passed a resolution yesterday apologizing for slavery, making way for a joint congressional resolution and the latest attempt by the federal government to take responsibility for 2 1/2 centuries of slavery.
"You wonder why we didn't do it 100 years ago," Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), lead sponsor of the resolution, said after the unanimous-consent vote. "It is important to have a collective response to a collective injustice."
The Senate's apology follows a similar apology passed last year by the House. One key difference is that the Senate version explicitly deals with the long-simmering issue of whether slavery descendants are entitled to reparations, saying that the resolution cannot be used in support of claims for restitution. The House is expected to revisit the issue next week to conform its resolution to the Senate version.
Harkin, who called the Senate's vote an "important and significant milestone," said he wanted the resolution passed yesterday to closely coincide with Juneteenth, a holiday first celebrated by former slaves to mark their emancipation.
This recent willingness to deal with the nation's difficult racial history has come about in part because of President Obama's election, said Rep. Stephen I. Cohen (D-Tenn.), who began pushing for an apology more than a decade ago when he was a state senator and pronounced himself "pleased" with the Senate vote.
Still, Cohen said, "there are going to be African Americans who think that [the apology] is not reparations, and it's not action, and there are going to be Caucasians who say, 'Get over it.' . . . I look at it as something that makes people think."
Full Story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061803877_pf.html
Resolution Specifies That It Cannot Be Used in Reparations Cases
By Krissah Thompson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 19, 2009
The Senate unanimously passed a resolution yesterday apologizing for slavery, making way for a joint congressional resolution and the latest attempt by the federal government to take responsibility for 2 1/2 centuries of slavery.
"You wonder why we didn't do it 100 years ago," Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), lead sponsor of the resolution, said after the unanimous-consent vote. "It is important to have a collective response to a collective injustice."
The Senate's apology follows a similar apology passed last year by the House. One key difference is that the Senate version explicitly deals with the long-simmering issue of whether slavery descendants are entitled to reparations, saying that the resolution cannot be used in support of claims for restitution. The House is expected to revisit the issue next week to conform its resolution to the Senate version.
Harkin, who called the Senate's vote an "important and significant milestone," said he wanted the resolution passed yesterday to closely coincide with Juneteenth, a holiday first celebrated by former slaves to mark their emancipation.
This recent willingness to deal with the nation's difficult racial history has come about in part because of President Obama's election, said Rep. Stephen I. Cohen (D-Tenn.), who began pushing for an apology more than a decade ago when he was a state senator and pronounced himself "pleased" with the Senate vote.
Still, Cohen said, "there are going to be African Americans who think that [the apology] is not reparations, and it's not action, and there are going to be Caucasians who say, 'Get over it.' . . . I look at it as something that makes people think."
Full Story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061803877_pf.html
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Obama To Nominate Sonia Sotomayor To Supreme Court
CBS News Interactive
May 26, 2009 7:36 am US/Central
Sotomayor Will Be First Hispanic On The Court, If Confirmed
President Barack Obama tapped U.S. Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, officials said, making her the first Hispanic in history picked to wear the robes of a justice.If confirmed by the Senate, Sotomayor, 54, would succeed retiring Justice David Souter. Two officials described Obama's decision on condition of anonymity because no formal announcement had been made.Administration officials say Sotomayor would bring more judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice confirmed in the past 70 years.A formal announcement was expected at midmorning.Obama had said publicly he wanted a justice who combined intellect and empathy -- the ability to understand the troubles of everyday Americans.Democrats hold a large majority in the Senate, and barring the unexpected, Sotomayor's confirmation should be assured.If approved, she would join Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second woman on the current court.
Full Story: http://wcco.com/national/obama.supreme.court.2.1019138.html
May 26, 2009 7:36 am US/Central
Sotomayor Will Be First Hispanic On The Court, If Confirmed
President Barack Obama tapped U.S. Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, officials said, making her the first Hispanic in history picked to wear the robes of a justice.If confirmed by the Senate, Sotomayor, 54, would succeed retiring Justice David Souter. Two officials described Obama's decision on condition of anonymity because no formal announcement had been made.Administration officials say Sotomayor would bring more judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice confirmed in the past 70 years.A formal announcement was expected at midmorning.Obama had said publicly he wanted a justice who combined intellect and empathy -- the ability to understand the troubles of everyday Americans.Democrats hold a large majority in the Senate, and barring the unexpected, Sotomayor's confirmation should be assured.If approved, she would join Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second woman on the current court.
Full Story: http://wcco.com/national/obama.supreme.court.2.1019138.html
Monday, March 9, 2009
Change to Top 10 Percent Rule Clears Committee
Diverse Issues in Higher Education
by Associated Press
Mar 6, 2009, 09:11
AUSTIN, Texas
Texas students who graduate in the top 10 percent of their high school class would no longer be guaranteed automatic admission to a public university under a bill that passed a Senate panel Wednesday.
