American Forum Op-Ed

MISSOURI FORUM

By: Bailey Parrish

My name is Bailey Parrish. A 23-year old-employee of a Catholic hospital, I grew up in Ozark, Mo., and moved to Springfield, Mo., to study psychology, biomedical science and religious studies at Missouri State University. When I was 20, I was hired on as a nurse's aide. It's hard, unglamorous and underpaid work, but together with nurses, doctors, social workers, housekeeping and administration, we take care of our patients. We also take care of each other.

I will continue to work with what has become my family until I move to Washington, D.C., in the fall to study public health promotion. This will be a happy move because my education will allow me to reach more people, but it will be sad because I will be leaving the mothers, grandmothers, sisters and brothers that have changed me for the better.

The Obama administration recently made a decision to protect affordable access to birth control. Now, millions of women including those in my surrogate family, who are employed at religiously affiliated hospitals or universities, will receive the same health and economic benefits as everyone else. These are benefits we need.

When I first started, I didn't care about being an active contributor to the system or becoming a better person; I needed a job. But like any good first job, my experiences there have taught me the value of discipline, the power of a positive attitude and ,most importantly, love and tolerance for others whatever their personal differences.

When on the clock, I understand that I am not there to form opinions about people, and I am not there to inform others. I may not refuse to provide a service that medical science has proved to help others because of how it makes me feel, or how I feel about the one giving me the order, or sometimes even what I know to be true. Although ministry is a valuable ideal, the organization I work for is primarily focused on providing medical care for all who need it by employing people capable of providing it.

That is all that this provision, which has received so much media attention, is trying to do: provide care. By making birth control available and affordable for all, it gives women and families choices.

Others would have you believe that this provision tramples on religious choices of institutions. What they fail to mention is that the original compromise on this policy gave churches and houses of worship the freedom to opt out of this policy. Approximately 335,000 are exempted.

Recently, President Obama went even further, making special accommodations for religious employers like mine who operate like any other employer in terms of employees and people served. These include huge hospitals and universities, which have a primarily secular purpose and hire thousands of people based on secular criteria. The new policy says religious organizations will be allowed to deny contraceptive coverage should they choose. Importantly, though, the president clarified that insurance companies will offer contraceptive coverage to those employees with no additional burden or cost. If you have been told differently, that person was either misinformed or lying.

America values religious freedom because it values personal freedom -- not the other way around. Employers also must respect personal freedom, something on which conservatives and progressives can agree.

People will always disagree. But when we make policy decisions, we need to stick to the facts.
* Women of all faiths use birth control. Catholics do so in the same proportion as other women.
* Birth control allows women to plan their families and have healthier pregnancies. This means more healthy mothers and children.
* A majority of the American public supports this new policy.

Sometimes on our quest to serve God, we see only potential threats to His world. We forget that He is also about tolerance and choices. This provision will not force anyone to consume or provide birth control; it only makes it affordable for all.
--------------------------
Parrish works at a Catholic hospital as a Nurse's Aide. She is a recent graduate of Missouri State University in Springfield, MO, and will be attending George Washington University in the Fall to pursue her masters degree.

© Missouri Forum. 2/12.

AMERICAN FORUM

By Patricia West

As a Pennsylvania social worker specializing in family dynamics, I’ve spent most of my 40 year career analyzing and trying out various ways to keep women healthy and safe. This month [June 7] we celebrate the anniversary of a breakthrough in that process: the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut Supreme Court decision that legalized contraceptive use for married couples—and more importantly, recognized an individual’s right to privacy in family planning matters.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently recognized family planning as one of the ten great public health advances of the 20th century. At clinics and centers that provide family planning, the complications of pregnancy that are a woman’s most common source of ill health can be prevented or treated. And our national family planning program – Title X of the Public Health Service Act of 1970 – made family planning available to low-income people as well as the rich. As a result, some 98 percent of us have used birth control at some point in our lives, and we mostly take it for granted.

We shouldn’t. The House voted recently to defund Title X completely for fiscal 2011. The Senate saved the program, but another attempt to kill it is certain this year. The attackers are using innuendo and misinformation to entangle family planning in their anti-abortion war, claiming to cut spending but ignoring the truth: Title X, the only dedicated source of federal funding for family planning services, saves the government some $3.4 billion every year by preventing unintended pregnancies, nearly half of which would likely end in abortion.

