CategoriesJoin Us At:
|
The Democracy Restoration Act — Restoring a Civil Right Denied(Originally posted on Daily Kos.) As the Supreme Court has indicated, "[n]o right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined." Unfortunately, in America today, millions of citizens work, pay taxes, live in our communities and bring up families, yet they are without a voice. According to a 2008 ACLU/Brennan Center report, an estimated 5.3 million citizens cannot vote as a result of a felony conviction, and nearly 4 million of those citizens have been released from prison and are living and working in the community. Worse still, felony disfranchisement laws are rooted in the Jim Crow era and were intended to bar minorities from voting. The impact of these laws continues today. Nationwide, 13 percent of African American men have lost the right to vote — a rate seven times the national average. Latino citizens are also disproportionately disfranchised because they are over-represented in the criminal justice system. In turn, this has impacted the families of those who are disfranchised and the communities in which they reside by reducing their collective political voice. Confusion Surrounding State LawsStates have vastly different approaches to allowing those with criminal convictions to vote, which often compound the problems further. For example, some states disfranchise some, but not all, citizens with criminal convictions, while others allow voting after a sentence is completed or after release from prison. Two states, Virginia and Kentucky, permanently disfranchise citizens with felony convictions unless the state approves individual rights restoration; two states, Maine and Vermont, allow all persons with felony convictions to vote, even while incarcerated; all other states fall somewhere in between. Unfortunately, this has caused widespread confusion about the proper administration of state laws, sometimes resulting in eligible voters, even those with no disqualifying criminal conviction, being purged from the rolls or denied the ability to register to vote or cast their ballots. Research indicates that many election officials do not understand their state's basic voter eligibility laws or the registration procedures for voters with a criminal conviction. A Legislative Solution: The Democracy Restoration Act of 2009Congressional action is needed to establish a uniform standard that restores voting rights in federal elections to the millions of Americans who are living in the community, but continue to be denied the ability to fully participate in civic life. Fortunately, on July 24, 2009, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) and Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) introduced the Democracy Restoration Act of 2009 (H.R.3335 and S.1516). The provisions of the Democracy Restoration Act would:
Passage of the Democracy Restoration Act would:
Bipartisan Progress While felony re-enfranchisement is often misperceived as a partisan issue, both Republicans and Democrats alike have supported state enfranchisement laws. Political leaders of both parties have recognized that felony disfranchisement laws make reconnecting to the community and rehabilitation much harder for those with convictions. Recently, the Republican governors of Louisiana and Florida and Democratic governors from Iowa, Maryland, North Carolina, and Washington have supported important felony enfranchisement reforms. In fact, these states are part of a growing trend towards the restoration of voting rights for people with criminal convictions. In the last decade, 20 states have reformed their laws to expand the franchise or ease voting restoration requirements. Law Enforcement Support Like political leaders, members of the law enforcement community have also come out in strong support of re-enfranchisement laws because they have determined that continuing to disfranchise individuals after release from prison is an ineffective law enforcement policy and does nothing to reduce crime. Allowing people with felony convictions to vote can improve civic engagement, strengthen our democracy, and may encourage them to steer away from future crimes. One study has found that former offenders who voted were half as likely to be re-arrested as those who did not. The American Probation and Parole Association; Association of Paroling Authorities International; the National Black Police Association; and the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives are just some of the law enforcement organizations that have expressed support for laws ensuring that people with past felony convictions are allowed to vote. As Ron Stalling, a member of the National Black Police Association, described in written testimony on a Maryland state felony voting bill, "[v]oting is an important part of making people feel connected to their communities, which in turn helps them avoid falling back into crime." By continuing to deny citizens the right to vote based on a past criminal conviction, the government is endorsing a system that expects these citizens to contribute to the community, but denies them participation in our democracy. It is time to restore the most precious of civil rights that has been denied far too long to millions of American citizens. For those denied their political voice, your voice is needed to help pass the Democracy Restoration Act. CORRECTION: A previous version of this post stated that the governor of Rhode Island supported felony enfranchisement legislation. While the Rhode Island Restoration of Voting Rights Act (H.B. 7938) did become law while Gov. Carcieri was in office, the law went into effect on July 7, 2006, without the governor’s signature.