The legislation, passed 4-1 out of the Senate Higher Education Committee, would cap top 10 percent admissions to 50 percent of a school’s entering freshman class.
The bill has strong backing from the University of Texas, where more than 80 percent of current freshmen gained admission through the automatic-entry guarantee.
Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, sponsor of the cap legislation, said talented musicians and would-be scientists are going elsewhere because they can’t get into UT.
Full Story: http://www.diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_12369.shtml
by Associated Press
Mar 6, 2009, 09:11
AUSTIN, Texas
Texas students who graduate in the top 10 percent of their high school class would no longer be guaranteed automatic admission to a public university under a bill that passed a Senate panel Wednesday.
The legislation, passed 4-1 out of the Senate Higher Education Committee, would cap top 10 percent admissions to 50 percent of a school’s entering freshman class.
The bill has strong backing from the University of Texas, where more than 80 percent of current freshmen gained admission through the automatic-entry guarantee.
Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, sponsor of the cap legislation, said talented musicians and would-be scientists are going elsewhere because they can’t get into UT.
Full Story: http://www.diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_12369.shtml
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Solis Confirmed as Labor Secretary
The Washington Post
By Michael A. Fletcher
February 24, 2009
The Senate this afternoon confirmed Rep. Hilda Solis (D-Calif.) as labor secretary, more than two months after she was nominated for the post by President Obama.The Senate voted 80 to 17 to confirm Solis, after Senate Republicans today assured Democrats that they would not filibuster the nomination. Solis had come under fire from Senate Republicans, who thought she was unresponsive to many of their questions during her confirmation hearing, a situation that was compounded by her work as treasurer for American Rights at Work, a pro-labor group.
There were also concerns among some Republicans about her support for a measure that would make it easier for workers to organize unions.
Consideration of Solis's nomination was further delayed when it was revealed that her husband had recently paid about $6,400 to settle tax liens against his California auto repair business.
While Solis's nomination generated skepticism among many Republicans and their backers in the business community, the new labor secretary enjoys solid support among members of organized labor. The daughter of immigrants from Mexico and Nicaragua, both of Solis's parents were union members. Also, as a member of Congress, Solis has shared union skepticism toward free trade agreements, and been a strong proponent of developing jobs in renewal energy and other "green collar" areas.
Full Story: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/02/24/solis_cleared_for_senate_confi.html
By Michael A. Fletcher
February 24, 2009
The Senate this afternoon confirmed Rep. Hilda Solis (D-Calif.) as labor secretary, more than two months after she was nominated for the post by President Obama.The Senate voted 80 to 17 to confirm Solis, after Senate Republicans today assured Democrats that they would not filibuster the nomination. Solis had come under fire from Senate Republicans, who thought she was unresponsive to many of their questions during her confirmation hearing, a situation that was compounded by her work as treasurer for American Rights at Work, a pro-labor group.
There were also concerns among some Republicans about her support for a measure that would make it easier for workers to organize unions.
Consideration of Solis's nomination was further delayed when it was revealed that her husband had recently paid about $6,400 to settle tax liens against his California auto repair business.
While Solis's nomination generated skepticism among many Republicans and their backers in the business community, the new labor secretary enjoys solid support among members of organized labor. The daughter of immigrants from Mexico and Nicaragua, both of Solis's parents were union members. Also, as a member of Congress, Solis has shared union skepticism toward free trade agreements, and been a strong proponent of developing jobs in renewal energy and other "green collar" areas.
Full Story: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/02/24/solis_cleared_for_senate_confi.html
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Senate Committee Cancels Vote on Labor Secretary Nomination
Workforce Management
February 6, 2009
Senate Committee Cancels Vote on Labor Secretary Nomination
Rep. Hilda Solis will have to wait a while longer for her nomination as the next secretary of labor to come before the full Senate after a committee postponed its vote on her nomination on Thursday, February 5.
USA Today reported Thursday that the California Democrat’s husband had not paid $6,400 in tax liens against his auto repair business until February 4. Some of the penalties had been outstanding for 16 years.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said in a briefing Thursday that Solis’ nomination is not in jeopardy.
“We reviewed her tax returns and her tax returns are in order,” Gibbs said. “We’re not going to penalize her for her husband’s business mistakes. Obviously, her husband I think has and should pay any taxes that he owes.”
The Solis confirmation process has been stalled since her
-appearance before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on January 9. Solis refused to state a position on a controversial bill that would make it easier for employees to form a union and did not offer her opinion about right-to-work laws and other policies.
After the hearing, panel Republicans submitted a series of written questions to Solis about the union legislation as well as her service on the board of American Rights at Work, an advocacy organization. Solis had not indicated her position in House financial disclosures, according to published reports.
Full Story: http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/26/16/09.php
February 6, 2009
Senate Committee Cancels Vote on Labor Secretary Nomination
Rep. Hilda Solis will have to wait a while longer for her nomination as the next secretary of labor to come before the full Senate after a committee postponed its vote on her nomination on Thursday, February 5.