In Pennsylvania, for example, the state’s 234 Title X centers served 287,200 clients in 2008, providing not just contraceptives but also essential preventive care: pelvic exams and Pap tests; pregnancy testing; screening for high blood pressure, anemia, diabetes and cervical and breast cancer, and for sexually transmitted infections including HIV; basic infertility services; health education; and referrals for other health and social services. This care helped
Pennsylvania women avoid 59,700 unintended pregnancies, which likely would have resulted in 26,500 births and 24.900 abortions. That saved the state $183.5 million in Medicaid spending, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

At the moment, unintended pregnancy costs U.S. taxpayers about $11 billion a year, according to new Guttmacher research. Without publicly funded family planning services, these costs would be 60 percent higher. Nationwide, Title X funds 89 nonprofit grantees who operate more than 4,500 sites. Most are county and local health departments; the rest are hospitals, family planning councils and other private nonprofit agencies.

Seventeen million people need some assistance to get the kind of care these centers provide, but today Title X is funded to cover just over five million of those in need. Some 70 percent of them have incomes at or below the federal poverty level of $10,830 per year. They live paycheck to paycheck, and the Pennsylvania women I have worked with know what that is like. Six in ten women who get care from Title X
consider it their usual source of health care, and for many it is their only source.

Every dollar invested in publicly funded family planning averts nearly $4 in Medicaid costs. It only makes sense that the Obama administration should include contraceptives in the women’s health preventive services benefits under the Affordable Care Act.

Title X, in short, is essential to preventing unintended pregnancies and improving public health while saving taxpayers billions of dollars every year. Family planning gives a woman options for her life beyond childbearing. If she wants two children – as most American women do – she will be able to pick the five years she will be pregnant and bearing her children, confident that contraceptives are available to her for the 30 years she will spend avoiding pregnancy.

This is a life-changing freedom. In the coming Pennsylvania and national spending battles, Title X must be recognized for what it has always been: a fundamental part of American life that can and must be preserved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
West lives in Philadelphia and is a member of the Women Donors Network. She is a public health social worker and user of “the pill” from 1959 through 1970.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2011 by American Forum. 6/11

AMERICAN FORUM

By Clare Coleman

If you’re an average woman, you want two children, according to various surveys. That means you’ll spend about five years of your life trying to become pregnant, being pregnant or recovering from pregnancy, and 30 years trying to avoid it.

You can do that thanks to the June 1965 landmark Supreme Court decision Griswold v. Connecticut, which affirmed the right of married couples to use contraceptives -- and more importantly, recognized an individual's right to privacy in family planning matters. Universal usage and acceptance of contraceptives followed, transforming the lives of millions of Americans.

The Griswold case was a catalyst for our national family planning program -- Title X of the Public Health Service Act -- the only dedicated source of federal funding for family planning services. Created in 1970, Title X provides access to family planning for all, without regard to economic circumstances.

Today, contraceptives are an important part of family life in America -- so much so that 98 percent of us have used birth control at some point in our lives, and we mostly take it for granted.

We shouldn’t. During the recent battle in Congress over funding the government, the House of Representatives voted to eliminate Title X. Opponents of family planning used a mixture of misinformation and innuendo to entangle family planning in their anti-abortion war, ignoring the fact that Title X saves the government some $3.4 billion every year by preventing unintended pregnancies, nearly half of which would likely have ended in abortion. The Senate saved the program, but another attempt to kill Title X is certain this year. When it comes, Americans must recognize that access to basic primary and preventive care is being threatened.

Title X funds 4,500 nonprofit- and government-run sites nationwide: most are county and local health departments. The rest are hospitals, family planning councils and other private nonprofit agencies. These agencies are required to provide preventive and primary health care services including pelvic exams and Pap tests; pregnancy testing; screening for high blood pressure, anemia, diabetes and cervical and breast cancer, and for sexually transmitted infections including HIV; basic infertility services; health education; and referrals for other health and social services -- as well as contraceptives and counseling about them.

These are the facts of life: According to new Guttmacher Institute research, unintended pregnancy costs U.S. taxpayers approximately $11 billion a year. Without publicly funded family planning services, these costs would be 60 percent higher. In 2008, services at Title X centers helped prevent 973,000 unintended pregnancies that would likely have resulted in 432,600 births and 406,200 abortions. The centers also performed 2.2 million Pap tests, 5.9 million STI tests and a million confidential HIV tests in 2009 alone.

Seventeen million people need some assistance in order to get this important care, but today, Title X is funded to cover just over five million of those in need. There are always more patients than subsidies. Seventy percent of the individuals seen at Title X-funded health centers have incomes at or below the federal poverty level -- meaning they earn less than $10,830 per year. Many of them are working young adults, living paycheck to paycheck. They count down the days until they get paid and are just one unexpected problem from disaster -- if the car engine light comes on; the childcare center raises its fees; or their hours are cut.