Equality in Our Pay EnvelopesToday marks the 46th anniversary of President Kennedy's signing of the Equal Pay Act of 1963. That historic act signified our nation's commitment to ensuring that women are not paid less than men for equal work. Upon signing the bill, President Kennedy proclaimed that the bill "affirms our determination that when women enter the labor force they will find equality in their pay envelope." Indeed, the bill helped women make significant strides towards equality in the workforce. Unfortunately, over time, loopholes and weak remedies have made this historic law less effective than Congress originally intended. Therefore, there is no more fitting way to commemorate this historic anniversary than to push for passage of S. 182, the Paycheck Fairness Act, a necessary update to the Equal Pay Act. There is no doubt that updates to improve the effectiveness of the Equal Pay Act's protections are needed. Forty-six years after President Kennedy signed the Act, women, on average, continue to earn only 78 cents for every dollar earned by men — that's only 18 cents more on the dollar than when President Kennedy signed the bill in 1963. For women of color, the progress has been even slower. This bill would enable President Kennedy's vision to be fully realized, albeit several decades late. The Paycheck Fairness Act would give employees legal tools to close the wage gap that has held women's economic progress back for so long. For example, the bill would require employers to demonstrate that disparities in pay between men and women working the same job result from factors other than sex. It would also prohibit retaliation against employees who inquire about their employers' wage practices or disclose their own pay to their colleagues. Furthermore, the Act would deter discrimination by strengthening the penalties for equal pay violations and would authorize additional training of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission staff to better identify and address pay violations. Through these steps, the Paycheck Fairness Act would allow our nation to finally move forward in closing the unlawful wage gap. Last January, the House of Representatives recognized the need to update the Equal Pay Act and overwhelmingly passed the Paycheck Fairness Act with bipartisan support. Recently, Senators Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) announced that they will take the lead on the fight to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act. Over 31 senators and counting are cosponsors. The bill now has more cosponsors than in any other previous Congress. There is momentum, but more work is necessary. The 46th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act is a good reminder that the Senate needs to follow the House's example of working to finally secure equal pay for equal work for all American workers. In 1963, President Kennedy recognized upon signing the Equal Pay Act that "our economy today depends upon women in the labor force." This is even truer today. During this financial crisis, women are a critical part of the economic engines that will drive this nation's recovery. However, under no circumstances should women, single-mother households, and families dependent on two wage earners have to struggle to live on less than they rightfully earn. The impact of these pay disparities is felt even more during these times of economic hardship. Now more than ever, passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act is essential not only for women, but for all working families. Let us celebrate the 46th anniversary of President Kennedy's signing of the Equal Pay Act by pushing for the passage of S. 182, the Paycheck Fairness Act. Passing the Paycheck Fairness Act is the only way we can fulfill President Kennedy's assurance that American women will "find equality in their pay envelope." — Deborah J. Vagins, Legislative Counsel, ACLU Washington Legislative Office, and Rachel Marshall, 2009 Summer Law Clerk, ACLU Washington Legislative Office
It’s Common Cents – Close the Wage Gap for Women(Originally posted on Daily Kos.) Does 22 cents mean much to you? It should, if like most Americans, you need every cent from your paycheck that you have rightfully earned. Unfortunately, 45 years after the enactment of the Equal Pay Act – a law originally intended to secure equal pay for equal work – women who work full time still earn, on average, 78 cents for every dollar men earn. Over time, loopholes and weak remedies, further eroded by adverse court decisions, have made the Equal Pay Act less effective in combating wage discrimination. Not only has the Equal Pay Act been unable to close this gap, but each year, this ongoing wage disparity is marked on Equal Pay Day. Sadly, Equal Pay Day – this year April 28 – represents the day into 2009 that a woman must work to earn the same that a man earned in 2008. But it’s not just cents we’re talking about. According to the congressional testimony of economist Evelyn Murphy (PDF), chronic wage discrimination can deprive a woman of between $700,000 and $2 million over her career. This figure grows when the loss of pension and social security benefits is included. The