USA Today reported Thursday that the California Democrat’s husband had not paid $6,400 in tax liens against his auto repair business until February 4. Some of the penalties had been outstanding for 16 years.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said in a briefing Thursday that Solis’ nomination is not in jeopardy.
“We reviewed her tax returns and her tax returns are in order,” Gibbs said. “We’re not going to penalize her for her husband’s business mistakes. Obviously, her husband I think has and should pay any taxes that he owes.”
The Solis confirmation process has been stalled since her
-appearance before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on January 9. Solis refused to state a position on a controversial bill that would make it easier for employees to form a union and did not offer her opinion about right-to-work laws and other policies.
After the hearing, panel Republicans submitted a series of written questions to Solis about the union legislation as well as her service on the board of American Rights at Work, an advocacy organization. Solis had not indicated her position in House financial disclosures, according to published reports.
Full Story: http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/26/16/09.php
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Senate Turns Back Challenge to Wage Bias Bill
CQ TODAY MIDDAY UPDATE Jan. 22, 2009 – 1:12 p.m.
By a comfortable margin, the Senate on Thursday rejected the first and most comprehensive challenge to a bill aimed at making it easier for victims of wage discrimination to seek redress in court.
The 40-55 vote defeating an amendment by Kay Bailey Hutchison , R-Texas, paves the way for Democrats and the Obama administration to deliver on the first of several labor law changes promised during the 2008 election campaign.
Democrats hope to complete action later Thursday on the “Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act,” which would allow workers who allege discrimination based on race, gender, national origin, religion, age or disability to sue anytime within 180 days of receiving their last discriminatory paycheck.
“We’re making progress on this bill,” declared Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev. “We’re going to finish Ledbetter today, tonight. I hope I do not have to file cloture on this.”
The House passed a broader version of the legislation on Jan. 9; the two will have to be reconciled before a final bill can be sent to President Obama for his expected signature.
Full Story: http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=cqmidday-000003015010
By a comfortable margin, the Senate on Thursday rejected the first and most comprehensive challenge to a bill aimed at making it easier for victims of wage discrimination to seek redress in court.
The 40-55 vote defeating an amendment by Kay Bailey Hutchison , R-Texas, paves the way for Democrats and the Obama administration to deliver on the first of several labor law changes promised during the 2008 election campaign.
Democrats hope to complete action later Thursday on the “Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act,” which would allow workers who allege discrimination based on race, gender, national origin, religion, age or disability to sue anytime within 180 days of receiving their last discriminatory paycheck.
“We’re making progress on this bill,” declared Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev. “We’re going to finish Ledbetter today, tonight. I hope I do not have to file cloture on this.”
The House passed a broader version of the legislation on Jan. 9; the two will have to be reconciled before a final bill can be sent to President Obama for his expected signature.
Full Story: http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=cqmidday-000003015010
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Reversing Discrimination
The New York Times
January 7, 2009
Editorial
Reversing Discrimination
President-elect Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress are already signaling a welcome new seriousness in Washington about protecting civil rights after eight years of erosion.
They are planning swift action on legislation to overturn an unjust 2007 Supreme Court decision that has made it much harder for people to challenge illegal discrimination in employment, education, housing and other fields.
The 5-to-4 ruling in 2007 involved Lilly Ledbetter, a supervisor at a Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company plant in Alabama. She received much smaller raises over several years than men in comparable positions.
Tossing aside longstanding legal precedents, government practice and a jury verdict in Ms. Ledbetter’s favor, the narrow Supreme Court majority decided that she was entitled to nothing. They ruled that Ms. Ledbetter should have filed her claim within 180 days of the very first decision to pay her less. The justices rejected the argument that each subsequent discriminatory paycheck was a new violation of the law.
The impact of the Ledbetter decision has been broad injustice. As Robert Pear reported in The Times on Monday, courts around the country have cited the decision hundreds of times as a reason for rejecting lawsuits claiming discrimination based on race, sex, age and disability, without regard to the underlying merits of the individual cases.
The House is expected to vote this week on a legislative fix that would restore the law’s original intent. The measure would state that a violation occurs each time a person receives a paycheck resulting from “a discriminatory compensation decision.” The Senate is expected to take up the bill soon after. It merits passage, along with a related bill, the Paycheck Fairness Act, which contains other useful steps for combating gender-based wage discrimination.
Senate Republicans blocked the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act last spring. They should consider now whether hostility to civil rights and pay equity for women is really the image they want to project for their party after the losses it suffered in November.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/opinion/07wed2.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
January 7, 2009
Editorial
Reversing Discrimination
President-elect Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress are already signaling a welcome new seriousness in Washington about protecting civil rights after eight years of erosion.
They are planning swift action on legislation to overturn an unjust 2007 Supreme Court decision that has made it much harder for people to challenge illegal discrimination in employment, education, housing and other fields.
