Skip to main content

Mitt Romney
"You don't really think I'm going to answer that, do you?" (Darren Hauck/Reuters)
Mitt Romney really doesn't want people to know where he stands on the Paycheck Fairness Act. The bill, which will be coming up for a Senate vote next week, would close loopholes and strengthen protections in the Equal Pay Act of 1963. But not only has Romney not said anything about this important issue himself, the Washington Times reports that:
His campaign didn’t respond to five messages left over the past week seeking his stance on the Paycheck Fairness Act. In April, when he was fending off questions about his stance on women’s compensation, his campaign would only say he “supports pay equity” but would not say any more about the new legislation.
This is a major policy issue which the United States Senate is actively considering, and Mitt Romney won't tell even the conservative media where he stands on it. Of course, that tells us all we need to know—as Kaili Joy Gray wrote Saturday, "You're for equality or you're not. Period." Romney says he supports the concept, but he won't say a word about the bill that would take the concept toward reality. That means he's not really for equality.

Mitt Romney may be silent on the Paycheck Fairness Act, but the Senate won't be. Tell your senators to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act.

Originally posted to Daily Kos Labor on Wed May 30, 2012 at 08:21 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Hey Mitt, you got your 1144......Is there a (6+ / 0-)

    problem?

  •  He's awaiting word from his Billionaire supporters (10+ / 0-)

    on what his policy is....

    Doctor Mitt Romney Brain Sturgeon-The Operation was a success but the patient died, where's my fee?

    by JML9999 on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:02:22 AM PDT

  •  That's odd, considering he has five (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Crashing Vor, shoeless

    different opinions on the matter.

  •  And majority of idiot public don't/won't care. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    revbludge
  •  How many women worked at Bain? (4+ / 0-)

    And you just know they were paid less than their male counterparts.

    Then again, the only women Mitt ever "worked with" at Bain were probably the outsourced housekeeping services.

    Nature created the human race, but humans created racism.

    by GrannyOPhilly on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:11:49 AM PDT

  •  Having owned my own business (0+ / 0-)

    I should probably shy away from responding to this particular issue.  I'm just contrary enough, though, to give my "opinion" here on this, however.

    To me, it would be almost impossible for any small business owner to make sure that every person working for them makes exactly what every other person makes that works for them.  We have people with specific skills, even in the same pay grade, that will be needed more than others.  Let's say Joe Citizen is a far more experienced and qualified machinist than Jane Citizen.  Our customer wants their product to have specs that only Joe can be trusted to produce and that will take O.T. pay to get done because of the intracacies and time involved.  Let's say that in any particular month or quarter, that is the case.  Of course, there can be just so many other scenarios where that might play out, but this is presented as an example.

    If Joe Citizen then receives more pay than Jane, are we then saying that she has a case for a lawsuit?  

    This would be FAR more difficult to enforce and manage than anyone could ever imagine.  I have no problem with equal pay for equal work, but we must be careful here that we don't severely affect those that provide our populace with the jobs that they need.

    Thanks in advance for understanding what I am saying here.

    - If you don't like gay marriage, blame straight people. They're the ones who keep having gay babies.

    by r2did2 on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:14:06 AM PDT

  •  What Mitt is saying, by not saying... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    417els

    ...(and in fundie code-speak) is basically, "If you start paying women equal to men, they might start getting the idea that they are equal to men."  And that just ain't how fundies roll...

  •  He simply doesnt know (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    417els

    Cut Mitt some slack. Rove and the Koch brothers are busy spending 1billion on Mitt and the senate and house races to buy America. They'll get back to Romney as soon as they can to let him know his official position.

  •  Need to make sure the Daily Kos co-sponsored (0+ / 0-)

    debates are structured as sit down affairs; there's going to be a lot of questions requiring detailed answers and explanations. Probably ought to let the candidates bring their play book.

    Notice: This Comment © 2012 ROGNM

    by ROGNM on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:17:40 AM PDT

  •  Seriously....does anybody REALLY need an (0+ / 0-)

    actual answer from Team Mitt about this?

    You couldn't guess?

    Hints: Mitt's a rich fucking republican with money shooting out his ass and we're talking about "paychecks' and 'fairness'.

    Now really.... WTF do you think he feels about a paycheck fairness act?

    #occupywallstreet: Although I know the rhythm you'd prefer me dancing to, I'll turn my revolt into style.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:29:40 AM PDT

    •  Owners of businesses in Congress/Senate (0+ / 0-)

      I am fairly sure that we have a great many congresspeople and senators (from both parties) in D.C. that are either owners, themselves, of businesses or have the lion's share of businesses.  Because of this, I am sure that even though this is a very valid and just piece of legislation, it won't be passed.  Just enough of the democratic coalition will be there to make sure this is a "no-go" legislative effort while those not affected and needing to be seen as supporting it will vote "yea" on it.  