effects of wage discrimination follow its victims for a lifetime. This makes the marking of Equal Pay Day much more than symbolic – it’s a call to protect the economic well-being of our families. Swift congressional action is needed to address this persistent and pernicious pay gap. In this economic climate, working families cannot afford to wait. The entire family feels the pain of wage discrimination. As unemployment rates skyrocket, families depend on women’s income more than ever, making pay equity even more critical to families’ economic security and the nation’s economic recovery. At the beginning of this Congress, the House of Representatives passed, with bipartisan and overwhelming support, the Paycheck Fairness Act, a bill that would provide much-needed updates to Equal Pay Act and tackle the most stubborn barriers to fair pay. The bill is pending in the Senate, and it’s critical it takes the bill up soon. The Paycheck Fairness Act provides useful tools to employees to combat the wage gap, while also balancing the legitimate business needs of employers. This is why both the U.S. Women’s Chamber of Commerce (PDF) and Business and Professional Women have endorsed it. For example, the bill requires that employers demonstrate that wage differences between men and women holding the same position and doing the same work stem from criteria unrelated to their gender. Of course, employers may use factors such as merit, education and seniority to pay employees differently. But the bill strengthens the Equal Pay Act by indicating that those pay differences must be based on bonafide reasons other than the sex of their employees. In addition, the bill protects employees against retaliation, but also protects a company’s legitimate need for confidentiality. Often, company policies prohibit employees from telling colleagues about their salaries. To address this barrier, the bill prohibits retaliation against workers who ask about a company’s wage practices or tells another employee their wage. However, to balance business’ need for confidentiality, employees with access to colleagues’ wage information in the course of their work, such as human resources employees, may still be prohibited from sharing that information. The Paycheck Fairness bill also strikes a good balance between the needs of employees and employers in the remedies it provides for equal pay violations. The bill’s measured approach levels the playing field by ensuring that women can obtain the same remedies as employees who have suffered from discrimination on the basis of race or national origin. For the vast majority of employers who already follow our civil rights laws and don’t discriminate against their employees, the Paycheck Fairness Act imposes virtually no additional burdens. The bill’s goal is to merely give new tools to women only when bad-acting employers unlawfully pocket their wages. At the same time, this legislation provides new tools that also directly benefit employers. It would require, for example, the U.S. Department of Labor to provide technical assistance to employers and recognize the achievements of businesses that work to address the wage gap. It also mandates that staff at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission receive additional training to better identify and handle wage disputes, which may help employers and employees before any litigation is necessary at all. So, does 22 cents mean much to you? For the sake of our families’ future financial welfare, it’s time for the Senate to make pay equity a priority and to end the necessity to “celebrate” Equal Pay Day each year. It’s just common cents.
Liberty and Economic Justice For All(Originally posted on Daily Kos.) Now more than ever, a family’s basic economic survival depends on pay equity. Without the ability to bring home every dollar rightfully earned without regard to gender, race, religion, age, or disability, there can be no economic justice for workers and true equality for all Americans. President Obama probably best explained the importance of the fundamental fairness of equal pay to our country’s economic security when he signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a bill that restores the right of employees to challenge ongoing pay discrimination. He noted at the White House: So in signing this bill today, I intend to send a clear message: That making our economy work means making sure it works for everyone. That there are no second-class citizens in our workplaces, and that it's not just unfair and illegal — but bad for business — to pay someone less because of their gender, age, race, ethnicity, religion or disability. And that justice isn't about some abstract legal theory, or footnote in a casebook — it's about how our laws affect the daily realities of people’s lives: their ability to make a living and care for their families and achieve their goals.Today, thanks to the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the right to challenge an unlawful pay gap in court has been restored. Unfortunately, the pay gap itself still exists — women still on average only earn 78 cents for every dollar that men earn for doing the same job. The numbers are