[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 9 (Thursday, January 15, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S402-S403]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      LILLY LEDBETTER FAIR PAY ACT

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I, too, shortly want to make some 
remarks about our good friend from Delaware as he leaves the Senate 
today to take up his new responsibilities, but first a few observations 
about the next item on the agenda, the so-called Ledbetter legislation.
  Let me say to my good friend the majority leader, I intend to vote 
for cloture on the motion to proceed. He and I have had a number of 
constructive conversations privately, and he has reiterated again today 
publicly that we are going to make an effort to get the Senate back to 
operating the way it used to, which is that bills are amendable. So I 
have said to my colleagues and I would say to my good friend from 
Nevada that I trust you and believe you that we are going to get on the 
Ledbetter bill, we are going to have amendments and have votes and then 
dispose of the legislation in the normal way.
  With regard to the substance of that particular measure, despite the 
gross distortions voters heard about this legislation in the runup to 
the November elections, the Ledbetter bill as written is neither about 
women nor fairness, and it is not about whether pay discrimination 
should be illegal. Pay discrimination is illegal, and it has been since 
1963. Rather, this bill is about how long the statute of limitations on 
pay discrimination suits should be.
  Last night, Republicans began to outline a proposal for addressing 
this question in a way that is fair for everyone. Senator Hutchison's 
bill strikes the right balance. It says the clock should not run out on 
someone who has been discriminated against until he or she discovers 
the alleged discrimination. This way, the focus is where it should be, 
on the injured party.
  The Ledbetter legislation unfairly targets business owners, who may 
or may not have discriminated against a man or a woman, on the basis of 
pay years or even decades ago. Its primary beneficiaries are lawyers, 
who want to squeeze a major settlement out of every company that fears 
the expense or the publicity of going to court. This bill is unfair to 
business owners who in many cases will no longer have the evidence they 
would need to mount a convincing defense, and it is unfair to the 
millions of American workers who are worried about losing their jobs in 
the current economic downturn. Job creators have enough to worry about 
at the moment. Adding the threat of never-ending lawsuits is a new 
burden the Federal Government should not even be considering at this 
particular time.
  No right-thinking American would defend discrimination of any kind in 
the workplace or anywhere else. And it is unfair to the public to 
suggest that those who oppose this bill endorse discrimination. It 
degrades our public discourse and it degrades the legislative process.
  Many of us oppose this bill as written because it will paralyze 
businesses and add an even greater strain on workers than they 
currently face. We support a business climate that creates the 
conditions for success, not a climate that harasses the millions of men 
and women in this country who support themselves, their families, and 
their

[[Page S403]]

workers by owning and operating small businesses.
  Republicans have a better proposal and other good ideas to help 
American workers. I believe we need to get on the Ledbetter bill, as I 
said a few minutes ago, and have an open debate about it so the 
American people can hear Republican alternatives and the Senate has an 
opportunity to vote on more than what our good friends on the other 
side have offered.

                          ____________________