      Washington is a strange and complicated animal.  Argue it all you want.  Wait to see how this comes out.

      - If you don't like gay marriage, blame straight people. They're the ones who keep having gay babies.

      by r2did2 on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:34:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  THEY are more or less uniformly focused (0+ / 0-)

        on fucking the worker.

        So I will ASSUME I know how this is gonna turn out.

        #occupywallstreet: Although I know the rhythm you'd prefer me dancing to, I'll turn my revolt into style.

        by xxdr zombiexx on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:38:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I hear your ire, xxdr (0+ / 0-)

          And, I know that in just so many cases, men and women don't get equal pay for equal work.  I don't know, exactly, how to resolve that because it has been a part of our country's working environment for just so long.  I'm not against things being equal even though I "sound" like I am.  I am a pragmatist and know that in just so many cases within our country's working environment, it will be nearly impossible to square the pay between men and women without severely affecting businesses' ability to succeed.  Again, I wish I knew the answers here.

          Yes, in just so many cases the female worker is fucked.  What do we do to resolve it?  Do we say: "screw the businesses and require huge governmental involvement and monitoring" to make is all square?  Do we?  Really?

          It's a conundrum.  Even Obama struggles with this as in his own administration, women are paid less than men...and much of it is job specific, but then, should the president make sure we have an equal number of equal pay women and men in his/her administration?  How far do we take this.  It's not an easy thing to legislate...probably impossible.

          - If you don't like gay marriage, blame straight people. They're the ones who keep having gay babies.

          by r2did2 on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:47:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  He'll get back with 5 conflicting answers, asap. (0+ / 0-)

    I think that Republicanism is revealing itself as a personality disorder, not so much an ideology." -- Naomi Klein

    by AllanTBG on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:34:02 AM PDT

  •  The fun begins (0+ / 0-)

    This duplitious forked tongued Ahole will be called out starting NOW! When Wolf Blitzer is already calling you out you are in trouble!  Its going to be a fun 5 months. The billions will be spent but they have nothing but lies. Pass the popcorn.

    I am pro-life. Bring our troops home ALIVE!

    by Doc Allen on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:34:41 AM PDT

  •  Romney looks presidential in a Leslie Nielsen way. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    417els

    Maybe if we remind him that Pretend President pays a lot more and doesn't take much work, he'll drop out and save everyone the trouble.

    Dear conservatives: If instead of "marriage equality" we call it "voluntary government registration of committed homosexuals," are you on board?

    by Rich in PA on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:37:13 AM PDT

  •  His whole strategy is to NOT answer questions (0+ / 0-)

    And to never give specifics on any plans or policies he (re; his masters) have planned. This is going to be the stealthiest campaign in history.

    Romney 2012 - Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy? Caught in a landslide..... no escape from reality...

    by Fordmandalay on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:44:03 AM PDT

  •  The problem for Mitt is that it's entirely (0+ / 0-)

    OK to oppose the Paycheck Fairness Act, but impossible to avoid the follow-on:

    What would you do instead?

    People who do the same type and quality of work for the same employer should be paid accordingly. It makes business sense to reward profitable contributions, whatever their source.

    The PFA is chock-full of potential to make life hell for employers and to hurt the economy, but so is failing to recognize that irrational wage disparities do the same thing.

    So -- if you don't want to handcuff employers with something like the PFA, how do you achieve a more rational and (presumably) more productive economy?

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Wed May 30, 2012 at 09:46:13 AM PDT

  •  Romney equates people with businesses-he lacks (0+ / 0-)

    the moral judgment to qualify for president.

    I thought he was joking when he said,"Corporations are people". In his moral universe they are. His business practices show  us someone who thinks that what matters most are profits, not people. If people need to lose their jobs to increase his bottom line, so what?

    Corporations are people in Mitts world--immoral people, who don't care about the misery they cause others as long as they make a profit.

    Real people care. We are programmed morally to care in our human development.Sometimes things go wrong with the brain or the environment to prevent you from developing compassion but it is "normal" in human development to care for one another.If you don't care , there are laws that will punish you if you don't.

    Mitt believes that you can ignore or buy off those who make the laws if you are rich enough.Its up to us to show him otherwise. Please keep this in mind when you are conversing with Romney supporters. They need to get in touch with their human side.

  •  Romney doesn't want to piss off Republican women. (0+ / 0-)

    They demand to be paid less than men.

    Ann Richards on how to be a good Republican: You have to be against all government programs, but expect Social Security checks on time.

    by shoeless on Wed May 30, 2012 at 10:32:02 AM PDT

  •  I don't support the concept of Mitt Romney, (0+ / 0-)

    because that concept is not reality.

    Ann Richards on how to be a good Republican: You have to be against all government programs, but expect Social Security checks on time.

    by shoeless on Wed May 30, 2012 at 10:35:59 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site