There ought to be a law. Senator Murray pays her male staffers $21,000 more on average than the females. Is this discrimination?
So Senator Patty is proposing a law. She and four other female senators Wednesday announced the proposed Paycheck Fairness Act. Free Beacon It would facilitate large punitive damage claims in discrimination suits and is up for a vote following the Memorial Day recess.
But there already is a law. Obama is very proud of Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009. He brags that it was the first bill he signed. Weekly Standard
Despite the Lilly Law: Free Beacon
Murray, who has repeatedly accused Republicans of waging a "war a women," is one of the worst offenders. Female members of Murray's staff made about $21,000 less per year than male staffers in 2011, a difference of 35.2 percent.
That is well above the 23 percent gap that Democrats claim exists between male and female workers nationwide. The figure is based on a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report, and is technically accurate.
A significant "gender gap" exists in Senator Feinstein's office, where women also made about $21,000 less than men in 2011, but the percentage difference--41 percent--was even higher than Murray's.
Senator Boxer's female staffers made about $5,000 less, a difference of 7.3 percent.
The Free Beacon used publicly available salary data from the transparency website Legistorm to calculate the figures, and considered only current full-time staff members who were employed for the entirety of fiscal year 2011.
Though...
However, as CNN's Lisa Sylvester has reported, when factors such as area of employment, hours of work, and time in the workplace are taken into account, the gap shrinks to about 5 percent.
But Murray doesn't claim this smaller gap when she is complaining about women being discriminated against.
Why does she pay her female employees less? Did the Senate exclude itself from the Lilly Ledbetter law?
But it is funny to see Democrats hoisted on their own political petard. These PC diversity idiots should be exposed whenever and wherever possible.
As with most things Left, the hypocrisy is always glaring.
Posted by: Jeff B. on May 25, 2012 10:35 AMSensible's got nothing to do with it.
There's a new wingnut meme out there and Ron's gonna do his part to spread it. Even Jeff recognizes that it's a likely non-issue.
Posted by: scottd on May 25, 2012 11:12 AMFixed that for you, scottd. You may want to pull your head out of god knows where and look around sometime. Then you'll realize it isn't the right that are spreading mythological "war's". That would be wingnut's like yourself and the democ-rat party.
Posted by: Rick D. on May 25, 2012 11:22 AMEntirely true. However, Murray doesn't allow for these unknown variables when she attacks businesses who have similar (though not as bad) gaps. She can't have it both ways. Either she is guilty of a war on women, or the people she's attacking are not.
scottd: There's a new wingnut meme out there and Ron's gonna do his part to spread it. Even Jeff recognizes that it's a likely non-issue.
It is a non-issue ... except to the extent that it exposes that Murray is either lying, or a hypocrite.
She knows exactly how to be manipulated by the Democratic Party and has always been that way "Don't do as I do, do as I say".
That doesn't mean she has an original thought in her head and chronically does not tell the whole truth (as here) - she follows the Democrat playbook and lies by leaving out the relevant facts.
Posted by: KDS on May 25, 2012 07:03 PMNope. It was the majority of the dumb King County voters that put her in office and the pork she sends home to appease them that keeps her there. Inertia and pork: the price of a non-thinking King County voter.
It's a shame Rossi wasted his last chance against Murray. He would have fared much better in this 'fed up with Democrats/incumbents' mood and against our very own bog-turtle Cantwell.
Posted by: RagnarDanneskold on May 25, 2012 08:34 PMMurray herself is too stupid to comprehend the contradiction.
Her handlers haven't needed to exhaust themselves to market her as acceptable to equally stupid Washington State Dimocrat voters.
Posted by: Saltherring on May 25, 2012 11:32 PMIf you weren't too lazy to present an actual example of Murray lying, I might be able to respond.
So let's just stay on topic and look at the central premise that Ron (and you) so dutifully parrot. The premise is that Murray's a hypocrite for pushing the PFA because the average pay of all women in her office is less than the average pay of all men. Of course, the PFA says nothing about simply comparing the average pay of men vs the average pay of women without considering differences in job category, experience, etc.
So, does that mean Ron is lying? Lemme know...
Posted by: scottd on May 26, 2012 11:17 AM@14 - Why don't you do that yourself ? You would also be lazy for not even attempting it. It would compromise your ideology, but it would also give you some substance for a change. FYI- I have previously provided evidence why I believed Bush-43 to be a bad president.
One idea - why does she talk about equal pay for genders when she doesn't even provide equal gender pay for her staff as stated in the article. She was a mouthpiece for the phony war on women that the Democratics ginned up also. You don't have a lack of material - no excuses...
Posted by: KDS on May 26, 2012 01:35 PMYou don't have a lack of material...
Indeed. Patty "Nitwit in tennis shoes" Murray is, as they say, a "target-rich environment."
Posted by: Bastiat Fan on May 27, 2012 12:34 PM