When I try to explain Hillary Clinton's positions on various issues I invariably have to say, "You can't make this s&*! up."  Along comes John Phillips to do the heavy lifting and actually describe candidate Clinton's positions:

The Civil Rights Act of 2008:

"Require disparate impact claims (in other words, not intentional discrimination but discrimination that’s the effect of policies or practices–or what I call the difference between intentional and unintentional discrimination) to be analyzed the same way Title VII claims are analyzed.  Cutting to the chase, this means that class actions under the ADEA would be permissible.  As discussed previously on this blog, age discrimination cases are likely to be overwhelming during the next decade because of all the boomers getting into their 60’s.  This proposed legislation could very well cause a tsunami."

The ADA Restoration Act:

"Redefine the term “disability” to mean “a mental or physical impairment.”  Now, the definition is “a mental or physical impairment that substantially limits a major life activity.”  And it’s that latter part of the definition the Supreme Court has used to narrow the meaning of “disability.”  Without that qualifying language, it’s fair to say that a lot of things not disabilities today would become disabilities, e.g., carpal tunnel.  One might argue that the entire workforce would become disabled.  In any event, this would surely mean greater responsibility on the part of employers to provide reasonable accommodations and a significant increase in disability discrimination cases."

A side note on the ADA:  I remember when the ADA was proposed.  I distributed an article to my board members outline concerns that the legislation would create a massive incentive for poor performers to develop a "disability," to claim protection under the ADA.  They all looked at me like I was crazy.  "That could never happen." 

The Supreme Court:

"Who would Senator Clinton appoint if she became President?  No way to know, although pundits and Supreme Court watchers could probably come up with a likely list.  But they would be guessing.

What we know for sure is that she voted against Roberts and Alito, two of the more conservative members of the Court. But note, both Roberts and Alito voted against the employer in the recent case of Federal Express v. Holowecki (click here for more on this case).   We can also assume that Senator Clinton was supportive of President Clinton’s appointment of Justices Ginsburg and Breyer."

The Fair Pay Restoration Act:

"The Fair Pay Restoration Act says that an unlawful act is committed when a discriminatory compensation decision is adopted, when an employee becomes subject to the decision, or when an individual is affected by the application of the decision, including each time compensation is paid.  It allows an aggrieved employee to recover back pay for up to two years preceding the filing of a charge of discrimination.  This proposal would amend Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Where does Senator Clinton stand on this proposed law?  She co-sponsored it, together with a bunch of other senators and members of the House of Representatives.  The proposal has passed the House and is bogged down in the Senate."

I need another drink. . .Think I'll make it 18-year-old this time.

Thanks, John Phillips.