Republicans’ Attack on the White House Proves Obama’s Point

The administration’s transparency means critics can shame them for any gender-related discrepancies in pay. And that’s a good thing.

National Journal
Add to Briefcase
Lucia Graves
April 14, 2014, 12:03 p.m.

Re­pub­lic­ans con­tin­ued to ac­cuse the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion of hy­po­crisy on Sunday, with Rep. Mar­sha Black­burn, R-Tenn., telling Face the Na­tion that, while Re­pub­lic­ans sup­port equal pay in gen­er­al, the par­tic­u­lar le­gis­lat­ive ef­forts pushed by Demo­crats are “con­des­cend­ing” and in­ef­fec­tu­al.

Black­burn, like many of her GOP col­leagues, spe­cific­ally cited the White House’s own pay gap as evid­ence that the ad­min­is­tra­tion has no busi­ness pro­mot­ing salary trans­par­ency through two new ex­ec­ut­ive or­ders an­nounced last week. “The White House pay­ing wo­men 88 cents for every dol­lar that a guy earns in com­par­able po­s­i­tions?” she said in ref­er­ence to a re­cent study by the Amer­ic­an En­ter­prise In­sti­tute. “They need to go clean up their own act first.”

But the only reas­on Black­burn can cri­ti­cize the White House pay gap is be­cause the White House re­leases its pay in­form­a­tion — something Obama wants every com­pany to do. Black­burn’s cri­tique ac­tu­ally proves Obama’s point: Trans­par­ency can help put pres­sure on in­sti­tu­tions to “clean up their act,” as Black­burn would say. She’s right to cri­ti­cize the White House, but the am­muni­tion she uses is not avail­able for most em­ploy­ers.

Black­burn’s ar­gu­ment also leaves out some im­port­ant nu­ances. Con­trary to her on-air state­ment, the pay dif­fer­en­tial between men and wo­men does not ap­ply to Obama staffers in “com­par­able po­s­i­tions.” She also fails to men­tion that the White House’s re­cord on this front is sig­ni­fic­antly bet­ter than that of con­gres­sion­al Re­pub­lic­ans or the pre­vi­ous ad­min­is­tra­tion.

Still, pun­dits have per­sisted in cast­ing last week’s em­phas­is on the wage gap as a win for the GOP.

Ideas ad­vanced by a hand­ful of Re­pub­lic­an sen­at­ors last week would take an im­port­ant step to­ward end­ing pay dis­crim­in­a­tion (namely, ban­ning re­tali­ation against any em­ploy­ees who dis­close their own salar­ies). But they don’t go as far as the Paycheck Fair­ness Act, which, among oth­er things, would have dir­ec­ted the Equal Em­ploy­ment Op­por­tun­ity Com­mis­sion to col­lect em­ploy­ers’ gender and race wage data. That le­gis­la­tion was un­an­im­ously blocked by Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans last week, the same week the House passed Rep. Paul Ry­an’s Re­pub­lic­an budget, which, as The Wash­ing­ton Post‘s Dana Mil­bank re­por­ted, would force cuts to in­vest­ments that dis­pro­por­tion­ately be­ne­fit wo­men.

Oth­er pun­dits such as The Post‘s Nia-Ma­lika Hende­r­son ac­cused the White House of “try­ing to carve out a nar­row ar­gu­ment which says more trans­par­ency means less dis­crim­in­a­tion … even though trans­par­ency at the White House still finds a 12 cents pay gap.”

The White House’s re­cord not­with­stand­ing, the ar­gu­ment is not par­tic­u­larly nar­row. A study from the In­sti­tute for Wo­men’s Policy Re­search, for in­stance, finds trans­par­ency is among the best ways to pre­vent pay dis­crim­in­a­tion. “More trans­par­ency al­most al­ways helps in fight­ing sex dis­crim­in­a­tion and oth­er forms of dis­crim­in­a­tion be­cause it ex­poses what the em­ploy­er is do­ing,” Su­z­anne Gold­berg, dir­ect­or of the Cen­ter for Gender and Sexu­al­ity Law at Columbia Uni­versity, told ABC News at the time.

It is also, as MS­N­BC’s Ir­in Car­mon has noted, likely re­lated to the reas­on the White House pay gap is nar­row­er than the na­tion­al av­er­age.

A nar­row ar­gu­ment would be one that dis­missed good policy by cit­ing an in­sti­tu­tion’s faulty be­ha­vi­or.

Still, Gary Burt­less, an eco­nom­ist at the cent­rist Brook­ings In­sti­tu­tion, said that even com­plete salary trans­par­ency would be un­likely to solve gender dis­crep­an­cies in pay. The salar­ies of con­gres­sion­al staffers are pos­ted on­line, he noted in a con­ver­sa­tion with Na­tion­al Journ­al, and still sig­ni­fic­ant gender wage gaps per­sist.

Mari­anne DelPo Ku­low, an as­so­ci­ate pro­fess­or of law at Bent­ley Uni­versity whose work on the is­sue has been pub­lished in the Har­vard Journ­al on Le­gis­la­tion, agreed. “The more nu­anced con­ver­sa­tion is why is there still a gap even in the face of wage trans­par­ency and the an­swer to this is that there are a num­ber of factors con­trib­ut­ing to the gap, not just wage secrecy,” she wrote in a state­ment. “To erad­ic­ate the gap en­tirely, one needs a multi-pronged ap­proach.”

Ad­voc­ates of equal pay would say the White House is ab­so­lutely not above re­proach on this is­sue, that they need to do bet­ter. And if crit­ics, in­clud­ing Black­burn and her col­leagues, keep up the pres­sure by pro­mot­ing trans­par­ency le­gis­la­tion or at least the sham­ing it en­ables, they will. More im­port­antly, so will every­one else.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.