ERA proponents roused by a big change in Congress

The Democratic takeover of Congress should revive interest in an issue many Americans think is settled — adoption of the Equal Rights Amendment — as new bipartisan groups pursue the Republican-leaning states needed for its ratification.

“I think a great way to commemorate the elevation of the first woman speaker would be to elevate all women in the Constitution,” said Rep. Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey Democrat and one of nearly 200 ERA proponents in the House.

Supporters say that despite advancements for women’s rights since the ERA’s official death in 1982 — primarily prohibitions against sex discrimination — the constitutional amendment is needed because women lag in career advancement and pay equity.

In 1972, for instance, the ratio of female-to-male earnings for full-time, year-round work was 58 cents on the dollar. Last year, it was 77 cents on the dollar, according to Census Bureau data.

“The equal treatment of women should be made a pillar of our society,” said Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, New York Democrat. “Unlike under the previous majority, I think we will at least have a discussion of rights that should exist and that most people in fact believe are already in the Constitution.”

The one-sentence ERA — “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex” — has been promoted since the 1920s to ensure that women are treated on an equal basis with men, especially in the workplace.

The ERA was passed by Congress in 1972 but declared dead on June 30, 1982, when only 35 of the 38 necessary states ratified it.

Now activists are working to get three more state legislatures to ratify the ERA, and they expect a Democrat-led Congress and historical precedent to ensure its enactment.

“Once the American public really wants it, it will be had,” said Jennifer Macleod, national coordinator of the ERA Campaign Network.

The rationale behind this “three-state strategy” is that Congress accepted the 27th “Madison” Amendment, which concerns congressional pay increases, after a 203-year ratification period and can therefore accept more ERA ratifications even after the deadline.

To which legendary ERA opponent Phyllis Schlafly said: “I think they are dreaming. I think they’re beating a dead horse.”

Opponents, led by Mrs. Schlafly, founder of Eagle Forum, helped sink the ERA with warnings about a military draft for women, unisex toilets, same-sex “marriage,” and loss of family and workplace protections for wives, mothers and widows.

The ERA has its veteran supporters, such as the National Council of Women’s Organizations. But in recent years, at least two new groups have emerged with the mission of getting three more state ratifications.

The two new groups are purposefully bipartisan, recognizing that Republican ERA support is a necessity: Of the 15 unratified states, Illinois is the lone “blue” state; the other 14 are “red” states that sweep from the Carolinas through the South, and into the West, with Arizona and Utah. The most vigorous ERA campaigns are in Florida, Missouri and Illinois.

“It’s a myth” that Republicans don’t support the ERA, said Idella Moore, who founded www.4ERA.org in Atlanta in early 2003.

Story Continues →