Equal Pay for Equal Work?

We hear a lot of talk about the fact that women on average make less than men.  That brings out calls by Democrats for new legislation.  And it's used to portray Republicans as anti-woman when they oppose the legislation.  To really understand the topic, you have to look past national averages.

Equal Work:  By the very nature of national averages you don't get results that reflect equal work.  Look to most any school and you'll find more female teachers than male teachers.  Look to a construction site and you're likely to see more men than women.  Look to any hospital and you're likely to find more male doctors than female and more female nurses than male.  Look to the NFL and MLB and you find more males than females (especially since they're exclusively male.)
So to get an accurate reflection on pay statistics based on equal work you need to look to a particular profession, say physicians.  But even that doesn't give you "equal work" results.  The last time I worked in a hospital female physicians were more likely to be primary care doctors while specialties like surgery were more likely to be filled by males.  Should a pediatrician and a surgeon be paid the same?

Should there be any allowances made for why someone doing equal work might be paid less?  Let's take the case of basketball players.  We have professional women's and men's basketball leagues.  They both play basketball, a competitive game for a season.  Should the women be paid the same as the men?  If the case for Equal Pay for Equal Work demands it in any case, it would seem to be most applicable in the case of professional basketball.  However other factors create an environment where the pay differential between the two leagues is HUGE!

So how do you measure "equal work" with national level statistics?  You can't.

Equal Pay:  It's currently against the law to pay men and women unequally for the same job.  We no longer have different pay scales for women and men.  So the question really isn't related to that issue, there are already laws that apply.  The real issue is how do you set a value for differing types of jobs since there is a natural tendency for females and males to gravitate towards different work.

I came from a family with six children, five females and one male.  I gravitated towards a degree in accounting, became a CPA and served most of my career in senior management positions.  Four of my sisters became teachers.  Each got a masters degree in education and were good teachers.  How do you value their "work" verses the "work" I did.  Since none of us were paid by the hour, did we work the same number of hours a year?  Should we have gotten equal pay per hour or equal pay per year?  To ensure "Equal Pay for Equal Work" on a national average you have to ignore hours worked in salaried jobs and assign all work, regardless of what is involved, equal pay.  Until that happens there will be an "Equal Pay for Equal Work" issue.

It's just one more way Democrats attempt to maintain an advantage in the women's vote.

NC Senate Debate (10/7/14): Questions Sen. Hagan Should Have Been Asked

Sen. Kay Hagan and Speaker Thom Tillis debated on a variety of subjects, many of which they would have little control over as a Senator.  But some of the most important topics never came up.  Topics like Budget Deficits, National Debt and Social Security.  For a Republican to leave them on the table is like leaving your best players on the sidelines in your state championship football game.

- Sen. Hagan took office in 2009 and has watched Majority Leader Harry Reid violate law by refusing to pass a budget in the Senate.  What is Sen. Hagan's position on her party leader's refusing to pass budgets?

http://washingtonexaminer.com/with-elections-looming-and-debt-rising-senate-democrats-wont-put-out-fiscal-2015-budget/article/2544889

- Sen. Hagan took office in 2009 when the National Debt had just exceeded $10 trillion.  By the end of December it will exceed $18 trillion.  Yet according to the 2014 National Journal Almanac of American Politics (page 1239) Sen. Hagan voted "No" in the 112th Session on a Balanced Budget Amendment bill.  (As did every other Democrat.)  $8 trillion in additional debt adds between $400 billion and $480 billion per year in additional Interest Outlays at normal interest rates.  What is Sen. Hagan's position on rapidly increasing debt, interest outlays and a Balanced Budget Amendment?

- Each year since Sen. Hagan took office the Social Security Trustees have urged Congress to act in a timely manner in passing reforms to the program.  They've included that urging in the conclusion section of their annual Trustee Trust Fund report every year beginning in at least 2005.  Yet Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is on record saying he won't allow the Senate to consider reforms until 2031 (2011 + 20 years).  With the WH OMB's projections for the next 10 years showing that Social Security Outlays will exceed Social Security Payroll Tax Receipts by $2.1 trillion, what is Sen. Hagan's position on Social Security reforms and how would she keep it solvent for future years?

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/03/28/Hands-Off-Social-Security-Harry-Reid
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/tr/2014/index.html
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/tr/2005/index.html

Aren't these the questions that Sen. Hagan should be asked to answer in their third debate?  But I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

"If it's not broken, don't fix it."

I was listening to my local radio station which carries news by Fox News.  They had a piece on the LA Senate race with comments from two voters.  One of them said he had made up his mind and his decision was based on the saying "If it's not broken, don't fix it."  That seems to mean he thinks two things:

1. That he has a Senator who is voting on his behalf.
2. He will be supporting Sen. Landrieu.

After hearing that, I couldn't help but wonder what it would take for him to think things were broken? I also wondered what kind of race the Republicans are running.  After all, just a few of the things that someone might think are broken include:

- The national debt is approaching $18 trillion and there is no sign of a balanced budget coming soon.
- Senate Democrats refused to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment in the 112th session.
- The Social Security Disability Trust Fund is scheduled to run out of money in 2016.
- Democrats are waging a "war" on fossil fuels.
- Obamacare has driven up the cost of healthcare for millions of families.
- Millions of more families were kicked off their health insurance plans after Obamacare took effect.

While this is just a small list of the things that are "broken", it seems like there is enough there to make anyone wonder.  Senate Democrats haven't been helping solve these problems. 

So voting for a Democrat for the Senate won't help, no matter how nice they are or how conservative they act.

I wish I could have a few minutes of that voter's time to share some thoughts on this with him!