even worse for women of color. Certainly, we should stop and celebrate this historic passage, but we cannot slow down as we take the next step in finally closing this pay gap for good. Less money brought home and pocketed by discriminating employers is bad for businesses trying to do the right thing (PDF), bad for families trying to make ends meet, and ultimately, bad for our most important American ideals — work hard, play by the rules, and you will be treated fairly. Without the ability of an employee to be paid fairly as compared to her coworkers, there can be no economic justice, no advance in civil rights, and no level playing field for employers who do not pay discriminatorily low wages. After all, during these belt-tightening times, what higher priority can there be than securing American workers’ paychecks and ensuring legitimate business competition? Therefore, there is more work to be done and other protections must be passed. Over time, the law that was originally intended to ensure equal pay for equal work, the Equal Pay Act, has become less effective because of loopholes and weak remedies. The Paycheck Fairness Act makes several changes to the 45-year old Equal Pay Act that strengthens its ability to combat wage discrimination. The bill puts the onus on employers to prove that wage differentials between men and women in the same position stem from facts other than sex. It provides protection against retaliation for employees who disclose their wages or ask about an employer’s wage policy. It also requires training for Equal Employment Opportunity Commission staff and technical assistance from the Department of Labor for employers seeking to address the wage gap. The bill also establishes a national award for employers who make substantial efforts to eliminate pay disparities between men and women in the workplace. Last month, the House of Representatives sent a message to the Senate by overwhelmingly passing a paycheck fairness package that included both the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act bills. By passing both these bills, members of the House took a concrete step forward for wage discrimination safeguards after years of unwarranted rollbacks of basic wage protections. Unfortunately, the Senate did not pick up the pay equity baton and pass the package. So our fight now moves to the Senate to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act. It cannot happen fast enough. In these economic times, no senator should be reluctant to ensure that our nation’s workers receive every penny rightfully due them. President Obama has indicated that if the Senate passes it, he will sign the Paycheck Fairness Act — then we will be able to take another important step towards showing that “justice isn't about some abstract legal theory;” it is ultimately “a question of who we are.”
Pay Equity: Restoration and Improvement"With this bill in place, we now can move forward to where we all hope to be — improving the law, not just restoring it." — Lilly Ledbetter, On the signing of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act On January 29, 2009, I shared an amazing moment with Lilly Ledbetter as President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — the first bill he signed into law. It was a truly moving morning and the culmination of years of struggle by Ms. Ledbetter. A struggle that began at Goodyear Tire, where she worked for 19 years, overtime and double-shifts, being paid less than her male coworkers and withstanding degrading treatment. And then a struggle that continued, as she challenged the pay discrimination though a hostile appellate process that reversed decades of law that would have protected her. While she will never regain the years of wages pocketed by her discriminating employer, Ms. Ledbetter, a broad coalition of organizations, and many concerned Members of Congress worked successfully to undue the Supreme Court's injustice for other workers. It was an important struggle and a hard fight. Last year we could not garner enough support in the Senate to move the legislation and former President Bush threatened a veto. But we prevailed in righting this wrong. I wish I could tell you, however, that we established a new and groundbreaking anti-discrimination law. I wish I could tell you that we protected new sectors of employees, removed unfair limitations on remedies for our workers, or created new protections for a new workforce. But I can't. We fought for just a restoration of rights. Don't misunderstand, however. It was a vitally important fight — one that gives all employees their day in court as long as their employer continues to discriminate against them — but a fight to just preserve the rights we had already won early in civil rights laws. Despite all the arguments and assertions to the contrary by opponents of this legislation, the protections in this new law are not groundbreaking. Far from imposing a new rule on employers, the legislation reversing the Ledbetter decision merely restores the well-understood law that prevailed in the majority of federal circuits and the policy of the EEOC under both Democratic and Republican administrations before the Supreme Court's