Womenstake

7 Questions with NWLC's Lara Kaufmann

by Jessica Lauredan, Outreach Intern
National Women’s Law Center

This post is part of a series profiling our blog authors.

Lara Kaufmann is Senior Advisor for Education and Employment at NWLC.

Q: The Senate’s recent vote on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was a setback in the movement to make pay equity a reality. What will happen next? And how can women join the fight for fair pay?
Lara: The fight is not over yet! We didn’t get the 60 votes necessary to move to the next big step in the Senate — scheduling a debate and a vote on the merits of the bill — but we got very close, and we are calling on the Senate leadership to continue to bring up the bill until it passes. Women (and men) who support equal pay can help by contacting their Senators and encouraging them to support (or, in some cases, to continue supporting) the bill. There are simple instructions on our website for how to do this. It only takes a minute, and it’s really worth it — Senators do pay attention to what their constituents want. Also, there are two more bills pending before Congress right now that address fair pay, one called the Paycheck Fairness Act and one called the Fair Pay Act. Our fact sheet on Pay Equity has information on both of those initiatives too.

Q: The Fair Pay Act has come before the Senate during an election year. Do you think the bill will have an impact on the campaigns, or vice versa?
Lara:  Both, actually. It is just a coincidence that this is being considered in an election year (the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was introduced following the Supreme Court’s May 2007 decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear, and the House of Representatives passed it back in July 2007). But because of the timing, it may be discussed during presidential debates, which means that more Americans will learn about it than otherwise might, and I think that's a good thing. Senators Clinton and Obama were original cosponsors of the bill and support it, while Senator McCain stated to reporters that he opposes it. We hope voters will take the opportunity to ask all three Senators about this issue and press them to support, or continue to support, the bill.

7 Questions with NWLC's Julia Kaye

by Jessica Lauredan, Outreach Intern
National Women’s Law Center

This post is part of a weekly series profiling our blog authors.

Julia Kaye is a Policy Associate for the Health and Reproductive Rights team at NWLC.

Q: Twenty million unmarried women did not vote in the 2004 election. As a young woman, what do you think caused this lack of participation?
Julia: Whatever the reasons were then, unmarried women have been voting en masse during this primary season — I’ve actually read several articles on the pivotal role that experts believe unmarried women will play in determining the results of the November elections — and I think it’s a trend that’s not going away. The stakes are high right now.  The results of this election will largely determine the role that America will play in fighting global warming, the future of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, possibly two new Supreme Court Justices (and the security of Roe v. Wade) … the list goes on. I think that women both understand the gravity of these issues and have come to recognize that they are a significant demographic with a lot of electoral power, and that they have the power to influence policy on these crucial issues — if they get out and vote.

Q: Could pro-choicers and anti-choicers ever agree that it’s important to work toward preventing unintended pregnancies by increasing access to contraceptives and emergency contraception, thus reducing the need for abortions?
Julia: I sincerely hope so!

Q: What do you say to people who claim that giving women over-the-counter access to emergency contraception increases the rates of STI’s?
Julia: I’d say that the people making those claims are trying to imply that emergency contraception/Plan B is significantly different from “regular” birth control pills, and needs to be judged and critiqued using a significantly different set of criteria. In fact, both are advertised and endorsed as products that help prevent against unintended pregnancy, and both packages inform users that the product does not protect against sexually transmitted infections. Debating EC’s potential to increase STI rates distracts from its proven efficacy in preventing unintended pregnancy. I would also say that women who are informed enough about their sexual health to seek out EC after experiencing a contraceptive failure or having unprotected sex are probably informed enough to recognize that unintended pregnancy is not the only potential consequence of unprotected sex.

7 Questions with NWLC's Taryn Wilgus Null

by Jessica Lauredan, Outreach Intern
National Women’s Law Center

This post is part of a weekly series profiling our blog authors.

Taryn Wilgus Null is a MARGARET Fund Fellow for the Education and Employment team at NWLC working on employment discrimination and Title IX issues.

Q: It’s been 45 years since the Equal Pay Act was passed, yet women still earn 77 cents for each dollar earned by men. Why has this travesty gotten so little public attention?

Taryn: I think there is a misconception among many people that the wage gap between the sexes is based entirely upon choices that men and women make about the jobs that they take. Unfortunately, it’s difficult for them to see that sex discrimination is at the root of much of the sex segregation in employment and the pay differential between the jobs held primarily by women and those held primarily by men.

Q: What are the biggest obstacles women face in earning equal pay?

Taryn: Many jobs are largely segregated by sex and have been for a long time. This is not inherently problematic, but many of the jobs held primarily by women pay much less money than primarily male jobs that require similar levels of training. There is no reason that, for example, a cosmetologist should earn much less than an auto mechanic, but it’s hard to change things once salary levels are so entrenched.

