The Washington Examiner’s Betsy Woodruff writes that Texas Republicans are “jittery” over Democrat Wendy Davis’ equal pay lawsuit law gambit. In that gambit, Davis is pushing a state law that more or less mirrors the equal pay lawsuit law that President Obama already signed on the federal level. Why we even need a state law when there’s already a federal law isn’t addressed much, either by Woodruff or by Davis herself. Apparently we need a state lawsuit law because Wendy Davis needs something to talk about and the media needs something to get breathless about.
The law Davis proposes doesn’t actually do very much. No one in this day and age doesn’t support the concept of equal pay for equal work. The question is whether we need a law, and in the case of the law that Davis supports, whether we need a law that makes it easier for people to file lawsuits. Trial lawyers may support that, because it’s good for their bottom line. But Texas is a tort reform state. Trail lawyers aren’t the most popular critters around here. The last Democrat to run for governor got tagged a “liberal trail lawyer” so much that the phrase became as much a part of Bill White’s name as his actual name. He had to have “liberal trial lawyer” surgically removed. He lost, for that and many other reasons. Liberal trial lawyers like Steve Mostyn fund the Democratic Party in Texas. That’s one of the reasons that the Democrats here keep siding with trail lawyers, and against the majority of Texans. And they lose. Mostyn’s millions haven’t and won’t change any of this.
Woodruff didn’t ask me to comment on the “jitters” that she finds among Texas Republicans — those she does quote, she quotes anonymously, leaving readers to guess who they are (and I have a couple of suspects) — but if she had, I would have expressed no jitters at all. Davis has yet to produce any anxiety whatsoever. The truth is, Wendy Davis isn’t even a very credible candidate in this state. That could change, but so far there’s no evidence of that happening.
Wendy Davis has spent the first months of her campaign floundering around embarrassingly. She claimed to be “pro-life” when she is most famous for supporting unrestricted late-term abortion in substandard clinics, at the behest of the ravenous abortion lobby. Her filibuster helped her tally up donations in leftist enclaves outside Texas, but it brought dishonor on the state at the time, with the “Hail Satan” chants and all the other despicable things her allies did. Davis claims that she’s pro-gun despite her attempt to kick gun shows off Fort Worth city property. Wendy Davis is against voter ID; most Texans support it. She sued a newspaper because it hurt her feelings. Wendy Davis got caught fudging her own origins story.
It’s true that Davis has finally found a bit of traction over this equal pay lawsuit law, but there’s no substance here. The law does very little, to the point that it’s redundant. There is no evidence that states that have their own equal pay lawsuit laws do any better on the actual equal pay front than states that don’t. In fact, there’s no evidence that the federal law does very much. The president and his party are certainly not angels on equal pay — they talk a good game but they’re all talk. The Democrats including Wendy Davis pay women less than men. I’ll resist going full Molly Ivins and declaring that Wendy Davis’ equal pay lawsuit law maneuver is “all hat and no cattle,” but it is. So I guess I didn’t resist too hard. Sorry. But there’s just no there there.