ruling. This restoration of rights was very important, but there is now more to be done. As Ms. Ledbetter noted at the White House, our work now turns to improving the law. Over 45 years ago, Congress passed the Equal Pay Act to fix the disparity in wages between men and women, but over time, loopholes and weak remedies have lessened its effectiveness. Another piece of legislation, the Paycheck Fairness Act , makes several common sense changes to strengthen the Equal Pay Act — putting in place enforcement tools needed to make real progress on pay equity. There should be little doubt that such improvements are necessary. According to the U.S. Census Bureau women who work full time still earn, on average, only 78 cents for every dollar men earn. The figures are even worse for women of color. The consequences of this discrimination are severe and predictable. The pay disparity forces single-mother households and families dependent on two wage-earners to live on less than they rightfully deserve, while simultaneously reducing women's retirement earnings. In short, unfair pay disparities perpetuate women's economic dependence and deprive them of economic opportunity and equal protection of the laws. Moreover, and a critical factor today, women tend to be hurt first and worst during economic downturns. The Paycheck Fairness Act is an important and measured approach to eradicating wage discrimination and is another critical weapon in the battle against sex discrimination in the workplace. The bill already passed the House of Representatives this past January, but is yet to be taken up in the Senate. As Ms. Ledbetter noted : "…you can count on my continued commitment to fighting to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act — and to make sure that women have equal pay for equal work, because that's what this country is all about." Indeed, fundamental fairness should be what this country is all about and, when it is not, like Ms Ledbetter has done on our behalf, we should work to achieve it. By signing the bill bearing her name, President Obama restored the right of employees to have their day in court to challenge any unlawful wage gap they uncover. Now we all must set our sights on the next step — improving the law — by closing, for once and for all, the wage gap itself. Click here for the ACLU's letter to Congress regarding the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Paycheck Fairness Act.
A Step Towards Fair Pay With a Stroke of a Pen(Originally posted on DailyKos.) Just hours ago, I shared an incredible moment with Lilly Ledbetter — who stood in the White House and watched President Obama sign a piece of legislation bearing her name. One can only imagine what that feels like. But, we know this much: The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act struck a powerful blow for justice not just for her, but for anyone who has been victimized by wage discrimination. Today the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act became law and overturned the Supreme Court decision in the Ledbetter v. Goodyear case, in which employees lost their right to their day in court for ongoing pay discrimination. And it became the first major bill that President Obama signed.
With the stoke of a pen — actually several pens, President Obama made today a good day for all employees, who — regardless of gender, race, national origin, age or disability — are illegally receiving smaller paychecks than their colleagues.
Before signing the bill, President Obama made clear that this bill is not just about Lilly Ledbetter or his two daughters or the countless women who are still facing unlawful pay disparities; it is also about the families who have to make ends meet with less because of wage discrimination: Equal pay is by no means just a women's issue — it's a family issue. It's about parents who find themselves with less money for tuition and child care; couples who wind up with less to retire on; households where one breadwinner is paid less than she deserves; that's the difference between affording the mortgage — or not; between keeping the heat on, or paying the doctor bills — or not. And in this economy, when so many folks are already working harder for less and struggling to get by, the last thing they can afford is losing part of each month's paycheck to simple and plain discrimination.But even more, by signing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act into law, with the stroke of his pen President Obama sent a clear message about our values as Americans. Today, we all took a step closer to ending workplace discrimination. Today, our commitment to equality and equal access to the American dream gleamed a little brighter. Today, we all got a little closer to building an America we can be proud of, once again.
But there is more to be done. The next stop for the fair pay fight: the Paycheck Fairness Act. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act restored rights lost in the civil rights rollback of recent years. The next step is to amend the Equal Pay Act — to close, for once and for all, the pay gap between men and women and allow employees to finally bring home every dollar they rightfully earn.
