Senate

It’s the last week of August, and just as millions of kids around the country are zipping up their backpacks for the first time in many months, so too the Senate will be preparing to come back into session after Labor Day. Between the political conventions, religious holidays, and Senators’ desire to campaign in their states before the November elections, there’s not much time to actually conduct the people’s business in September. But there’s a lot to do.

One must-do priority is confirming the backlog of judicial nominees – and if longstanding Senate practices were followed, this could be accomplished quickly and easily. Right now, there are 18 nominees to federal district courts around the county who have been approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and are simply waiting for a vote to be scheduled. It may come as a surprise if you’ve been watching Congress lately, but the Senate could confirm all of these nominees in a block, in a single scheduled vote. Indeed, as Senator Patrick Leahy, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has reminded us in recent months, the Senate routinely used to vote on groups of nominees, as many as 18 at a time.  Read more »

Yesterday, the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions (HELP) Committee issued a searing indictment of for-profit colleges. The report, “For Profit Higher Education: The Failure to Safeguard the Federal Investment and Ensure Student Success,” was the result of Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa)’s two-year investigation into the growing for-profit higher education sector.

The report found that although for-profit colleges, in theory, have an important role to play in higher education and should be well-equipped to meet the needs of non-traditional students—such as older students and single parents—the reality is quite different.

For-profit education is a big money-making industry that puts profits ahead of student success. More widgets = more profit. Except for that the widgets in this case are students. So it’s no surprise that companies that the report examined spent $4.2 billion (with a capital “B”) on marketing and recruiting, equivalent to 22.7% of all revenue.

This incentive structure has led to aggressive, misleading, and deceptive recruiting practices that look a lot like a sales process. For example, training materials from some for-profits showed that recruiters were taught to locate and manipulate prospective students’ fears.

And it’s working! These schools sink incredible amounts of money on marketing and recruiting, and are reaping incredible profits. In 2009, publicly traded companies operating for-profit colleges had an average profit margin of nearly 20% (and paid their CEOs an average of $7.2 million). Read more »

Did your Senators do the right thing?

Find out how your Senators voted on ending the Bush-era tax cuts for the richest 2 percent. And send them a quick message!

Yesterday, the Senate voted 51 to 48 to end the Bush-era tax cuts for the richest 2 percent of Americans. Ending these tax cuts would save $1 trillion over the next 10 years and help protect programs that are critical to women at every stage of their lives.

While some Senators did the right thing, others did not. Take two minutes to find out how your Senators voted and send them a message.

Our advocacy isn't done when the vote is tallied. We need to make sure your Senators know that you are watching their votes because this issue will come up again. Read more »

Last week, I lamented that, in an era of 70+ judicial vacancies and 20+ nominees cooling their heels waiting for a vote, the Senate is only managing to schedule votes on one district court nominee per week. Read more »

Last week, the Senate HELP Committee (that’s Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions) held a hearing on an important piece of bipartisan legislation, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would provide lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals with long overdue protection against discrimination in the workplace. Specifically, ENDA would prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in both public and private employment (with exemption for small businesses and certain religious employers). Although in certain circumstances, LGBT individuals are currently protected from employment discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, there is no federal law that explicitly prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The HELP Committee hearing provided an important opportunity for advocates, scholars, and business executives to explain their support (and in one case, opposition) of ENDA to members of the Senate. It also marked an historic occasion—Kylan Broadus, Founder of the Trans People of Color Coalition, became the first openly transgender person to testify before the Senate, a milestone that Senator Harkin (and the Washington Blade) noted. Broadus spoke movingly about his experiences as a transgender American and with workplace discrimination, and described his transition as “a matter of living the truth and sharing that truth for the first time in [his] life.” Read more »

This week, we had a small piece of good news about federal investments in child care and early education. On June 12, the Senate Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee approved a fiscal year 2013 appropriations bill that included increased funding for the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG), Head Start, and early intervention services and provided new funding for Race to the Top, with a portion set aside for the Early Learning Challenge.

The bill would increase Child Care and Development Block Grant discretionary funding by $160 million, to $2.438 billion. (Discretionary funding is set each year; there is also $2.917 billion in mandatory CCDBG funding.) The increase includes $90 million to support training, education, and other professional development opportunities for the early care and education workforce, which is key to improving the overall quality of early care and education, and $70 million to help more families pay for care and raise reimbursement rates for child care providers. By providing funding to expand the availability of child care assistance as well as to enhance the quality of the workforce, the Senate Subcommittee is signaling that it recognizes investments in both areas are essential in giving families access to higher-quality child care options. Read more »

This morning the Senate took to the floor to debate the Paycheck Fairness Act (PFA), a bill that would give workers stronger tools to combat wage discrimination, bar retaliation against workers for discussing salary information, and ensure full compensation for victims of gender-based pay discrimination. This afternoon the PFA failed to garner the 60 votes needed to end debate in a 52-47 vote that stuck to party lines.

While I was watching the debate, numerous Senators spoke in support of the PFA. They spoke to the many issues that matter in this fight – the (obvious) reasons women should be paid fairly, how we can boost women’s economic security by passing the PFA, how fair pay for women is good for families, and more. Senator Durbin made a point that particularly resonated with me. He simply said: protection for women and their families used to be bipartisan.

This clearly should be a bipartisan issue. The fact of the matter is that the typical woman working full time, year round is still paid just 77 cents for every dollar paid to her male counterpart, a figure that has barely budged over the last decade. Part of this 23 cent difference can be explained by occupations, work hours, and experience. But the truth of the matter is – much of the wage gap is entirely unaccounted for by these factors, and court cases show that discrimination continues to play a significant role in the wage gap. Read more »

Mad about the vote?

Help spread the word about equal pay for women.

Just moments ago, the Paycheck Fairness Act failed to get the 60 votes needed to move forward in the Senate. Fifty-two Senators voted to allow it to proceed, while 47 opposed it.

For the thousands of you who sent emails, made calls and met with your Members of Congress on this very important bill, this is a huge disappointment. We thank you for standing with us, and we urge you to continue the fight.

In the wake of a disappointing vote, help us get the message out about the importance of equal pay for women by sharing this video:

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Or, forward this email and ask your friends and family to watch the video

During today’s Senate floor debate about the Paycheck Fairness Act Senator Heller (R – NV) called the Paycheck Fairness Act (PFA) a “trial lawyers’ bailout.” Yet Senator Heller acknowledged the persistence of the wage gap, saying “no one in this body should be so naïve as to say pay discrimination has been eliminated.”

After describing the working women in his life and claiming to be their committed advocate against pay discrimination, Senator Heller went on to say that the Equal Pay Act is sufficient to fight the wage gap. If that is true, why has the wage gap only narrowed by 18 cents since the Equal Pay Act was passed in 1963? Read more »

In an unsurprising but discouraging vote yesterday, the House of Representatives passed a budget bill to implement components of the FY 2013 budget resolution introduced by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI). 218 Members of Congress, all Republicans, voted in favor of the bill, which would slash funding for Medicaid, food stamps (SNAP), child care, the Affordable Care Act, and more. (Sixteen Republicans and 183 Democrats voted no.)

Supporters have asserted that these drastic cuts – which would cripple programs that are vital to low-income women and their families – are necessary to avoid the automatic cuts (known as the “sequester”) scheduled to take effect in 2013 under the Budget Control Act. New revenue from the wealthiest individuals and corporations would be a far better way to replace the sequester, but the bill that passed the House does not ask for one penny from those who could actually afford to contribute to deficit reduction. Read more »