Skip to main content

Scott Walker and Rebecca Kleefisch sitting in a tree, B-S-i-n-g

Wisconsin enacted a law in 2009 which gave employees, especially women, more power to challenge pay discrimination to the state courts. With the law in place, gender pay gap in the state improved from 36th to 24th in the country (approximately $0.78 to the $1.00 that men made).

In 2012, however, Republican Governor Scott Walker and the Republican-controlled state legislature decided to repeal this law.

Now with Governor Walker in a tight race with Democratic challenger Mary Burke, whom has been attacking him on this very repeal, Walker has decided to respond via Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch, where she says the following in an ad:

"That's why I find it so insulting that Mary Burke would say that we're trying to make it harder for women to earn equal pay. Under Scott Walker, workplace discrimination will always be illegal, for any reason. Mary Burke wants to create more opportunities to sue. We want to create more opportunities for women to succeed."

What dumb and dumber are missing here is the fact that employment gender discrimination is illegal nationwide, yet women are still only making about $0.78 to the $1.00 that men are making for the same work. So, while gender discrimination in the workplace isn't "legal," it's still taking place with the pay gap as it is, and unless women are permitted to sue against these unfair pay practices, the non-discrimination laws aren't very helpful.

It's rather ironic what Lieutenant Governor Kleefisch stated in the ad. She claimed that Mary Burke just wants to give women more opportunities to sue, while she and Scott Walker want to give women more opportunities to succeed. However, as the state rankings showcased, women were given more opportunities to succeed when they were given more opportunities to sue, so it sounds to me that by she and Governor Walker not wanting to give women more opportunities to sue, they don't want to give them more opportunities to succeed.

Kleefisch's ad should have really gone like this:

"That's why I find it so insulting that Mary Burke would say we're trying to make it harder for women to earn equal pay, even though we repealed a bill which was making it easier for them to do so. Under Scott Walker, workplace discrimination will always be illegal, just like everywhere else, except when it comes to equal pay. Mary Burke wants to create more opportunities to sue, which, studies show, creates more opportunities for women to succeed. We want to create more opportunities for women to succeed by giving them fewer opportunities to sue, which has been shown to create more opportunities for them to succeed. Yeah, something like that."

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/10/29/3585912/scott-walker-ad-against-equal-pay/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"