The 5-to-4 ruling in 2007 involved Lilly Ledbetter, a supervisor at a Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company plant in Alabama. She received much smaller raises over several years than men in comparable positions.
Tossing aside longstanding legal precedents, government practice and a jury verdict in Ms. Ledbetter’s favor, the narrow Supreme Court majority decided that she was entitled to nothing. They ruled that Ms. Ledbetter should have filed her claim within 180 days of the very first decision to pay her less. The justices rejected the argument that each subsequent discriminatory paycheck was a new violation of the law.
The impact of the Ledbetter decision has been broad injustice. As Robert Pear reported in The Times on Monday, courts around the country have cited the decision hundreds of times as a reason for rejecting lawsuits claiming discrimination based on race, sex, age and disability, without regard to the underlying merits of the individual cases.
The House is expected to vote this week on a legislative fix that would restore the law’s original intent. The measure would state that a violation occurs each time a person receives a paycheck resulting from “a discriminatory compensation decision.” The Senate is expected to take up the bill soon after. It merits passage, along with a related bill, the Paycheck Fairness Act, which contains other useful steps for combating gender-based wage discrimination.
Senate Republicans blocked the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act last spring. They should consider now whether hostility to civil rights and pay equity for women is really the image they want to project for their party after the losses it suffered in November.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/opinion/07wed2.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Senate Democrats Hold Hearing on Pay Equity for Women
CNSNews.com
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com) – Lilly Ledbetter, a former Goodyear Tire plant manager who became a cause célèbre among advocates of gender pay-equity issues, told the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday that she has become a second-class citizen. At one point in the hearing, the committee chairman echoed a line from an ‘Obama for President’ television ad, criticizing Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s position on the issue. “My retirement is based on what I earned,” Ledbetter told the panel. “This means I’m treated like a second-class citizen all of my life because that never changes.” Ledbetter lost a pay discrimination lawsuit against Goodyear after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that she filed the complaint too late. She retired after working 19 years at the Goodyear plant in Gadsden, Ala. The high court said that, under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, an employee must sue within 180 days regarding alleged pay discrimination. Speaking to a group of mostly Democratic senators – some of whom were quick to make electioneering statements – Ledbetter had a sympathetic audience. Senate Democrats introduced the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act this year. If passed, the law would extend the limit on how long an employee can wait before suing an employer for pay discrimination. The bill was stopped by a Republican-led filibuster. Of the two presidential candidates, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) voted for cloture so the bill could come up for a final vote, while Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was not present during the vote but voiced his opposition. Echoing a line from an Obama campaign ad, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) referred to McCain, saying, “One senior senator, who didn’t show up to vote on the act, said quote ‘women just need more education and job training.’” Ledbetter said she was “strongly offended” by the McCain statement and that she frequently took continuing education courses while working for Goodyear. [To read the entire story, go to: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=36189 ]
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com) – Lilly Ledbetter, a former Goodyear Tire plant manager who became a cause célèbre among advocates of gender pay-equity issues, told the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday that she has become a second-class citizen. At one point in the hearing, the committee chairman echoed a line from an ‘Obama for President’ television ad, criticizing Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s position on the issue. “My retirement is based on what I earned,” Ledbetter told the panel. “This means I’m treated like a second-class citizen all of my life because that never changes.” Ledbetter lost a pay discrimination lawsuit against Goodyear after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that she filed the complaint too late. She retired after working 19 years at the Goodyear plant in Gadsden, Ala. The high court said that, under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, an employee must sue within 180 days regarding alleged pay discrimination. Speaking to a group of mostly Democratic senators – some of whom were quick to make electioneering statements – Ledbetter had a sympathetic audience. Senate Democrats introduced the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act this year. If passed, the law would extend the limit on how long an employee can wait before suing an employer for pay discrimination. The bill was stopped by a Republican-led filibuster. Of the two presidential candidates, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) voted for cloture so the bill could come up for a final vote, while Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was not present during the vote but voiced his opposition. Echoing a line from an Obama campaign ad, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) referred to McCain, saying, “One senior senator, who didn’t show up to vote on the act, said quote ‘women just need more education and job training.’” Ledbetter said she was “strongly offended” by the McCain statement and that she frequently took continuing education courses while working for Goodyear. [To read the entire story, go to: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=36189 ]
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Senate Approves Legislation to Expand Workplace Disability Law
Workforce Management
September 11, 2008
—Mark Schoeff Jr.
A bill that would expand workplace protections for disabled Americans gained unanimous Senate approval on Thursday, September 11.
The legislation, which was co-sponsored by 77 senators, sailed through on a voice vote. Both presidential nominees, Sens. John McCain, R-Arizona, and Barack Obama, D-Illinois, came out in support of the bill weeks ago.
The measure clarifies that Congress meant for the Americans with Disabilities Act to be broadly interpreted. The original measure, which became law in the early 1990s, required employers to make accommodations for disabled employees.