The Highest Priority: A Smooth and Fair ElectionDuring a September 8, 2008 meeting with the ACLU and other civil rights groups, Attorney General Michael Mukasey called the "smooth" running of this election the Department of Justice's highest priority. Despite the ACLU's repeated requests for DOJ to take action to protect voters and stop suppressive tactics, so far, DOJ is not living up to its commitment. For example, right now, two weeks before the election, the government is engaging in a highly-publicized attempt to raise the "specter of voter fraud" against groups who have been working hard to register poor and minority voters. Unfortunately, DOJ is doing little, if anything, to help the thousands, maybe millions of eligible voters who may turn up on Election Day, just to be sent home. DOJ should be addressing true threats to the election this year, such as voter suppression schemes, unlawful purging, and racially motivated voter intimidation. Election officials should concentrate their limited resources on expanding access to the ballot box and protecting voters. Mickey Mouse is not coming to an election booth near you. However, when eligible voters do show up, only to find they have been improperly purged from the rolls, we will wonder why DOJ did not enforce the laws that could have prevented it. Even in this short time before the election, there are several things DOJ could do to protect voters: 1. It is critical that DOJ respond to racially discriminatory voter suppression tactics, such as voter caging and deceptive practices, widely reported over the past several elections. The press should be used to help voters. DOJ should issue a national press statement in advance of the upcoming election affirming DOJ's intention to investigate and enforce the federal civil rights statutes that prohibit minority voter schemes. 2. DOJ must respond to recent threats to challenge the registration of any voter whose address appears on a list of foreclosed homes. DOJ's issuing a statement specifically identifying that foreclosure lists are an unacceptable basis for purging or challenging voter registration would be an important step towards clarifying the misinformation currently facing voters. 3. In communications with the Secretaries of State, DOJ should include reference to the National Voter Registration Act's (NVRA) requirements for the timely processing of voter registrations. This election season, citizens have registered to vote in extremely high numbers. Minority and young voters have demonstrated an enthusiasm to participate in what will prove to be one of the most historic elections in recent memory. Facing what could be an unprecedented administrative challenge for some jurisdictions and armed with the knowledge of problems from earlier elections, DOJ must be vigilant in ensuring that those jurisdictions are in compliance with the law and provide oversight to ensure that applications are being properly and timely processed. 4. DOJ must quickly investigate recent allegations concerning eleventh hour efforts to remove voters from the registration rolls in several states including Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Colorado, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Nevada and North Carolina. It appears that these efforts may violate provisions of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and the NVRA. DOJ should intervene if the states are breaking the law by conducting last-minute purges of the voter rolls. 5. DOJ and the FBI should not engage in partisan fraud prosecutions in the few weeks left before the upcoming election because of the chilling effect that such actions may have on voter participation. Instead, DOJ should shift limited resources to preventing improper or illegal voter suppression activities that will have the effect of disenfranchising large numbers of people. The election is less than three weeks away and it is crucial that DOJ act immediately to protect voters from discriminatory interference in their right to participate in November. Time is running out to make this a smooth and fair election. For more information about voting rights, visit the following links:
Tags: Voting Rights Symposium
We Need Fair Play on Fair Pay
On April 23, 2008, the Senate failed to address important wage discrimination legislation, H.R. 2831, The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007. This bill faced a very tough procedural vote Wednesday night, which fell just shy of the 60 votes needed to move on to a Senate vote on final passage.
Had the Senate voted to address H.R. 2831, Congress could have restored protections for employees subjected to pay discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, and disability. The bill was intended to undo last year's Supreme Court decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Rubber & Tire Co., in which the court ruled, 5-4, that workers filing suit for pay discrimination must do so within 180 days of their employer's actual decision to discriminate against them. With its holding, the Supreme Court gave a free pass to employers who can manage to conceal their discriminatory decisions for 180 days. Recognizing this rollback of civil rights protections, the House passed this crucial legislation in July 2007. Unfortunately, in a move putting politics before people, many members of the Senate blocked this bill from consideration on the merits. In addition, the administration issued a veto threat shortly before the vote. The battle is not over. The ACLU plans to fight to have this important civil rights measure come before the Senate again this year and, if needed, next year. In a move necessary to bring the bill back up for reconsideration, Majority Leader Harry Reid, who is supportive of the bill, had to switch his vote to "no," but he and other senators have vowed to bring this vote up again. Many thanks to those of you who contacted your senators because of our earlier requests. We could not have gotten as far as we did without your help. Find out how your senators voted. If your senator voted the right way, please call them to thank them for their vote and urge them to bring this important bill back to the floor. If your senator did not support the bill, please let them know how disappointed you are that, especially in this time of economic belt-tightening, they did not stand up to help American workers earn fair wages. Tags: Civil Liberties News |
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
