A look back at the 1982 ERA fight
Friday, Jun 1, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Make sure to read Rick’s story today if you like Illinois history…
* From the piece…
There were chants and songs from the legislative galleries. A group of women supporters held a hunger fast for weeks, leading to some being hospitalized. The group that staged the sit-in previously chained itself to the gold railing outside the Senate chamber. The same group later splattered animal blood on the marble floor outside the 2nd floor governor’s office when the amendment failed.
“What they want is publicity and that’s what you give them,” then-state Sen. James “Pate” Philip of Elmhurst chided reporters at the time.
The chamber’s Republican leader and future Senate president went on: “Starving themselves, chaining themselves then disrupting the Senate — if anything they’re turning the senators off.”
Opposing the amendment at the state and national level was Illinois’ own, the late Phyllis Schlafly of Alton. The head of the conservative Eagle Forum joined with her red-dressed backers who carried small hand-held stop sign-shaped cards saying, “STOP ERA.”
- nonBeliever - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 10:56 am:
It is my understanding that the opportunity to vote for the national ERA ended in 1979. That it had to be passed within seven years.
Do I not understand this issue or do others not?
If anybody knows more detail, please share.
- Perrid - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 11:02 am:
Originally it was 79, then it was extended by Congress to 82. So technically it has passed, but the Constitution doesn’t say anything about deadlines, that’s just part of the law, and since Congress already changed the deadline once, could they do it again? A question for SCOTUS probably.
- DuPage Saint - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 11:02 am:
It got extended one time to early 80s. Some people claim there is precedent to ignoring time limits on an amendment. How ver 5 states have voted to rescind their previous ratifications. Pro ERA people say they are not allowed to rescind, but we can overturn a no vote 30 years later? Like having your cake and eating it too. So all will end up at Supreme Court where everyone will complain about judicial activism
- Stones - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 11:06 am:
I recall those events well. Worked as a temporary Senate Page in those days while I was in college.
- NeverPoliticallyCorrect - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 11:29 am:
What is sad about this and all the rest of legislative work in Illinois is that the Dems can decide to pass a bill, the ERA, that will have no impact on equal rights because current laws and regulation mandate equal rights and proscribe penalties for non-compliance. However, they can’t provide for 19,000 people with developmental disabilities who can’t get services here in Illinois. Just another example of why Illinois is so poorly governed.
- wordslinger - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 11:29 am:
–In the end, neither chamber approved the ERA in 1982, each falling several votes short of passage just days before its expiration date — the only northern state not to ratify it.–
Very interesting point. Illinois found itself right in the heart of Dixie on the question back then.
States that had passed ERA before the 1982 deadline included Texas, Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia, plus virtually all the Western and Plains states.
Times change.
http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/states.htm
- VanillaMan - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 11:39 am:
==Current supporters say that 1982 expiration deadline is not relevant. They point to the 1992 ratification of the 27th amendment to the Constitution, which bans mid-term federal House or Senate pay raises. That occurred more than 203 years after its 1789 passage by Congress.==
Found an error…
The difference between the two is that there was no deadline set for the 27th Amendment. It was not acted upon for 203 years, but wasn’t resolvdd either. So it isn’t a valid comparison at all, according to many legal scholars.
Constitutionally, the ERA will need to go through the entire process. It’s as finished as a rusty old Plymouth Reliant. How hard could that be though? I don’t imagine that we’ve ever seen a twice-expired constitutional amendment go zombie. Five states rescinded their support on this old thing. We can’t ignore that.
Start fresh. Do it again. Perhaps President Nikki Haley would be in office by then, so we’d really have something to celebrate as well.
- VanillaMan - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 11:44 am:
==Very interesting point. Illinois found itself right in the heart of Dixie on the question back then.==
Now that the GOP is finally in control over those old Dixiecrat states, there shouldn’t be any problem passing it now, right you are ’slinger.
- wordslinger - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 11:57 am:
–Now that the GOP is finally in control over those old Dixiecrat states, there shouldn’t be any problem passing it now, right you are ’slinger.–
I’m not following, VMan.
But both the Democratic and Republican parties in Dixie have undergone substantial changes over the decades. There really is no point in comparing the parties there today to those, say, 40 years ago.
- Practical Politics - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 12:02 pm:
It was a costly legislative fight that took its toll and elevated Madigan to the Speakership (coupled with the passage of the Pat Quinn “Cutback Amendment”).
One of the outgoing Republican minority reps (Susan Catania) refused to vote for the GOP remap in retaliation for the defeat of the ERA and it flipped the chamber and changed the balance of power in the state.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 12:56 pm:
It’s fascinating how little interest the ERA gets now, for a rare US Constitutional amendment (you’d think it would be worth a few hundred comments if CapitolFax had been around in 1982). I would think that at this point it is primarily a symbolic amendment that won’t kick-start a rash of new legislation. After all, we have traversed all the equal pay, abortion rights, and “who gets to use the bathroom” issues throughout the past 36 years with some resolution, and I am not sure a ratified and encoded amendment will move the societal needle much at this point. On its face, it is hard to argue that the Constitution shouldn’t give equal protection to the sexes.
- Anonymous - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 1:15 pm:
I expect Oberweis will lead the fight against the ERA.
- Nick Name - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 3:34 pm:
===I expect Oberweis will lead the fight against the ERA.===
The fight’s done, so far as Illinois is concerned. The resolution passed both chambers.
- Been there - Friday, Jun 1, 18 @ 4:14 pm:
There were many intervening and unrelated issues in the middle of the ERA fight in Illinois. One was the replacement of the “Black Leader” after Deacon Davis retired. The Black Caucus wanted to vote on it while the original Mayor Daley “anointed” a new leader. Five members of the Black Caucus withheld their vote. I think the House voted on the amendment 14 times coming as close as needing one vote with one Democrat absent.