Democrats Reintroduce the ERA

Yesterday, Democrats in the House and Senate reintroduced the Equal Rights Amendment, calling it the Women's Equality Amendment, and promised a vote on the legislation before the end of the session. Democrats were prompted to take the direct route after recent failures to add three states to the 35 that had ratified the Equal Rights Amendment before its 1982 deadline.

In a Washington Post article, Arkansas (one of the three states targeted in recent years to ratify the amendment) state Representative Dan Greenberg (R) rightly argued that ratification would likely result in courts determining that the government would have to pay for abortions-- just as courts have determined in cases involving two states whose constitutions have been amended to include ERA language (New Mexico is one). These claims aren't alarmist-- pro-abortion groups have been among those leading the lawsuits in these two states.

Whether the amendment could be ratified by adding only three states after its 1982 deadline is in dispute. In support of ratification, proponents point to the Madison Amendment (dealing with Congressional pay raises) which was ratified over 200 years after its introduction. Legal scholars, however, note that the Madison Amendment was never given a deadline for ratification. The ERA on the other hand, as passed by Congress in 1972, was given a ten year deadline that it failed to pass.

During election cycles in recent years, conservatives have pointed to the ERA/abortion link as a possible example of what would likely happen if Democrats gained control of Congress. In a weird way, it is gratifying to know that we were right.