The new bill, the ADA Amendments Act, addresses Supreme Court decisions that critics say restricted the law. The court ruled in several cases that mitigating measures—such as medication or prosthesis—make a person ineligible for coverage.
In an unusual show of cooperation, disability advocates and the business lobby compromised on the final bill, ensuring broad support on Capitol Hill. In late June, the House approved a similar bill, 402-17.
“This was a slam-dunk,” said Keith Smith, director of employment and labor policy at the National Association of Manufacturers. “The biggest hurdle was the Senate calendar.”
Congress returned from its August recess on Monday and will be in session until late September, when it will take another break to allow members to go home and campaign.
It’s not clear whether all legislative business will be concluded by October, but the window is closing quickly.
Both the House and Senate versions of the ADA bill reiterate that the definition of a disability is a physical or mental impairment that “substantially limits” one or more major life activities. They also increase the number of activities covered, add a category of bodily functions and allow workers to sue if they are “regarded as” disabled.
The House bill defines “substantially limits” as “materially restricts.” In an effort to garner more support, the Senate avoids such sharpening of the language.
“Instead, the bill takes several specific and general steps that, individually and in combination, direct courts toward a more generous meaning and application of the definition,” Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said in a Congressional Record statement in July.
Differences between the House and Senate bills won’t slow down the measure, Smith said. He anticipates that the House will take up and pass the Senate measure, bypassing the need for a conference committee. [To see the entire article, go to: http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/76/20.php ]
September 11, 2008
—Mark Schoeff Jr.
A bill that would expand workplace protections for disabled Americans gained unanimous Senate approval on Thursday, September 11.
The legislation, which was co-sponsored by 77 senators, sailed through on a voice vote. Both presidential nominees, Sens. John McCain, R-Arizona, and Barack Obama, D-Illinois, came out in support of the bill weeks ago.
The measure clarifies that Congress meant for the Americans with Disabilities Act to be broadly interpreted. The original measure, which became law in the early 1990s, required employers to make accommodations for disabled employees.
The new bill, the ADA Amendments Act, addresses Supreme Court decisions that critics say restricted the law. The court ruled in several cases that mitigating measures—such as medication or prosthesis—make a person ineligible for coverage.
In an unusual show of cooperation, disability advocates and the business lobby compromised on the final bill, ensuring broad support on Capitol Hill. In late June, the House approved a similar bill, 402-17.
“This was a slam-dunk,” said Keith Smith, director of employment and labor policy at the National Association of Manufacturers. “The biggest hurdle was the Senate calendar.”
Congress returned from its August recess on Monday and will be in session until late September, when it will take another break to allow members to go home and campaign.
It’s not clear whether all legislative business will be concluded by October, but the window is closing quickly.
Both the House and Senate versions of the ADA bill reiterate that the definition of a disability is a physical or mental impairment that “substantially limits” one or more major life activities. They also increase the number of activities covered, add a category of bodily functions and allow workers to sue if they are “regarded as” disabled.
The House bill defines “substantially limits” as “materially restricts.” In an effort to garner more support, the Senate avoids such sharpening of the language.
“Instead, the bill takes several specific and general steps that, individually and in combination, direct courts toward a more generous meaning and application of the definition,” Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said in a Congressional Record statement in July.
Differences between the House and Senate bills won’t slow down the measure, Smith said. He anticipates that the House will take up and pass the Senate measure, bypassing the need for a conference committee. [To see the entire article, go to: http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/76/20.php ]
Thursday, September 11, 2008
ADA Amendments Act will Restore Vital Civil Rights Protections for Americans with Disabilities
ADA Watch/National Coalition for Disability Rights (NCDR)
601 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 900S Washington, DC 20004
Media Contact: Jim Ward, Founder and President 202-415-4753 jimward@ncdr.org
(Washington, DC) The leaders of a national coalition of disability, civil rights and social justice organizations praised the U.S. Senate today for taking bipartisan action to restore vital civil rights protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In recent years, the ADA - the world's first human rights law for people with disabilities - has been dramatically narrowed in the courts leaving citizens with epilepsy, diabetes, mental illness, HIV-AIDS and other disabilities unprotected from discrimination. The ADA Amendments Act clarifies the intent of Congress and reverses the "judicial activism" that has resulted in more than 90% of employment-related ADA cases being dismissed on summary judgment.
For more than 8 years, ADA Watch and the National Coalition for Disability Rights has called for restoration of the ADA. Since 2006, our Road To Freedom bus tour and disability rights exhibit has traveled to all 50 states, generating widespread media attention and collecting thousands of petition signatures calling on Congress to restore the ADA. The organization's "Campaign for Fair Judges" promotes awareness of the importance of supporting candidates who will advance judicial nominees supportive of disability rights and civil rights generally.
ADA Watch/NCDR founder and president, Jim Ward stated today, "This legislation will move the courts away from narrow interpretations of the ADA and the expending of resources on determining if a person is "disabled" enough to deserve the protections of the ADA. The courts should now move to fairly determining whether there has been discrimination."