Q: You’ve previously worked at the American Civil Liberties Union and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. How have those experiences influenced the work you do here?

Taryn: At both the ACLU and the EEOC, I got a lot of wonderful legal research and writing experience that has been invaluable here. I also worked on sex discrimination cases in both positions, so I learned some substantive law that has proved very useful.

7 Questions with NWLC's Dina Lassow

by Jessica Lauredan, Outreach Intern
National Women’s Law Center

This post is part of a weekly series profiling our blog authors.

Dina Lassow is Senior Counsel for Education and Employment at NWLC.

Q: Sex discrimination and the wage gap are still very real for women in America, despite being unconstitutional and illegal. Do you believe the psyche of America must change rather than the laws?

Dina: I don’t see them as necessarily being two different questions. Through the enforcement of sex discrimination laws, you hopefully change the psyche of the workplace — so that women know their rights and those rights are respected. Both factors must work together for there to be change.

Q: More than 35 years after Title IX was passed, plaintiffs are still fighting for its enforcement. Why has Title IX proven so difficult to execute?

Dina: Well, most civil rights legislation is hard to enforce, so I don’t think Title IX is all that different. There is still a lot of discrimination of all forms in the world. However, Title IX has drawn more backlash than many other laws. Title IX has become an easy target for those who are upset about cuts in certain men’s teams, such as wrestling. But men’s participation in sports overall is not decreasing. If certain teams are cut, the culprit is a school’s decision on how to allocate its resources — often with huge sums going to football — not Title IX.

7 Questions with NWLC's Lisa Codispoti

by Jessica Lauredan, Outreach Intern
National Women’s Law Center

This post is part of a weekly series profiling our blog authors.

Lisa Codispoti is Senior Advisor with the Health and Reproductive Rights Team where she advocates for comprehensive and affordable health care for women and their families.

Q: A major burden on the U.S. healthcare system is the over-use of costly emergency services due to the delay of routine healthcare and the lack of preventative measures. At what point do you believe that the fight for comprehensive health care should include access to affordable health foods, physical education programs, and routine care that would limit a number of preventable medical crises?

Lisa: While I think that having access to affordable healthy foods and physical education play an important role in improving our overall health, and keeping people healthy can save money and lives, we have to prioritize. We are working to ensure people have access to affordable preventative care, as well as routine health care; both are critical foundations to the goal of comprehensive, affordable, quality health care for all.   

7 Questions with NWLC's Kristina Gupta

by Jessica Lauredan, Outreach Intern
National Women’s Law Center

This post is part of a weekly series profiling our blog authors.

Kristina Gupta is a Policy Fellow for the Family Economic Security and the Education and Employment Departments of NWLC.

Q: What are your fears for women and their families as our economy continues to take a downturn?

Kristina: Low-income women and their families are already struggling to make ends meet. As the economy enters a downturn, the struggle will become that much more difficult. In addition, social supports for women and their families have eroded over the past seven years – sacrificed in favor of tax cuts for the wealthy and funding for the war in Iraq.

Q: You wrote in a recent blog post that more than 1 in 100 American adults are confined in a prison or jail, and that this prison population is increasingly including women. Do you think there is a correlation between this and the feminization of poverty?

Kristina: Well, women do have higher poverty rates than men – in 2006, the poverty rate for women was over 12 percent, while the poverty rate for men was just under 9 percent. Economic status is related to crime and incarceration rates. Another, and perhaps more immediate, factor driving the growing incarceration rate for women is the so-called “war on drugs” – about one-third of women are incarcerated for drug crimes, compared to about one-fifth of men.

7 Questions with NWLC's Neena Chaudhry

by Jessica Lauredan, Outreach Intern
National Women’s Law Center

This post is part of a weekly series profiling our blog authors.

Neena Chaudhry works to enforce and protect Title IX as a Senior Counsel for Education and Employment at NWLC.

Q. Some argue that Title IX ignores fundamental differences between men and women and will never succeed in fully leveling the playing field. What do you say to these claims?

Neena: These are precisely the kind of stereotypes that Title IX was enacted to combat. To say that boys are more interested in sports or that girls don’t like math is to limit their educational opportunities based on sex. In addition to being legally impermissible, these arguments are factually incorrect. For example, since Title IX was enacted 35 years ago, women’s participation in sports has increased exponentially. Yet each time women reached a new level of participation, opponents of the law claimed it was enough and schools should not add more opportunities for women because they weren’t interested. And each time, these critics were proven wrong as women’s participation continued to increase.

7 Questions with NWLC's Amy Matsui

by Jessica Lauredan, Outreach Intern
National Women’s Law Center

This post is part of a weekly series profiling our blog authors.

Amy Matsui is Senior Counsel on NWLC’s Family Economic Security team.

Q: The nomination of Richard Honaker to the federal District Court of Wyoming has brought about a wave of backlash. Why do you think so many people object to his nomination?

