This story deserves to be told and retold. It's gotten almost zero attention in the local or national press.
On January 14, 2020, Pima County (Arizona) Supervisor Sharon Bronson introduces a non-binding resolution before the Pima County Board of Supervisors. The resolution seems uncontroversial. It simply notes that there is a concurrent resolution pending in the Arizona legislature to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment. Bronson's resolution urges the legislature to approve the measure to ratify.
Cue Republican Supervisor Steve Christy, who jumps to be first to speak during discussion. We can tell he's prepared because he begins by holding up a copy of the Wall Street Journal and intoning:
If you look at any of the latest newspapers or news sources, it's universally accepted that “the fortunes of women in the labor market will determine the overall outcome of the labor market because they will be the predominant share.”
The inner quotation is from Marianne Wanamaker, a former adviser to President Trump, quoted in a WSJ article titled “As Jobs Cap 10 Years of Gains, Women Are Workforce Majority” published on Jan. 10, 2020. Christy doesn't mention that. He grants her universal authority.
Then he utters this absurdity:
The headlines in the recent Wall Street Journal say that women outnumbered men in the workforce in December So obviously there is absolutely zero discrimination being inflicted upon women in the workforce.
At that point in the official record, Board Chairman Richard Elías laughs out loud and Supervisor Bronson exclaims, “Ohhhh. Ohhh.” The entire meeting room seems to gasp.
You can hear it in this video clip provided by the Pima County Transparency Project, taken originally from the official County record:
The resolution passes 4-1, with Christy the only Nay.
For more background, see this article in the Green Valley News. I applaud them for being the only press outlet to cover the story contemporaneously:
Ironically, if Christy had just read a few paragraphs further into the same WSJ article he was reading out loud, he'd've found this:
However, those jobs are often in lower-paying fields, and those workers tend to be paid less than white, male counterparts.
In other words, his preparation was sloppy, his logic was nonexistent, and the whole room knew it.
But all that aside, how far out of touch with his constituents' lives must he be to think women face zero discrimination in the workforce? Does he talk to anyone outside of millionaire business owners like himself?
And even after that reaction in the room, Christy continues to insert his foot into his mouth. As reported recently in the Pima County Transparency Project blog:
Then Christy, undeterred, digs himself in deeper. He suggests that the “original Constitution” already provides equal protection by incorporating phrases like “for all people,” “liberty and justice for all,” “equal justice of all.” There's only one difficulty: Those phrases are nowhere in the US Constitution.
I could go on, but I think the point is clear. Steve Christy is incapable of representing his constituents. He's too far removed from their lives and their challenges. He represents only a privileged few.
All of which is why I'm running to flip that seat, where no Democrat has run since 1996. It looked like a safe Republican district until very recently, when voter registration numbers began to shift rapidly toward Democrats. It's not safe any longer, and I intend to make it blue for years to come.
You can help.
If you think this story of throwback attitudes deserves to be told, then rec, tip, and share.
If you think my campaign deserves your support, then donate what you can.
For more about me and my campaign, see previous diaries, especially this one.
Thank you!