Board member, Marcie Roth added, "While hopeful, we remain concerned that the rights of the more than 54 Americans with disabilities may still be in jeopardy if activist judges continue to disregard the intent of Congress. We call on both presidential candidates to support judges who will uphold the intent of Congress so that we can lessen discrimination and see a reduction in the shamefully high rates of poverty and unemployment among people with disabilities."ADA Watch and the National Coalition for Disability Rights (NCDR) is a coalition of national, state and local disability, civil rights and social justice organizations united to protect and promote the human rights of children and adults with physical and mental disabilities. For more information, go to www.adawatch.org and www.roadtofreedom.org
601 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 900S Washington, DC 20004
Media Contact: Jim Ward, Founder and President 202-415-4753 jimward@ncdr.org
(Washington, DC) The leaders of a national coalition of disability, civil rights and social justice organizations praised the U.S. Senate today for taking bipartisan action to restore vital civil rights protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In recent years, the ADA - the world's first human rights law for people with disabilities - has been dramatically narrowed in the courts leaving citizens with epilepsy, diabetes, mental illness, HIV-AIDS and other disabilities unprotected from discrimination. The ADA Amendments Act clarifies the intent of Congress and reverses the "judicial activism" that has resulted in more than 90% of employment-related ADA cases being dismissed on summary judgment.
For more than 8 years, ADA Watch and the National Coalition for Disability Rights has called for restoration of the ADA. Since 2006, our Road To Freedom bus tour and disability rights exhibit has traveled to all 50 states, generating widespread media attention and collecting thousands of petition signatures calling on Congress to restore the ADA. The organization's "Campaign for Fair Judges" promotes awareness of the importance of supporting candidates who will advance judicial nominees supportive of disability rights and civil rights generally.
ADA Watch/NCDR founder and president, Jim Ward stated today, "This legislation will move the courts away from narrow interpretations of the ADA and the expending of resources on determining if a person is "disabled" enough to deserve the protections of the ADA. The courts should now move to fairly determining whether there has been discrimination."
Board member, Marcie Roth added, "While hopeful, we remain concerned that the rights of the more than 54 Americans with disabilities may still be in jeopardy if activist judges continue to disregard the intent of Congress. We call on both presidential candidates to support judges who will uphold the intent of Congress so that we can lessen discrimination and see a reduction in the shamefully high rates of poverty and unemployment among people with disabilities."ADA Watch and the National Coalition for Disability Rights (NCDR) is a coalition of national, state and local disability, civil rights and social justice organizations united to protect and promote the human rights of children and adults with physical and mental disabilities. For more information, go to www.adawatch.org and www.roadtofreedom.org
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Employment Law Bill Stalls in Senate
Workforce Management
April 24, 2008
Employment Law Bill Stalls in Senate
A bill that would make it easier for workers to sue employers for pay discrimination stalled in the Senate on Wednesday night, April 23—adding to the list of labor law measures that Democrats will pursue again in the next Congress.
The measure fell three votes short of the 60 required under Senate rules to overcome a filibuster led by the chamber's Republicans.
Opponents argued that the bill would effectively eliminate the statute of limitations on pay discrimination cases and subject businesses to stale claims. The White House issued a veto threat before the Senate action.
Supporters mounted a fierce campaign to win over the handful of votes they needed to approve a final vote on the measure. They said the bill would bolster women and minorities in the workplace by overturning a Supreme Court ruling last year that held that pay suits had to be filed within 180 days of a discriminatory action, even if that action continues to diminish pay for years.
Under the bill, workers would be allowed to sue within 180 days of any paycheck affected by discrimination.
The bill passed the House last summer. Proponents vowed to continue to fight for Senate approval, although that is not likely to happen this year.
The Senate bill was placed on the calendar without a vote by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which Kennedy chairs. One reason that the level of support can’t be determined is that many senators aren’t yet familiar with the bill.
An advocate for the measure says it was being pushed forward because the number of legislative days remaining in the Senate is limited and because courts are dismissing pay suits based on the Supreme Court ruling.
Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women’s Law Center, asserts the bill would have made the statute of limitations work in the way Congress intended. She and other supporters say the Supreme Court erred in its decision in the case of Lilly Ledbetter, a former floor manager at a Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. plant in Gadsden, Alabama.
Ledbetter, who started with Goodyear in 1979, claims the company paid her less than it did male co-workers for the same job over the course of her nearly 20-year tenure. When she retired, Ledbetter was paid $3,727 per month, while the lowest-paid male manager received $4,286.
Ledbetter filed a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in March 1998—after she got an anonymous tip about the pay disparity. A jury ruled in favor of Ledbetter, awarding her back pay and $3 million in compensatory and punitive damages.
But the Supreme Court held that Goodyear was not liable because Ledbetter did not take action within 180 days of the first instance of discrimination.
In a scorching dissenting opinion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the court majority failed to understand the realities of today’s workplace—where pay information is secret and evidence of discrimination builds up over long periods of time. She challenged Congress to clarify the federal statute of limitations.
