Yes... because businesses that haven't treated women fairly might be sued, and therefore lawyers can make money off this? Why not just treat the women fairly to begin with? Might save lots of money, dum-dums...

OH! I hadn't REALIZED that one more time those big strong men were doing it FOR MY OWN GOOD! How silly of me!

so, women, if wronged, will have no legal recourse.

uh huh

but, there's no GOP War on Women....right....

The Lily Ledbetter law is similar to the Americans with Disabilities Act in that neither carries sanctions for violations. Each simply provides fair access to the courts for those who believe they have been victims of discrimination.

Working in a real estate development company, I know that ADA has made access for those with disabilities nearly universal. I do not know of an office building that is built, a shopping center that is opened or a sidewalk that is poured without meeting ADA standards. It is the fear of lawsuits that encourages compliance.

Similarly, fair pay laws simply provide access to the courts. Those who discrimiinate know that they can be sued. That will enocurage workplace compliance. And like the ADA, lawyers will become less involved over time as employers make sure they protect themselves from suits by voluntarily adopting affirmative non-discrimination policies.

Lily Ledbetter says "I am but one woman with one story, but there are thousands of women." How about millions?

All they have to do to keep down law suits is to pay women the same as men in the same jobs.

Of course the real problem is that many jobs that go almost exclusively to women are low paying jobs. When men start to take some of these jobs, pay will go up because most men will not work for such low pay. Many women take these jobs because they are the only jobs they can get, even when they have more skills and education than the men.

Mazzola's expanded comment (in Ledbetter article) reads, “If Democrats really want to help women, they should focus on the fact that women saw the slowest economic growth and jobs during the last year. They’re one of the demographics that are really struggling to find work, and if they focused on jobs and the economy instead of political payback, we’d be in a much better position.”

This is yet ANOTHER effort by the GOP to obfuscate. The fact is, the Ledbetter Law does nothing to make it more difficult for a woman to find employment. All it does it create open access to recourse if an employed is unfairly paid. To associate the two ideas, and start tearing down laws that are designed to protect women's rights in the workplace is another blatant attack on us. To associate fair pay with "political payback" is completely wrong, and should not be allowed to stand.

The irony is that the conservatives wouldn't have to worry about all this money going to trial lawyers if they simply enforced an equal pay law. That would show them rascally lawyers

Hey, if old white men are the ones best positioned to make health care decisions for women, why should they not be the ones also best positioned to make equality decisions for individual women?

Doesn't everyone know that in decisions related to race relations and female health care decisions and employment equality, the only persons impartial enough and knowledgeable enough to make decisions are old white men?

Doesn't everyone know that there would not need to be a war on women if women would accept their proper place in life and stop being so uppity?

Many women simply cannot afford to work at the wages they're being offered, as those wages do no more than cover the expenses associated with work. I believe that is defined as wage slavery. Those who are working and earning a living are often not earning what their male counterparts are earning for the same work. That is wage discrimination and, if provable, should be prosecuted just like any other form of work place discrimination that prevents equal opportunity.

The facts of the economy notwithstanding, women have endured wage discrimination for centuries. Yes, lawyers will be enriched, but so will women. They will have more doors open at higher levels of pay that is automatically granted and doesn't require that they out perform co-workers, beg or prostitute themselves.

This so not surprising. The gop will and has done pretty much everything they can think of to alienate everyone except the nra, evangelicals, and big oil. My question is; how do they expect to ever hold national offices again if they only want to play to a very select audience?

But these jokers never cease to amaze me with their ability to take a common sense issue and make it someone elses fault. But it does explain their business model; "everyone is wrong but me". However they fail to realize that those opinions are in the minority.

But of idiots. But then again, they do have Ted Nugget on their side, (spelled wrong intentially).

And Walker wonders why trial lawyers support Democrats....

So I just get done arguing w/ someone about the fact that churches are asking for special privilege over individual rights and here now we have Gov. Scott Walker talking about how he wants to deny individual rights for businesses.

I told you this before people: this has to do w/ Citizens United. They are attempting to flip the equation on it's head. It has been for about 50 years now that when individual rights come into conflict w/ a business, as long as there wasn't a clear and present harm being posed to the business, the individual was the one w/ whom the law would side. Now we are seeing people trying to flip that equation and make it that the law defaults to the business and the individual must argue why he or she should be given special allotments. The libertarian movement is the movement that pushes this more than anyone else which is why both Rand Paul and Ron Paul consistently talk about how they want to repeal things like the last article of the Civil Rights Act. It's all about expanding business powers over individual powers.

Seriously??? Can no one see this?

By this logic, ANY law which requires enforcement is boon to trial lawyers.

I still can't get over the two women in repup party, who voted against the Ledbetter bill defending it. What is WRONG with republican women?

Simple Truth - Ask yourself does your company value Increased Sales over Cutting Costs. If Increased sales is the answer then they need the middle class to make more to get their rewards (i.e. BONUSES!!!). You can't sell stuff to people with no money. If cutting costs is the answer then they could care less about the middle class or women. They (i.e. Board and CEO Staff) make their BONUSES off of a short sighted goal that cannot be sustained. How much cost can you really cut before only you are left. Anyway, If you work for a company with a CEO or officers that are focused only on cuting costs and not rewarding their Middle Class empolyees... My advise is to LEAVE... Find a company that has a sustainable vision and you will find a company that values talent regardless of gender.

Yep, keep on voting for these family values, religious nut jobs and this is what you get…Scott Walker. All religions throughout history have been repressive to the masses, and even more repressive towards women and children.