Rob Andrews

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased at this time to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), a strong voice for civil liberties.

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of our time. Madam Speaker, Lilly Ledbetter won an award for being the best at her job in her company. She was woefully underpaid compared to the men along whom's side she worked doing the same job. She said that she was underpaid because she was a woman, the employer said she was underpaid because she wasn't as good at her job. So they both went before a jury of their peers in Alabama, and the jury unanimously decided that Ms. Ledbetter was right and the employer was wrong, and they decided that she should be financially compensated for that wrong. But then she got an unwelcome surprise, that because she hadn't acted at precisely the right moment, because she hadn't acted against a wrong she did not know existed yet, because she did not have the power of a stance, she could not file her claim. The Supreme Court, with all due respect, turned this law into a trap and a game. Today, we are recorrecting that law, restoring the notion that when a woman goes to work in this country, she should be compensated on how good she is at her job, not her gender. Vote ``yes'' on this bill.

Mr. ANDREWS. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a member of the Rules Committee, the gentlelady from Ohio (Ms. Sutton).

Mr. ANDREWS. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am pleased at this point to yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Woolsey) in favor of this restoration of 40 years of civil rights legislation.

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield at this time 2 minutes to one of the civil rights champions of this Congress, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield at this time 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlelady from Chicago (Ms. Schakowsky) who is the Democratic leader of the bipartisan Women's Caucus in the House.

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased at this time to yield to the majority leader of the House of Representatives, who will lead us to reverse this unfortunate Court decision today, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) for 1 minute.

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a strong and consistent voice for the rights of all people in this Congress, the gentlelady from California (Mrs. Capps).

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield, at this time, 1 minute to the gentlelady from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono) who truly understands what's wrong with the situation where you get paid based on your gender.

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, it is my distinct and humble privilege to yield 1 minute to a person of great strength and dignity and leadership, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the gentlelady from California.

Mr. ANDREWS. Madam Speaker, I thank my chairman for yielding. I wanted to clear up what I think were three inaccuracies in my friend from Minnesota's statement about the bill. First of all, this bill will not extend an endless statute of limitations. It restores the statute of limitations the law recognized until the ill-considered Ledbetter decision. It essentially says you have 180 days after each paycheck to make your claim. If you don't make your claim, your claim expires. It doesn't extend the statute beyond that. Second, with respect to pensions, the bill makes it clear in the ``findings'' section that the same law that applied to pensions is not touched by this bill at all. The courts have generally recognized that when the pension structure is put in place and the person gets their pension, the clock starts running, and if the time expires after that, your ability to make the claim expires after that. Finally, with respect to the point that is made about people who never worked for the employer being able to sue, I think that is simply not an accurate statement. What is true is if someone suffers discrimination and their estate is owed money for what they would have earned when they were working, the estate is absolutely entitled to recover that sum of money because the man or woman who died would have recovered that. So this is a good bill. There was an extensive hearing on this issue previously. I would urge the House to do the right thing and adopt this bill. It should not become the law of the land that if you're an employer and can hide discrimination for 180 days you get away with it. If the Ledbetter decision stands, that's what the law is. Let's change that law and adopt this bill.

Mr. ANDREWS

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York City (Mrs. Maloney), a strong advocate of women's rights.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, and I would like to address several of the arguments that we have heard against it, first, that this is some bonanza for trial lawyers. What this is is an opportunity for women who have been discriminated against to get a lawyer. If you work as a sales clerk or in a factory, you can't afford to pay a lawyer the hourly fee that he or she needs to represent you. The only way you are going to get represented is through a contingent fee arrangement where a lawyer would recover, would get to keep part of what you recover as part of the deal. Now, the problem with the Equal Pay Act is its remedies are limited so much to just twice what your salary is that the damages are never high enough to justify legal representation. This is about getting lawyers for people who have a valid claim who cannot afford the thousands of dollars that it would be. Second, there was a representation made that defenses are stripped from employers. That's not accurate. What is accurate is that if an employer alleges that some reason other than gender was the reason that he paid the woman less than the man, it has to be a legitimate reason, like level of education or experience. It has to be a legitimate reason. The present law doesn't require that legitimacy. Finally, the statement was made that an employer cannot discharge an employee for talking about pay scales publicly, that's not accurate. What the law does is to say that it protects employees that are custodians and guardians of pay records. But it certainly doesn't restrict in any way an employer's right to enforce a legitimate and realistic company policy. This is a good bill. It's an excellent proposal that will help lift the economic status of women who work very hard, every day, in some cases 7 days a week, and deserve it. I would urge a ``yes'' vote.

Mr. ANDREWS. If the Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil suit against one of the people accused in the Wall Street wrongdoing, and there was a proposal on this floor that said the SEC can spend as much money as it wants to on its side of the case, but the Wall Street defendants accused of the wrongdoing are capped on how much they can spend on their legal defenses, I think the Members in the minority would say that's unfair. It is. So is this. To interfere in how much lawyers are paid is a matter the judges should take a look at under this law. It's not something this Congress should interfere with. And it frankly, I believe, is a diversionary tactic to take us away from the real purpose of this law, and that's a woman that is selling real estate or teaching school or sweeping floors should make, penny for penny, dollar for dollar, everything a man makes to do the same job. That is the issue before the House. Let's defeat this diversionary amendment. Let's pass the underlying bill and bring long-awaited justice to American women.

Mr. ANDREWS. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 1 minute to the very hardworking gentlelady from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter).

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey, a member of the committee who has worked very diligently on this issue, Mr. Holt.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentlelady who really makes the trains run on time around here, the Chair of the Rules Committee, Ms. Slaughter from New York.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen), a strong advocate for his constituents.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, that is correct. The only remaining speaker is our chairman.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of our time. I want to thank my friend and colleague, Rosa DeLauro, for her hard work on this. And this is the bill that is for the women who are office managers who are being underpaid for the men who are being called executive vice presidents. This is the bill for the women who do the work, make the decisions, shoulder the responsibility but don't get the pay. Now, that's been illegal for 46 years, but that remedy has been wholly ineffective until this bill came along. You couldn't get represented by a lawyer, under the present law, because your damages couldn't be enough because of the cap that were put on damages. We live in a world where women do the work, take the responsibility, shoulder the burden, but do not get the compensation. This makes the promise of the Equal Pay Act a reality for working women around this country. I'm proud that in the 19 years she's served in this body, the author of this bill has fought for this bill; and I say to her, to you, Mr. Speaker, and Americans all over this country, it will become law because of what we're about to do here today.

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield at this time 1 minute to a life-long fighter against discrimination, the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the very principled and articulate gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards).

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a wise and strong voice for the rights of our country, the gentleman from Chicago (Mr. Davis).

Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), who speaks with great authority for constituents and her beliefs. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)