Greenberger said the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and appeals courts had been agreeing on the issue—until the 11th Circuit overturned the Ledbetter trial jury ruling and the Supreme Court concurred.
“This was never a problem that the employer community railed against,” she said.
But at House and Senate hearings, employment lawyers have opposed the bill. [To see the entire article, go to: http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/48/75.html ]
April 24, 2008
Employment Law Bill Stalls in Senate
A bill that would make it easier for workers to sue employers for pay discrimination stalled in the Senate on Wednesday night, April 23—adding to the list of labor law measures that Democrats will pursue again in the next Congress.
The measure fell three votes short of the 60 required under Senate rules to overcome a filibuster led by the chamber's Republicans.
Opponents argued that the bill would effectively eliminate the statute of limitations on pay discrimination cases and subject businesses to stale claims. The White House issued a veto threat before the Senate action.
Supporters mounted a fierce campaign to win over the handful of votes they needed to approve a final vote on the measure. They said the bill would bolster women and minorities in the workplace by overturning a Supreme Court ruling last year that held that pay suits had to be filed within 180 days of a discriminatory action, even if that action continues to diminish pay for years.
Under the bill, workers would be allowed to sue within 180 days of any paycheck affected by discrimination.
The bill passed the House last summer. Proponents vowed to continue to fight for Senate approval, although that is not likely to happen this year.
The Senate bill was placed on the calendar without a vote by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which Kennedy chairs. One reason that the level of support can’t be determined is that many senators aren’t yet familiar with the bill.
An advocate for the measure says it was being pushed forward because the number of legislative days remaining in the Senate is limited and because courts are dismissing pay suits based on the Supreme Court ruling.
Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women’s Law Center, asserts the bill would have made the statute of limitations work in the way Congress intended. She and other supporters say the Supreme Court erred in its decision in the case of Lilly Ledbetter, a former floor manager at a Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. plant in Gadsden, Alabama.
Ledbetter, who started with Goodyear in 1979, claims the company paid her less than it did male co-workers for the same job over the course of her nearly 20-year tenure. When she retired, Ledbetter was paid $3,727 per month, while the lowest-paid male manager received $4,286.
Ledbetter filed a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in March 1998—after she got an anonymous tip about the pay disparity. A jury ruled in favor of Ledbetter, awarding her back pay and $3 million in compensatory and punitive damages.
But the Supreme Court held that Goodyear was not liable because Ledbetter did not take action within 180 days of the first instance of discrimination.
In a scorching dissenting opinion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the court majority failed to understand the realities of today’s workplace—where pay information is secret and evidence of discrimination builds up over long periods of time. She challenged Congress to clarify the federal statute of limitations.
Greenberger said the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and appeals courts had been agreeing on the issue—until the 11th Circuit overturned the Ledbetter trial jury ruling and the Supreme Court concurred.
“This was never a problem that the employer community railed against,” she said.
But at House and Senate hearings, employment lawyers have opposed the bill. [To see the entire article, go to: http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/48/75.html ]
Senate Passes Ban on Genetic Discrimination
The Senate voted Thursday, April 24, to ban insurers and others from basing health care coverage on genetic information.
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, S. 358, prohibits group health plans or issuers of individual health care policies from basing eligibility determinations or adjusting premiums or contributions on the basis of genetic information. The measure bans health plans and insurers from requesting, requiring or purchasing the results of genetic tests and from disclosing genetic information.
The bill prohibits employers from firing, refusing to hire or otherwise discriminating against workers with respect to compensation and other terms of employment on the basis of genetic information. Like insurers, employers are banned from requesting, requiring or buying genetic information. [To see the entire article, go to: http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/49/63.html ]
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, S. 358, prohibits group health plans or issuers of individual health care policies from basing eligibility determinations or adjusting premiums or contributions on the basis of genetic information. The measure bans health plans and insurers from requesting, requiring or purchasing the results of genetic tests and from disclosing genetic information.
The bill prohibits employers from firing, refusing to hire or otherwise discriminating against workers with respect to compensation and other terms of employment on the basis of genetic information. Like insurers, employers are banned from requesting, requiring or buying genetic information. [To see the entire article, go to: http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/49/63.html ]
Monday, February 18, 2008
Senators urge SBA to redo set-aside rules for women
The Business Journal
Kent Hoover Washington Bureau Chief
February 11, 2008
The Small Business Administration should scrap its regulations establishing federal contracting set-asides for women-owned businesses and start over, according to a Senate committee that oversees the agency.
Seven years after Congress told the SBA to set up the program, the agency finally issued proposed regulations for it. The proposal limits the program to only four industries. It also requires agencies to determine whether they have discriminated against women-owned businesses in these industries before they set aside contracts for them.
Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who chairs the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, said the proposed rule "is beyond inadequate."
"It is an affront to anyone who believes that women ought to have an equal opportunity to sell their goods and services to the federal government," he said.
