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.

Spring Soccer?

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

The Daily News recently reported about a Title IX problem brewing in the city that never sleeps.  New York City's Public Schools Athletic League schedules boys' soccer in the traditional fall season and girls' soccer in the nontraditional spring season.  The rest of the state plays soccer in the traditional fall season. So what's the problem?  Making girls in New York City play during the nontraditional spring season subjects them to disadvantages, such as the inability to compete in the state tournament, limited opportunities to be seen by college recruiters and to compete for athletic scholarships, and conflicts with club soccer schedules.  Awards and recognitions, such as playing on All-American teams, are also reserved for fall season players. As a result, these girls lose out on some valuable benefits of playing sports.

The League cites multiple reasons for moving the girls' soccer season to the spring, including field space and coaching availability, but this simply does not justify putting girls at a disadvantage. If these reasons preclude boys and girls playing in the same fall season, then the burden of playing in nontraditional seasons should be shared between boys and girls. The newspaper reports that PSAL has received complaints from parents, coaches and women's rights advocates, all to no avail. The next step will be legal action, but the courts have already established that off-season scheduling of only girls' sports is unlawful. Last year, the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by the Michigan High School Athletic Association, putting into effect the lower courts' rulings that scheduling six girls’ sports and no boys' sports in the off-seasons violates Title IX, the United States Constitution, and Michigan state law.  MHSAA was ordered to stop discriminating against girls, and recently, to pay $7.4 million in legal fees to the plaintiff, Communities for Equity.

With that type of precedent, if the PSAL has any clue, they’ll cut their losses now and provide equal opportunities for all athletes. The law is clear that treating girls as second-class is not only wrong and illegal, but comes with serious consequences. Besides, it shouldn’t take numerous complaints, court battles, or millions of dollars to enforce a right that is guaranteed by law.

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.

Danica's Big Win

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

Danica Patrick made history on Sunday as the first female to win an IndyCar race. She took the Indy Japan 300 in her 50th start in the series and put to rest any doubt that a woman can compete alongside the men—and win. Her victory is a great one for all female athletes.

Patrick has received a lot of criticism for marketing her good looks and for failing to win since she entered the Indianapolis 500 three years ago. She’s been dubbed the “Anna Kournikova of racing”, accused of using her looks to deflect her supposed lack of talent.

Female athletes are all too often placed in this classic double bind. They are scrutinized, either for being too feminine or too masculine, and somehow there’s no room in between. But Danica’s win proves that she is more than just a pretty face.

Congratulations to Danica for her great achievement and for paving the way for more women to participate in the world of sports.

The Implications of Graduation

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

In a few short weeks, I will be taking a proud walk across the stage to receive my hard- earned college diploma. Despite the regret that my exam-taking, paper-writing, dorm-living days are over, the most disheartening fact about entering the “real world” is that the young men who graduate along side me could earn significantly more than I do, just because of their sex.

Although it has been outlawed for over 40 years, the average full-time working woman still earns 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. As a recent grad, the 80 percent of a man’s salary that I can expect to earn will shrink to a disconcerting 69 percent in just 10 years. In other words, the gap only widens from here.   

Now I’m no math major, but all graduates put a 100 percent investment into their college education; yet female students get only get a fraction of the return? Hmm... that just doesn’t seem to add up.

This income gap means a lifetime of lost earnings and unrealized possibilities for millions of women like me — a smaller house, missed vacations, a could-have-been new car, or maybe a non-existent retirement fund. In a country that values self-sufficiency and hard work, where are the rewards for women who demonstrate just that? It’s time America realizes what the wage gap means for all the hard-working women who continue to get short-changed.

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.