Senate to vote on S. 181Tell your Senators to OPPOSE S. 181!

Eagle Forum ^

[Man50D]

UPDATE: On January 15th, 2009, the Senate voted on the motion to proceed to S. 181, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009. The motion passed by a vote of 74 to 23 (Roll Call 4). This means that the Senate may begin debate on S. 181 at any time. The Majority promised Republicans that amendments would be allowed. Eagle Forum is urging Senators to reject S. 181 and instead support Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison's alternative bill, S. 166. We will keep you updated as things develop.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) filed cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 181, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, on January 13, 2009. The vote on the motion to proceed to debate of this bill will take place tomorrow, Thursday, January 15th. No Senate committee will be able to hold hearings before the vote.

Please note that S. 181 is different than the House passed version of the Lilly Ledbetter bill, H.R. 11. S. 181 is worse.

Not only will it overturn the Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (2007), which upheld the timely filing of claims of alleged pay discrimination, S. 181 would also expand the class of potential plaintiffs to anyone "affected by" discrimination. A plausible reading of this language means a spouse or heir who receives pension checks and was not a victim of discrimination would have standing to file a lawsuit.

This is a dangerous addition to an already destructive bill. At a time when more than 11 million Americans are unemployed, the highest unemployment rate in sixteen years, these bills would expose large and small companies to vast new liabilities extending back decades. What our economy needs now is for businesses to hire more workers in America, but they are not going to do that if it means exposing themselves to expensive and frivolous litigation. The only things these two bills will stimulate are more litigation and a further exodus of jobs out of the United States.

Please note that Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) has introduced a great alternative piece of legislation that Eagle Forum supports, S. 166, the Title VII Fairness Act. Please tell your Senators to oppose S. 181 and urge them to get behind S. 166.

Call your Senators' offices NOW and tell them to vote NO on the cloture motion to proceed! After you contact the Senators in your state, begin calling this target list of Senators who need extra persuasion to vote NO on S. 181:

Snowe (R-ME)
Collins (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Casey (D-PA)
Tester (D-MT)
Webb (D-VA)
Reid (D-NV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Risch (R-ID) Freshman Senator
Johanns (R-NE) Freshman Senator

[Man50D]

Toll free capital switchboard numbers are:

800-965-4701

800-828-0498

[Man50D]

Congress critter ping!

[csmusaret]

And 1-877-762-8762.

[Russ]

Sorry, but the American people while in a hissy fit over Bush put the Democrats in solid control of the Senate. Any hope of a Republican sponsered bill getting through that body is nil. Don’t waste your time calling or writing your senator, your time needs to be spent working a second job to pay for the higher taxes you will be seeing. Besides, are there any more than four or five real Republicans left in the senate? Talk about a conservative wilderness...

[csmusaret]

I believe that if Democrats received a huge response they would re-think their position on this and many other issues. Calling only your own Congresscritter is not a waste of time but it is only a tiny first step. The beauty of these toll free numbers is that they don’t give any clues as to the origin of the call. Calling after hours means you don’t have to reveal your address and they won’t know you are not actually a constituent. You really have to think beyond calling only your own Rep. If enough Freepers called enough Senators and Reps we could alter legislation.

[Man50D]

your time needs to be spent working a second job to pay for the higher taxes you will be seeing.

Finding work will become much more difficult if this bill passes. To quote from the article:

This is a dangerous addition to an already destructive bill. At a time when more than 11 million Americans are unemployed, the highest unemployment rate in sixteen years, these bills would expose large and small companies to vast new liabilities extending back decades. What our economy needs now is for businesses to hire more workers in America, but they are not going to do that if it means exposing themselves to expensive and frivolous litigation.

[Wuli]

The entire set of text is written as if the reader is already informed of the exact nature of the problem the proposed legislation creates, and no where lays out that detail for the reader.

Communications 101 - don’t assume the reader knows the basic issue!!!!

[webstersII]

Does this mean that people who experienced reverse discrimination because of quotas over the last 20 to 30 years can go back and sue now?

[org.whodat]

Whatever kay baily hutchinson is far I’m against!!