He called on SBA Administrator Steven Preston "to go back to the drawing board and put forward a realistic, workable rule this Congress can get behind."
The committee's ranking Republican, Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, said the SBA had an opportunity to "hit a home run" with the women's procurement program, but instead issued "a rule that would have little, if any, measurable benefit."
Kerry accused the SBA of using "the narrowest possible" methodology to determine where women have been underrepresented in federal contracting.
[To read the entire article, go to: http://www.bizjournals.com/extraedge/washingtonbureau/archive/2008/02/11/bureau3.html?market=triad]
Kent Hoover Washington Bureau Chief
February 11, 2008
The Small Business Administration should scrap its regulations establishing federal contracting set-asides for women-owned businesses and start over, according to a Senate committee that oversees the agency.
Seven years after Congress told the SBA to set up the program, the agency finally issued proposed regulations for it. The proposal limits the program to only four industries. It also requires agencies to determine whether they have discriminated against women-owned businesses in these industries before they set aside contracts for them.
Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who chairs the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, said the proposed rule "is beyond inadequate."
"It is an affront to anyone who believes that women ought to have an equal opportunity to sell their goods and services to the federal government," he said.
He called on SBA Administrator Steven Preston "to go back to the drawing board and put forward a realistic, workable rule this Congress can get behind."
The committee's ranking Republican, Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, said the SBA had an opportunity to "hit a home run" with the women's procurement program, but instead issued "a rule that would have little, if any, measurable benefit."
Kerry accused the SBA of using "the narrowest possible" methodology to determine where women have been underrepresented in federal contracting.
[To read the entire article, go to: http://www.bizjournals.com/extraedge/washingtonbureau/archive/2008/02/11/bureau3.html?market=triad]
Monday, January 28, 2008
Senators Vow Fast Action on Wage-Bias Bill
Womensenews.org
Run Date: 01/25/08
By Allison Stevens
Washington Bureau Chief
Senators on Thursday vowed to push a bill that eases time pressures on wage-bias complaints. Ruth Bader Ginsburg urged the legislation last year after the high court ruled against Lilly Ledbetter.
WASHINGTON (WOMENSENEWS)--Senate Democrats vowed in a Senate hearing Thursday to take quick action on legislation that would reverse last year's Supreme Court decision making it more difficult for victims of wage discrimination to win lawsuits.
The Democrat-controlled House passed a similar version of the bill on July 30, with representatives voting largely along party lines.
If the bill clears Congress, it would go to President Bush, who issued a veto threat shortly before the House vote, saying it effectively eliminates time limitations on lawsuits.
"This is certainly not the first time we've pushed a piece of legislation with a veto threat," said Jocelyn Frye, a lawyer at the National Partnership for Women and Families, an advocacy group in Washington, D.C., that is a leading supporter of the bill. "As more people learn about the legislation and what it's designed to do, and when they understand the limited, modest nature of the legislation, then some of the opposition will fade."
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposes the measure but the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce, which is not affiliated with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, supports it. (Neither group is a government agency.)
Sen. Edward Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat who chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, said the Senate would consider the bill after it addresses the looming recession with an economic stimulus package. Kennedy predicted a floor vote in the next two months, and said he has the backing of Democratic leaders.
"We're going to get action on it one way or another," he said after the committee held a hearing on the issue Thursday. "There's no reason we can't get to this very quickly."
http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/3471
Run Date: 01/25/08
By Allison Stevens
Washington Bureau Chief
Senators on Thursday vowed to push a bill that eases time pressures on wage-bias complaints. Ruth Bader Ginsburg urged the legislation last year after the high court ruled against Lilly Ledbetter.
WASHINGTON (WOMENSENEWS)--Senate Democrats vowed in a Senate hearing Thursday to take quick action on legislation that would reverse last year's Supreme Court decision making it more difficult for victims of wage discrimination to win lawsuits.
The Democrat-controlled House passed a similar version of the bill on July 30, with representatives voting largely along party lines.
If the bill clears Congress, it would go to President Bush, who issued a veto threat shortly before the House vote, saying it effectively eliminates time limitations on lawsuits.
"This is certainly not the first time we've pushed a piece of legislation with a veto threat," said Jocelyn Frye, a lawyer at the National Partnership for Women and Families, an advocacy group in Washington, D.C., that is a leading supporter of the bill. "As more people learn about the legislation and what it's designed to do, and when they understand the limited, modest nature of the legislation, then some of the opposition will fade."
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposes the measure but the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce, which is not affiliated with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, supports it. (Neither group is a government agency.)
Sen. Edward Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat who chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, said the Senate would consider the bill after it addresses the looming recession with an economic stimulus package. Kennedy predicted a floor vote in the next two months, and said he has the backing of Democratic leaders.
"We're going to get action on it one way or another," he said after the committee held a hearing on the issue Thursday. "There's no reason we can't get to this very quickly."
http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/3471
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)