Why do human rights so often lose out to fears of “excessive litigation” in the small business – or any business community? This fearmongering was used today, again, to prevent extending civil rights – via equal pay for women, and to legalize the violation of those rights. Read more here about how the US Senate failed to pass a motion for cloture (and allow debate) on the Paycheck Fairness Act.
For me, the real underlying question is: Why doesn’t the logic that if the businesses were doing what is proper in the first place, there’d be no need for the law in the first place govern the way businesses function?
That, I can answer: because it’s more profitable for it not to govern. And so long as business gets priority in the minds of enough legislators, they can keep on violating the civil rights involved and will not be taken to task for a slack conscience. God forbid anyone be called on to do the right thing lest it interfere with – dare I say – BUSINESS.
This is not rocket science. We have regulations and laws like these because people seeking profit cannot always be trusted to do anything other than what is best for their profit ambitions. We have seen this over and over again, and in recent and past history. The gall of ignoring what it takes to have a civil society and treat each other civilly on all levels is beyond disappointing and depressing.
If you want to learn more about the boilerplate and fearmongering use of the “excessive litigation” excuse, start here. Shame on the women Republican senators (Snowe, Collins and Hutchison) in particular who voted for the Lilly Ledbetter Act but could only mutter this lame talking point excuse against cloture.