Six in ten women who get care from Title X consider it their usual source of health care, and for many it is their only source. Patients under the federal poverty level receive services at no cost to them; those who make over $10,830 a year are provided services on a sliding fee scale according to income.

Although no patient is turned away because of an inability to pay, Title X actually saves money for the government. Every dollar invested in publicly funded family planning averts nearly $4 in Medicaid costs. Given its proven effectiveness, it only makes sense that the Obama administration should include contraceptives in the women’s health preventive services benefit under the Affordable Care Act.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has cited family planning as one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century, and Title X funding is essential to our effort to prevent unintended pregnancies and improve public health while saving taxpayers billions of dollars a year.

As the states struggle with growing budget shortfalls, continued funding for Title X should be recognized for what it is: an essential part of America’s health care system.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coleman is president and CEO of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health
Association.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2011 by the American Forum. 5/11

AMERICAN FORUM

By Clare Coleman

If you’re an average woman, you want two children, according to various surveys. That
means you’ll spend about five years of your life trying to become pregnant, being pregnant or
recovering from pregnancy, and 30 years trying to avoid it.

You can do that thanks to the June 1965 landmark Supreme Court decision Griswold v.
Connecticut, which affirmed the right of married couples to use contraceptives -- and more
importantly, recognized an individual's right to privacy in family planning matters. Universal
usage and acceptance of contraceptives followed, transforming the lives of millions of
Americans.

The Griswold case was a catalyst for our national family planning program -- Title X of the Public
Health Service Act -- the only dedicated source of federal funding for family planning services.
Created in 1970, Title X provides access to family planning for all, without regard to economic
circumstances.

Today, contraceptives are an important part of family life in America -- so much so that 98
percent of us have used birth control at some point in our lives, and we mostly take it for
granted.

We shouldn’t. During the recent battle in Congress over funding the government, the House
of Representatives voted to eliminate Title X. Opponents of family planning used a mixture
of misinformation and innuendo to entangle family planning in their anti-abortion war,
ignoring the fact that Title X saves the government some $3.4 billion every year by preventing
unintended pregnancies, nearly half of which would likely have ended in abortion. The Senate
saved the program, but another attempt to kill Title X is certain this year. When it comes,
Americans must recognize that access to basic primary and preventive care is being threatened.

Title X funds 4,500 nonprofit- and government-run sites nationwide: most are county and local
health departments. The rest are hospitals, family planning councils and other private nonprofit
agencies. These agencies are required to provide preventive and primary health care services
including pelvic exams and Pap tests; pregnancy testing; screening for high blood pressure,
anemia, diabetes and cervical and breast cancer, and for sexually transmitted infections
including HIV; basic infertility services; health education; and referrals for other health and
social services -- as well as contraceptives and counseling about them.

These are the facts of life: According to new Guttmacher Institute research, unintended
pregnancy costs U.S. taxpayers approximately $11 billion a year. Without publicly funded family
planning services, these costs would be 60 percent higher. In 2008, services at Title X centers
helped prevent 973,000 unintended pregnancies that would likely have resulted in 432,600
births and 406,200 abortions. The centers also performed 2.2 million Pap tests, 5.9 million STI
tests and a million confidential HIV tests in 2009 alone.

Seventeen million people need some assistance in order to get this important care, but today,
Title X is funded to cover just over five million of those in need. There are always more patients
than subsidies. Seventy percent of the individuals seen at Title X-funded health centers have
incomes at or below the federal poverty level -- meaning they earn less than $10,830 per year.
Many of them are working young adults, living paycheck to paycheck. They count down the
days until they get paid and are just one unexpected problem from disaster -- if the car engine
light comes on; the childcare center raises its fees; or their hours are cut.

Six in ten women who get care from Title X consider it their usual source of health care, and
for many it is their only source. Patients under the federal poverty level receive services at no
cost to them; those who make over $10,830 a year are provided services on a sliding fee scale
according to income.

Although no patient is turned away because of an inability to pay, Title X actually saves money
for the government. Every dollar invested in publicly funded family planning averts nearly
$4 in Medicaid costs. Given its proven effectiveness, it only makes sense that the Obama
administration should include contraceptives in the women’s health preventive services benefit
under the Affordable Care Act.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has cited family planning as one of the 10 great
public health achievements of the 20th century, and Title X funding is essential to our effort to
prevent unintended pregnancies and improve public health while saving taxpayers billions of
dollars a year.

As the states struggle with growing budget shortfalls, continued funding for Title X should be
recognized for what it is: an essential part of America’s health care system.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coleman is president and CEO of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health
Association.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2011 by the American Forum. 5/11

AMERICAN FORUM

By Mahnaz Afkhami

A new day has dawned in Egypt. The dictator has been brought down. Euphoria is in the air. How will women fare as euphoria yields to reality?

During the past several days, I have kept in touch with our partners in Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries. They all agree that Egypt forecasts their destiny. They are enthusiastic and their exuberance is contagious.

Having lived through Iran’s 1979 revolution that dashed the hopes of millions, I was skeptical about Egypt’s prospects for a peaceful transition to participatory democracy. And I know revolutions are heady experiences, especially for the young, and especially for young women in repressive Middle Eastern countries. The Cairo air now shimmers with possibility, just as the air of Tehran once did.

Iran’s new regime proved far worse than the old regime, especially for women. What now in Egypt? Enas El Shafei, who leads our partner organization in Egypt, was optimistic, proud that the world hears voices of the Egyptian people for the first time in a generation. She was encouraged by people forming groups to clean and police their communities, to help each other and to provide services. Women, she said, are everywhere in the front ranks of protesters.

"This is about the Egyptian people -- not Christians, Muslims, men or women," she said. And she’s right. This is a popular revolution against autocracy and a desire for justice and dignity.

Other factors also suggest a better outcome. Egypt's opposition is not led by a charismatic and despotic personality with an unshakeable belief that he has a mandate from the Almighty. Second, Iran’s example is a caution to many Egyptians pressing for change. And finally, Egyptian women are fully engaged. “They are the police, they are the doctors -- they do everything,” Enas said. “Tahrir Square might be the media center, but transformation is occurring everywhere.”

Now that the transition is underway, the challenge ahead is to keep women’s rights on the reformers’ agenda. We must keep reminding the negotiators that democracy requires it.

Our Egyptian partner organization, Forum for Women in Development, has been working for a decade to introduce a culture of democracy at the grass-roots level. Democracy is both process and mindset, so our partners have tried quietly to lay the foundation for a culture of tolerance and consensus-building. They press for legislative change because new laws in one Muslim country can bolster arguments for change in others. They show, for example, that laws limiting women’s role in
decisions that govern their lives are in conflict with constitutions that give lip service to equality, as they are with the provisions of the international treaty on women’s rights known as CEDAW, which all area governments except Sudan and Iran have ratified. They have pointed out discrepancies among schools of Islam on the role of women, showing that it is not God's will but society that dictates how women are treated.

They’ve made considerable headway. Tunisia was prodded into eliminating the “reservations” it had placed on its terms for CEDAW ratification. Moroccans have reformed land ownership and family laws that govern women's right to marriage, divorce, work, travel, and child custody. Jordan now requires that 20 percent of political candidates be women. Lebanese women just gained rights for women citizens married to non-Lebanese men, and most countries now have women in cabinets and parliaments, albeit in low percentages.

But today in Cairo, the danger is that reformers will repeat Iran’s mistake and postpone women’s rights issues until “things settle down.” Although women have often participated in demonstrations, faced danger and given full support to opposition movements, they’ve held back on voicing their own aspirations and needs, convinced by movement leaders that somehow their demands were impractical at the moment, or of secondary importance. They accepted assurances that once success was achieved, their rights would be honored.

In Iran and elsewhere, that didn’t happen. Unless women are involved at every step – not just in organizing demonstrations but in shaping opposition demands and strategies, and especially in negotiations that determine the politics of the future – the result will bear no resemblance to the moderate, democratic society that everyone wants. Egyptian women must insist on being part of the political process. They must insist that the issue of women’s rights be on the agenda of every transition discussion.

Like drops of water, if we are persistent, we can bore into rock, uniting into rivulets and then rivers of change on behalf of women and everyone else.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afkhami is founding president of Women's Learning Partnership (WLP), a coalition of 20 organizations, mostly in Muslim-majority countries, that focuses on empowerment of women and democratic leadership. She was also the former Minister of Women’s Affairs in Iran.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AMERICAN FORUM

By Jennifer S. Smith, Ph.D., M.P.H.

Kristen Forbes of Noblesville, Indiana, had recently graduated from college when she was diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer at age 22. After a yearlong, painful battle, she succumbed to the disease, leaving behind a bright future and grieving family members and friends.

Like most of the 4,000 women in the United States who die of cervical cancer each year, Kristen’s death was preventable. We now have the medical know-how and the tools to stamp out this major cancer once and for all. What we need now, as our country honors National Cervical Cancer Awareness Month this January, is the will among members of the public health community – government officials and policymakers, medical professionals, insurers, women and others – to make it happen.

Cervical cancer used to be the leading cause of death for women in the U.S. With widespread use of Pap test screening in the last 50 years, cervical cancer rates have declined significantly, but have leveled to about 12,000 cases each year. This disease should be relatively easy to prevent. We know it’s caused by the human papillomavirus, or HPV, a common sexually transmitted infection. Most HPV infections go away on their own, but persistent HPV infections can lead to cell changes that can progress to cervical cancer. Fortunately, with proper treatment, the disease can usually be stopped before cancer develops.

The HPV vaccine is now available and prevents infection from the two types of HPV that are responsible for 70 percent of all cervical cancers. We have an established screening tool – the Pap test – that identifies cell changes that can signal cervical disease or cancer. We also have newer technology – the HPV test – to help identify women who are at increased risk.

So how can we make sure no more women die of cervical cancer?

First, we need to increase HPV vaccination rates. The HPV vaccine is recommended for routine administration in girls ages 11 and 12, with a “catch up” provision for those up to age 26. Studies show, though, that less than one in two young adolescent girls has received it.

We also need to increase screening rates. At least half of all cervical cancer deaths are due to a lack of screening. Yet about 25 percent of women in the U.S. have not been screened in the past three years. Importantly, women who have been vaccinated still need to be screened to protect against HPV types not targeted by the vaccine.

Also, while the Pap test has led to a dramatic decrease in cervical cancer in the U.S., about one third of cervical cancer deaths are caused by screening errors with the Pap test, a problem that more sensitive HPV DNA testing could address. The HPV test is available, in conjunction with a Pap test, for women ages 30 and older.

Most importantly, we need to make cervical cancer prevention a top national health priority. Public health officials and policymakers should support--and fund--programs to educate women about this disease and enable them to access prevention and treatment services. Medical professionals should educate their patients and provide these services, and insurers should pay for them. Women must take charge of their health and get screened and ensure that their adolescent daughters get vaccinated. All of these groups’ efforts must be coordinated for maximum efficiency and impact.

The elimination of cervical cancer is an eminently achievable goal. To achieve this vision, a new program – Cervical Cancer-Free America (www.cervicalcancerfreeamerica.org) – is driving state and local prevention programs, and ensuring that successful strategies are shared among the states. The initiative is led by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s Gillings School of Global Public Health.

Since the initiative’s launch last year, six states – Alabama, California, Indiana, Kentucky, North Carolina and Texas – have already joined the effort to become “cervical cancer-free.” Major universities and other public health experts are leading the charge in each state, supported by government and other leaders.

The movement to eradicate cervical cancer is gaining momentum in our country. But there is more work to be done. Let’s join hands and work together to ensure that no more women like Kristen Forbes lose their lives to this preventable disease.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smith is director of Cervical Cancer-Free America.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2011 by the American Forum. 1/11

Riane Eisler

AMERICAN FORUM

By Riane Eisler and Kimberly Otis

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia just asserted for a second time that our Constitution does not protect women against discrimination. That was one of the arguments for passing the proposed Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)., and ironically, people of Scalia’s “conservative” persuasion often countered that the ERA was not needed precisely because women are already protected by the 14th Amendment.

Kimberley Otis

Indeed, many Supreme Court cases have invoked the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to strike down laws that blatantly discriminate on the basis of gender. But now we’re told that these cases for four decades were wrong because the Constitution was never intended to protect women. And that’s true if we only look at original intent. The focus of the framers of the Constitution was to protect the life, liberty, and property of white men who owned substantial property. And the focus of the 14th Amendment was implicitly on African-American males.

Of course, the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause uses the term “person,” and in this 21st century it’s bizarre that a jurist would think “person” does not include members of the female half of humanity.

Even more bizarre, in light of the fact that the Constitution was certainly not intended to protect corporations, is that last year Justice Scalia saw nothing wrong in voting that the Constitution gives corporate executives the right to use corporate funds to anonymously make massive donations to elect representatives who favor their financial interests.

But bizarre or not, Mr. Scalia is a Supreme Court Justice, a man with enormous power. And if in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission he and four like-minded men could throw out key provisions of campaign finance laws dating back to

1907 plus two of the high court's own decisions from 1990 and 2003, we must take notice when such a man asserts that women are not constitutionally protected.

Which brings us back to the Equal Rights Amendment, that would clearly add women to the “persons” protected by the Constitution and that failed by only a slim margin in the Reagan era. It passed Congress and was ratified by 35 of the needed 38 states.

Given the current reactionary political climate, it may be argued that getting the ERA through now will be a tough uphill fight. But it’s precisely because of this climate that we must have it.

There are a number of initiatives on the table to finally enact this simple amendment that reads, “equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”

Here are some active websites and links where you can learn more about what you can do to pass the ERA http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/; http://www.eracampaign.net/; http://www.now.org/news/blogs/index.php/sayit/2010/08/20/era-suffrage-collins. You can also find new mobilizations on Facebook and Twitter by searching on ERA.

The time is now. The equality of rights of women -- half our population and our workforce -- must be enshrined in the Constitution once and for all.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eisler is the author of “The Equal Handbook: What ERA Means for Your Life, Your Rights, and the Future,” “The Chalice and The Blade,” and “The Real Wealth of Nations. Otis is an advocate and former executive director of the National Council of Women’s Organizations and The Sister Fund.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2011 by the American Forum. 1/11

AMERICAN FORUM

By: Linda Meric

The much heralded and hotly contested mid-term elections are done. The ballot questions have been decided and the candidates are either grateful because they pulled out a win or gloomy because they didn’t. Either way, it’s time to move on.

It’s time now to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act.

Women have been waiting for a very long time. Frankly, we’ve grown impatient. The moment is here. The U.S. Senate must pass the Paycheck Fairness Act, for the women of today, and for the women of tomorrow.

Since the Equal Pay Act was signed in 1963, the wage gap has been closing at a snail’s pace. In 1963, women who worked in full-time, year-round, jobs made 59 cents on average for every dollar earned by men. In 2009, women earned 77 cents to men's dollar. The wage gap has narrowed by less than half a cent per year. For women of color, the gap is even wider, with African American women and Latinas earning only 61 cents and 52 cents, respectively, on the dollar.

The pay gap is evident in almost every occupational category, in every income bracket; it’s a constant despite education, despite experience. Although enforcement of the Equal Pay Act and other civil rights laws has helped narrow the gap, it’s critical that the significant disparities in pay that remain be addressed. The Paycheck Fairness Act will be an important step to help end those disparities. It must be passed, for the women of today, and for the women of tomorrow.

Consider LaTerrell. She lives in Denver and works in the financial services industry. At one time, she worked as part of a team of three women. Then, Peter, the first male in the department, was hired. He was hired for the exact same job, only Peter didn’t have the same qualifications or the same experience. He didn’t have the same salary either. He was to be paid more. A supervisor discovered it, and the company decided to give all three women a raise to match Peter’s salary. Luckily, someone was paying attention and took action.

But women deal with unequal pay and inequitable salary ladders in all too many professions; something must be done to end it - for the women of today, and for the women of tomorrow. That something is passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act.

The Paycheck Fairness Act (S. 3772) is comprehensive legislation that updates the Equal Pay Act of 1963, strengthens penalties courts may impose for violations of existing equal pay laws, prohibits retaliation against workers who inquire about or share wage information, and empowers women to better negotiate for equal pay.

According to the National Women’s Law Center, the pay gap is about much more than fairness, it’s about women's and families' bottom-lines; the gap represents $10,622 a year. With that, you could buy a year’s worth of groceries ($3,210), arrange for three months of child care ($1,748), pay three months of rent and utilities ($2,265) six months of health insurance ($1,697), cover six months on a student loan ($1,602) -- and buy three full tanks of gas ($100)!

Our U.S. Senate must consider how the pay gap places families of today in jeopardy; at risk, especially in these tough economic times.

But if that doesn’t do it, maybe they should consider something else.

They should think about their own daughters, their granddaughters, great-granddaughters. They should think about how they prize them, how they love them, how they treasure them, how they would fight for them. Are they really worth less?

The answer should then be obvious: Pass the Paycheck Fairness Act now, without amendments, in this session. For the good of all women - women of today and of tomorrow - and for the good of our country, it’s the right thing to do.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meric is Executive Director of 9to5, National Association of Working Women
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by American Forum. 11/10

AMERICAN FORUM

By Geena Davis

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Davis is an Academy-Award winning actor and Founder of See Jane and The Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media. www.seejane.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright (C) 2010 by American Forum 4/10