Kaine & Obama Desperate To Distract From Failed Economic Record

Just four days after the U.S. Department of Labor announced that the national unemployment rate climbed to 8.2 percent in April and on the same day the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported that “the long-term outlook for the national debt remains dire,” it’s clear where former DNC Chairman Tim Kaine will focus his attention on if elected to the Senate, and it’s not the economy.

Instead, Kaine has been busy doing what he does best – cheerleading for President Obama’s latest political subject of the week and trying to distract Virginians from their failed economic record.

Kaine has joined fellow liberals Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer in pushing for the so-called “Paycheck Fairness Act,” a bill that is opposed by virtually every major small business organization in the country – see below – and even the left-leaning Washington Post editorial board warned represents “a flawed approach to job bias…[and] could make employers vulnerable to attack for responding to market forces.”

And as the Wall Street Journal opined today, “The bill ought to be called the ‘Trial Lawyer Paycheck Act,’ since it is a recipe for a class-action boom….It’s a walking advertisement for gridlock, a partisan stunt that would hurt the economy for no other reason than to pay off the Democratic donors in the tort bar.”

This trial lawyer bonanza that would have hurt Virginia small businesses was blocked by Republicans in the Senate today, but Tim Kaine has devoted virtually the entire last week to joining with Reid and Schumer in seeking to score political points off the vote.

“It speaks volumes about Tim Kaine’s misplaced priorities that while unemployment rises and our federal debt climbs, he’s focused on scoring cheap political points and misleading female voters in the Commonwealth,”

National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) spokesman Brian Walsh said today.  “Virginia small business owners and families deserve a Senator who will put their values first, but as we’ve seen time and again from Tim Kaine, he’s more concerned with the liberal Democratic agenda in Washington, than with helping to grow Virginia jobs.” 

BACKGROUND….

Also note what the Wall Street Journal wrote this morning:

• “The U.S. already has two broad federal laws—the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1963 Equal Pay Act—that prohibit gender-based pay discrimination. In case that wasn’t enough, Congress passed the Lilly Ledbetter Act in 2009 that as recently as March Mr. Obama said ‘ensures equal pay for equal work.’ What changed in the last three months?”

In fact, Chairman Kaine has yet to address how he squares his political rhetoric today with what he specifically claimed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act accomplished when it was signed into law three years ago — and he touted it in a fundraising email back in January.   Just five months ago, Kaine wrote to his supporters about the “Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, ensuring equal pay for equal work.”

This was also a view expressed repeatedly by President Obama, yet neither Obama nor Kaine have been able to explain why even more legislation is required, making clear this current debate is all about election-year politics for the Democrats.…

·         OBAMA: “Then we signed something called the Lilly Ledbetter Act — because we thought it made sense that women should get equal pay for equal work — I don’t know if you agree with that.” (President Obama, Remarks At DNC Fundraiser, 3/30/09)

·         OBAMA: “We passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — the first bill I signed into law – to make sure that women in this country get a fair shake on the workplace.” (President Obama, Remarks At DSCC/DCCC Fundraiser, 6/18/09)

·         OBAMA: “We passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — the first bill I signed so that equal pay for equal work is a reality all across this country.” (President Obama, Remarks, 6/29/09)

ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND….

Jobs Groups, Top Newspaper Editorial Boards Have All Blasted The Democrats’ Bill, Warning It ‘Would Spawn Frivolous Lawsuits’

JOBS GROUPS LETTER:“The provisions of the Paycheck Fairness Act would harm employers of all sizes, as the bill would apply to employers with as few as two employees. The threat the bill poses to small business is particularly troubling given the draconian penalties found in this legislation,which include unlimited damages regardless of whether a pay discrepancy was unintentional.” (Letter To Sens. Reid And McConnell, 22 Jobs Groups, 5/24/12)

·         “This flawed legislation could outlaw many legitimate practices that employers currently use to set employee pay rates, even where there is no evidence of intentional discrimination. Common practices that a court could find unlawful under S. 3220 include providing premium pay for professional experience, education, shift differentials or hazardous work, as well as pay differentials based on local labor market rates or an organization’s profitability.” (Letter To Sens. Reid And McConnell, 22 Jobs Groups, 5/24/12)

·         “A number of federal laws already specifically protect employees from pay discrimination, including the Equal Pay Act, the Civil Rights Act and the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.” (Letter To Sens. Reid And McConnell, 22 Jobs Groups, 5/24/12) 

·         Letter Signed By: U.S. Chamber of Commerce; American Bakers Association; American Bankers Association; American Hotel & Lodging Association; Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc.; College and University Professional Association for Human Resources; Food Marketing Institute; HR Policy Association; International Public Management Association for Human Resources; National Association of Manufacturers; National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors; National Council of Chain Restaurants; National Council of Textile Organizations; National Federation of Independent Business; National Public Employer Labor Relations Association; National Restaurant Association; National Retail Federation; National Roofing Contractors Association; Printing Industries of America; Retail Industry Leaders Association; Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council; Society for Human Resource Management

U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE:  “Unlawful pay discrimination is abhorrent, but this bill is not a responsible way to address it.” (“Mikulski Plan For Women’s Pay Gets New Push,” The Baltimore Sun, 5/23/12) 

·         “The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is opposing the legislation and will send a letter later this week urging senators to defeat it, arguing it would spawn frivolous lawsuits.” (“Equal Pay Bill Puts Romney On The Line On Women,” The Washington Times, 5/29/12) 

·         “…As a practical matter it is just one more thing that creates a disincentive to do business here in the United States. If you are looking at where to open a new business, it is going to be a factor…”(“Business Community Opposes Paycheck Fairness Act,” The Daily Caller, 11/13/10) 

SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT:  “…SHRM opposes Federal government efforts to second-guess employers in making pay decisions…” (“HR Alert! Oppose The Paycheck Fairness Act,” SHRM Statement, 5/30/12) 

·         SHRM: “The bill would also have a negative impact on employee privacy by encouraging employees to publicize their colleagues’ wages.” (“HR Alert! Oppose The Paycheck Fairness Act,” SHRM Statement, 5/30/12) 

EDITORIALS: ‘A Flawed Approach,’ ‘Grossly Intrusive’

CHICAGO TRIBUNE: “…grossly intrusive on decision-making by private businesses. At least one group would get a fatter paycheck from the Paycheck Fairness Act: trial lawyers.” (Editorial, “Paycheck Fairness?,” The Chicago Tribune, 11/12/10) 

WASHINGTON POST:“Paycheck Fairness Act: A flawed approach to job bias… could make employers vulnerable to attack for responding to market forces… not the right fix.” (Editorial, “Paycheck Fairness Act: A Flawed Approach To Job Bias,” The Washington Post, 9/28/10) 

·         “…risks tilting the scales too far against employers and would remove, rather than restore, a sense of balance.” (Editorial, “Two Sides Of Fair Pay In Bills Before The Senate,” The Washington Post, 1/15/09) 

BOSTON GLOBE:“…the measure as a whole is too broad a solution to a complex, nuanced problem… The bill would create too strong a presumption in favor of discrimination over other, equally plausible explanations…” (Editorial, “Bill Takes On Disturbing Pay Gap — But Offers Flawed Remedies,” The Boston Globe, 11/17/10) 

·         “… the controversial meat of the bill is the changes it would make to the legal process… companies are right to be concerned that this bill, as written, is too deep an intrusion.” (Editorial, “Bill Takes On Disturbing Pay Gap — But Offers Flawed Remedies,” The Boston Globe, 11/17/10)