Amy: I think that many people are justifiably concerned that if he is confirmed, he won’t be impartial and fair, especially concerning abortion rights. He has a long record of anti-abortion advocacy, including drafting state legislation that would have effectively banned abortion in Wyoming. He’s also shown a disregard for Supreme Court precedents, including Roe v. Wade. We’re worried that the constitutional rights of women in Wyoming wouldn’t be fully protected if he were confirmed to a lifetime position on the federal courts.

If women would like to take steps to oppose his nomination, they should call or write to their Senators — they can take a look at some of our materials for more information.

Q: The women’s movement has long been concerned with equal access to employment and fair pay. How do you factor in the “next steps” to full equality such as increasing women-owned businesses, re-evaluating gender roles, and the balancing of domestic duties?

Amy: For me, the next step in the women’s movement is building on the progress that’s come about so far by making sure that women on all parts of the economic spectrum have real choices and flexibility. I don’t want to see any woman having to choose between safe, high-quality child care for their child, and getting the medical care they need, or saving for their retirement. I hope there will be a time where women of all income levels have equal access and real choices in their child care, their employment, and their finances.

7 Questions with NWLC's Gretchen Borchelt

by Jessica Lauredan, Outreach Intern
National Women’s Law Center

This post is part of a weekly series profiling our blog authors.

Gretchen Borchelt fights for reproductive justice as Senior Counsel for Health and Reproductive Rights at NWLC.

Q: Health and reproductive rights are often governed by politicians but executed by physicians. Where should the line be drawn between doctors and politicians on medical decisions?
Gretchen: I don’t think it should be one or the other. Medical decisions should be made by the patient, with advice and support of the doctor and whomever else the patient chooses to include.

I certainly think that for the most part politicians should stay out of medical decision-making; Terri Schiavo showed us that. But that doesn’t mean there is not a role for politicians. It is important for politicians to protect and ensure individual rights and access to care. For example, we urge legislators to pass laws requiring hospitals to offer rape survivors the morning-after pill. The guiding principle should be whether a law helps individuals get the kind of care they and/or their doctors think is best for them, without interference and unnecessary hurdles. Doctors, politicians, and patients all factor into the equation.

Q: What makes you remain hopeful that progressive change for women’s issues is still possible?
Gretchen: To be honest, sometimes I’m not so hopeful. For the past eight years, we’ve faced a very unfriendly administration, and it’s been difficult to push proactive policies that help women. And our two new Supreme Court justices seriously undermined women’s rights during their first full term together. Even more frustrating, we’re always fighting apathy and the misconception that women already have full equality. I’m not sure why people are so deluded — we know that women still face unequal pay; that 35 years on, we’re still fighting to control our reproductive decision-making; that we’re still trying to figure out ways to balance work and family . . . (I’ll stop there).

What makes me hopeful is that every day, through the work of NWLC and our coalition partners, we are making change. We are coming up with creative strategies to make the law work for women and their families. We are turning apathy into action. Oh, and the fact that we’ll have a new administration. That helps too!

7 Questions with NWLC's Fatima Goss Graves

by Jessica Lauredan, Outreach Intern
National Women’s Law Center

This post is part of a weekly series profiling our blog authors.

Fatima Goss Graves, Senior Counsel at NWLC, works on ensuring gender equality in education through litigation, legislative policy, and public education.

Q: Your mother, Carol Goss, is President and CEO of the Skillman Foundation, a private organization working to improve schools and neighborhoods for children in southeast Michigan. How has her work influenced your career and goals?
Fatima: Both of my parents emphasized a commitment to public service from a young age. I have two sisters, and they always instilled in all of us the importance of being involved in issues that we’re passionate about — and about giving both our time and talents to those issues. In addition to my work here at the Center, one sister directs philanthropic affairs and urban renewal for the City of Detroit, and, while still in school, my other sister has always been heavily involved in community activities.

Also, I come from a long legacy of civil rights activists. My father and aunt were the named plaintiffs in a significant post-Brown Supreme Court ruling that desegregated schools in Knoxville, Tennessee, during the height of the civil rights movement.

Q: Over the years, the civil rights movement and the women’s rights movement have coincided and sometimes clashed. As a woman of color, do you ever feel torn between your loyalties as an African-American and as a feminist?
Fatima: I’m not sure I’d put it exactly that way — these are movements that have benefited from and fostered each other. And these movements continue to work in strong coalitions together; I work with many civil rights organizations on a regular basis and our work often overlaps.

That said, I strongly believe that feminists have a duty to be committed to racial and broader social justice, and there is a similar duty for civil rights activists to advocate on behalf of women and girls. And in so doing, feminists have to ensure that their advocacy takes the needs of all women into account, not just white women. Similarly, civil rights activists must ensure that their advocacy does not focus on progress for only men of color.