The House : Comparable Worth

By a vote of 259 for and 192 against, the House passed a bill (HR 5680) authorizing a study of the federal work force to determine whether women, as a result of sex discrimination, are being paid less than men for similar work.

The “comparable worth” legislation, which has become a major issues for feminists, was sent to the Senate.

Supporter Benjamin Gilman (D-New York) said, “It is time for the largest employer in the nation--the federal government--to examine any discrimination . . . in its own structure.”

Opponent Dan Lungren (R-Long Beach) said the study would invite lawsuits having “a very severe impact on that person rarely talked about here, the lowly taxpayer.”

Members voting yes wanted a comprehensive study of pay equity in the federal work force.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Dreier (R) x Rep. Martinez (D) x Rep. Moorhead (R) x Rep. Roybal (D) x Rep. Torres (D) x

Military Medical Malpractice

The House passed, 317 for and 90 against, and sent to the Senate a bill (HR 3174) enabling members of the armed services to sue for medical or dental malpractice that occurs in a stationary hospital or clinic.

The bill nullifies a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that active duty personnel lack standing to sue military doctors for malpractice.

Sponsor Dan Glickman (D-Kan.) noted that the government can be sued for malpractice by a wide range of civilians, including penitentiary inmates and military dependents and retirees.

Opponent Roy Rowland (D-Ga.) complained that the bill “potentially adds thousands of cases to an already overburdened civil court system” and makes no attempt to upgrade the quality of military medicine.

Members voting yes wanted active duty personnel to be able to sue military doctors for malpractice.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Dreier (R) x Rep. Martinez (D) x Rep. Moorhead (R) x Rep. Roybal (D) x Rep. Torres (D) x

Textile Import Restrictions

By a vote of 262 for and 159 against, the House passed and sent to conference with the Senate a bill (HR 1562) using tariffs and other protectionist devices to force deep cuts in textile and clothing imports from Asian nations.

Supporters said the legislation was needed to safeguard hundreds of thousands of jobs in the United States against the ravages of unfair foreign competition, while opponents said it was wrong for Congress to protect inefficient industries and invite retaliation against American exports.

Members voting yes wanted to protect the American textile and apparel industries against imports.

How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Dreier (R) x Rep. Martinez (D) x Rep. Moorhead (R) x Rep. Roybal (D) x Rep. Torres (D) x