Equal Pay? More Like Special Payoffs to Trial Lawyers

Democrats and left-wing activists have lately been pushing the idea of “equal pay” for women in an attempt to find some issue that would take attention away from the horrible economic record of the Obama administration as the campaign for the White House heats up. But who really benefits from this push? Trial lawyers, of course.

This week the Democrats tried to float the “Paycheck Fairness Act,” but it failed in the Senate in a 52-47 vote.

So what would this act do? As Andrew Stiles reports:

The “Paycheck Fairness Act” would have established unlimited punitive damage claims in class action lawsuits filed against employers in instances of alleged gender discrimination. The chief beneficiaries of the bill, experts told the Washington Free Beacon, would not have been female workers but the lawyers and law firms that would litigate the lucrative lawsuits made possible by its passage.

Naturally trial lawyers have given more than $230 million to federal political candidates with the largest amount going to Democrats — $132 million to Senate democrats alone.

As Stiles notes, Republicans opposed this bill because there is already a glut of frivolous lawsuits in this area of law and the result of passage of the act would only make that worse.

“The only winners under this legislation would be trial lawyers,” said Sen. Dean Heller (R., Nev.) before the vote on Tuesday morning. “Legitimate cases that could be addressed under the current system would be lost in a flood of lawsuits.”

The work in Congress is about through for the year, of course, so the idea that this bill could have become law this year is laughable. In fact, Republicans charge that the introduction of this failed act was a purely political move in the first place, that Democrats knew it would never pass.

There is also the matter of the hypocrisy of the whole thing. With Democrats offering themselves as the champion of lower paid women, it is interesting to note that they aren’t paying women on parity with men themselves.

While they claim to be on the side of those poor women, Democrats in Congress and Obama’s White House appear to be just as guilty of paying women less than men.

Regardless, this equal pay act is more like a higher payout to lawyers act.

Ace Proves Prescient
Mugshot Of The Day - Tracy Mabb
  • Stan Brewer

    Now the DemocRATs in the house want to raise the minimum wage to $10/hr. They think that by doing this, they will put people back to work. On this, I call Bullshit!! The last time the DemocRATs raised the minimum wage, the economy went south and it still hasn’t recovered.

    • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

      All the more reason to raise it.  Can’t let the economy recover and all those good Democratic voters who are dependent on the dole get back on their feet, right?  Gotta keep that voter base solidly locked to the government spigot!

  • ackwired

    Sounds like electoral posturing on both sides.  D’s can say that R’s voted against equal pay for women and R’s can bring out the evil trial lawyer story.

  • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

    I’m starting to think lawyers should be banned from Congress.  The problem with lawyers is that they’ve been trained to think that the proper words and their arrangement are much more important than the actual results that come from the words.

    And inside the Beltway, the culture is predicated on making the words sound good – regardless of the actual effects they’d have.Unfortunately, in the real world results are more important than nice-sounding platitudes or carefully crafted legislation.  The things they take great pride in doing in Washington have unexpected consequences when implemented outside the Beltway.

    Add in the fact that there’s not much that’s actually IMPORTANT for Congress to do any more (aside from passing a budget, which they’re avoiding like it was a chunk of glowing magma from Fukushima’s basement, which pretty well describes the collective reaction to Obama’s proposed budget, come to think of it…) aside from pass legislation to give evidence of how effective they are for the folks back home… and you’ve got a bunch of bored lawyers looking to make something that’ll justify their existence.

    And this would REALLY make their fellow lawyers happy.

    The rest of us?  As Stan said – raising minimum wage doesn’t put people to work, it hurts the economy.  But that’s not really a bug, is it?  As far as they’re concerned?

    Man, I’m cynical anymore… :-(

  • Plinytherecent

    The worst sentence in that article (at least for me) was “The work in Congress is about through for the year, of course”.  Congress has not passed a budget (although it is a legal requirement – thanks Harry!) nor has it passed the appropriations and authorizations bills needed to fund operations for the year that starts in October.  We’re going to have another (yet another!) year of Continuing Resolutions.  Being in a CR rather than under a budget is very disruptive and makes the government substantially less efficient than it otherwise would be.  While I realize that many here may consider that a good thing overall, there are, in fact, useful and necessary things that the government does (e.g., defense) where good people are hindered in doing their jobs simply because Congress does not do theirs.

  • Stan Brewer

    Speaking of Budgets. Now the DemocRAT Senate leaders (Dingy Harry, Chucky Cheese Schumer, and the Majority whip) are now blaming the Republicans for their (Dems) incompetence and refusal to do anything in the Senate. We all know that bogus, when Dingy Harry stated at the start of the new Congress, there would be nothing done this term, as far as the Senate is concerned.

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE