Dems trot out the ERA once again -- so what?

(Courtesy of equalrepresentation.org)

The Democrats' answer to the Supreme Court decision denying a class action suit by women against Wallmart was to re-introduce the ERA. I have to say, "So what?"

The ERA has been introduced in every Congress since 1923. We are reminded that the Dems have had many chances since then when holding majorities to make something happen, like 2009-2010 for example. Every year it is the same ol' same 'ol -- a PR push, photo ops, and then silence.

I love Rep. Carolyn Maloney, but her list of co-sponsors has grown shorter and shorter over the years. And Senator Edward Kennedy did mostly nothing each time he filed the companion startover bill now picked up by Senator Robert Menendez. Last year we were told that all the energy was sucked up by health care. There is always some excuse.

Why doesn't everyone get behind Rep. Tammy Baldwin's bill to lift the deadline set in 1977 allowing only five more years for 3 more states to ratify. Some states that did not ratify by 1982 -- like Illinois (May 2003, when Barack Obama was a State Senator), Florida (2003-11), Arkansas, Missouri -- have been trying in recent years with nothing to show for it. How difficult would it be to pass a bill in Congress now and start over?

Word on the Hill is that the 3-state approach won't fly legally -- but with the precedent of the Madison Amendment (passed more than 200 years later) it's worth a try and would certainly fire up the conversation!

Do the Dems really want a conversation about Equal Rights for women? Or will the next months be all about re-electing Barack Obama...

The Democrats -- even without a Majority, but with potential GOP allies doing what's right if there is ever a vote -- need to put their money where their mouths are. But don't hold your breath...They don't put their money where their mouths are to elect more women to Congress either.