LGBT group says Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage bans is not just an urban issue

With much of the national focus on the U.S. Supreme Court's impending decision regarding same-sex marriage centered on urban areas, a Tennessee marriage-equality group is taking its message to rural areas and small towns "because there are fewer support structures for LGBT residents there and because they were tired of hearing that LGBT rights is only an urban issue," Tim Marema reports for the Daily Yonder.

The Supreme Court "is expected to rule any day on whether to uphold or overturn same-sex marriage bans in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee," Marema writes. "Thirty-seven states now allow same-sex marriage, but the Court’s decision is likely to clarify a national position on whether banning marriage of couples who are the same sex violates the Constitution."

Chris Sanders, executive director of the Tennessee Equality Project, said many members are originally from small Southern towns, Marema writes. Sanders told Marema, "Where the residents are interested, we are forming committees in the towns we visit so that they can meet monthly to address their needs. It is part of a long-term organizing approach now."

"We wanted to focus on smaller towns because we're making progress in Tennessee's larger cities with non-discrimination and partner-benefits ordinances," Sanders told Marema. "Those cities also have more LGBT organizations to serve them, whereas most rural areas don't. Frankly, we also need [small towns and rural areas]. The state legislators from these areas often characterize LGBT issues as urban issues, and helping them see equality as a constituent issue is going to be critical in Tennessee." (Read more)

Fargo paper runs on A1 photos of legislators who voted against ban on anti-gay discrimination

The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead, which serves a large rural audience, garnered national attention over the weekend for its Friday front page, which featured photographs of the 94 North Dakota House members who voted Thursday against bills that, if passed, would have outlawed discrimination based on sexual orientation. The paper also featured members of the North Dakota Senate and how they voted on a similar bill that passed.

Some have accused The Forum of trying to shame politicians, but editor Matt Von Pinnion said that's not what he was trying to do. He said state legislation is big news in North Dakota and that this issue is a hot topic on the national level. Here's part of Friday's front page:

"Indiana and Arkansas are embroiled in similar debates, with constituents and large corporations such as Walmart loudly weighing in on the division, perhaps simplistically framed as a fight for gay rights versus a fight for religious freedom," Von Pinnion writes. "Closer to home, several business leaders have said approving equal protection for gays is important from an employee retention and attraction standpoint while acknowledging that younger workers tend to hold this value in higher regard than their older counterparts."

"Everyone seems to have an opinion on this ongoing social issue, whether they openly share it or not," Von Pinnion writes. "For all these reasons, we thought this roll call vote was appropriate for Page One. There was not one subjective piece of information on that front page. But as with any divisive social matter, people see this objective information through their own lens. Some people accused us of or congratulated us for 'shaming' lawmakers who voted against the bills. That was not our intent. In fact, a good chunk of Friday’s front page also features the faces, names, cities and political parties of lawmakers who voted in favor of the bills."

Von Pinnion said many readers—on both sides of the issue—contacted the paper to offers thanks for running the story because it gave them an idea of where politicians stand on issues. He also said many readers complained that it is difficult to find state voting records and they would like to be more informed on how state politicians vote. (Read more)

South, Northeast have the most income inequality, study by real estate company says

Income inequality between male and female workers is most prevalent in the South and Northeast, says a study by Movoto Real Estate, Laura Allen reports for the organization's blog. Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi have the most inequality, while South Dakota, Vermont and Nevada have the most equality.

The results were calculated by comparing median income between men and women, the percent of earning households compared to non-earning households, annual income greater than $100,000 versus annual income less than $25,000 and by using a state income Gini index, which measures inequality, Allen writes. From there, states were ranked from one to 50.

After Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi, the states with the most inequality are Connecticut, West Virginia, Massachusetts, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Michigan and Rhode Island. After 
South Dakota, Vermont and Nevada the states with the most equality are Nebraska, Utah, Iowa, Hawaii, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Minnesota and Maryland. (Read more) (Movoto map: To see an interactive version click here)

Women earn less than men, and fewer women than men work, especially in mostly rural states

Women's annual salaries remain lower than men's in several rural states, and many rural states are severely lacking in equal pay for men and women, says a report by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research. Women have the lowest median annual earnings in Arkansas, Mississippi, South Dakota and West Virginia, at $30,000, and Louisiana has the worst ratio of earnings between men and women. The report, which also looked at the percentage of women in the workforce and percentage of women in managerial or professional occupations, gave West Virginia and Alabama overall grades of F.

West Virginia, which was ranked last of all states and Washington, D.C., was ranked 49th for earnings ratios between men and women, last for percent of women in labor force and 44th for women in managerial or professional occupations. Alabama, ranked 50th overall, was 43rd in median salary, at $31,200, 46th in earnings ratios between men and women, 50th in percent of women in labor force and
42nd for women in managerial or professional occupations.

"Women in West Virginia are making less now than they were in 2010—when women were making 69 percent of what a man makes, as compared to 66 percent today, according to the report," Mackenzie Mays reports for the Charleston Gazette. Tara Martinez, executive director of the West Virginia Women’s Commission told Mays, "We’re actually moving backward,. The discouragement and the hopelessness that I see as part of my job. I take it home with me. Sometimes you look at where women are, especially in this state that we all love so much, and you say, ‘OK, what hope do I give them?’ The hope that I try to convey is that their voice is the only way to make the change that they need to make their lives better in this state.”

Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Wyoming were given a D-; Idaho, Indiana, Oklahoma and Kentucky were given a D; and Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee and Utah were given a D+. Washington D.C. was the only area to receive an A. (Institute for Women’s Policy Research map)

What can be done about rising income inequality?

Income inequality is a widespread problem. The two U.S. jurisdictions with the worst inequality are Manhattan and a rural Native American reservation in North Dakota, which President Obama will visit on Friday. Six of 10 of the most unequal counties are in the South, and so are 18 of the top 25, Jake Grovum writes for Stateline. To see an interactive version of the county-by-county map of income equality below, click here.

Inequality affects different places in different ways, and one issue that seems to be nationwide is a decline in economic mobility. A report last year by the Pew Charitable Trusts said 43 percent of Americans who grew up in the bottom of the income scale stay there as adults, and almost 75 percent never reach the middle.

Also the issue has become more of a concern for the general public. A Pew Research Center survey showed that 65 percent of Americans think inequality is growing. While 90 percent of Democrats participating in the poll though there was "a lot" or "some" actions the government could take to solve the inequality problem, 50 percent of Republicans said there was "not much" or "nothing" the government could do about it.

"Our economic divide has become so stark, inequality is so off the historical wall, it's almost forced itself on the country's attention," said Sam Pizzigati of the Institute for Policy Studies, a liberal think tank. "It's become so stark that it can't be ignored anymore."

This problem has served as the impetus for many state proposals this year, Grovum reports. Some people worry that the measures focus too much on regulating executive pay and will not directly help those who need it. "Inequality has distracted attention from the bottom, where it needs to be," said Alan Reynolds, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute.

Two California Senate Democrats proposed "tying the state's corporate income tax to CEO-worker pay equity, setting up a sliding scale whereby a company's tax bill would decrease if the gap between executive and worker pay was smaller," Grovum writes. The measure would've decreased the corporate tax rate for companies in which the CEO makes less than 100 times what the media worker makes at the company. Though the bill failed its first floor vote, its two authors are trying to keep it alive.

This year, minimum-wage increases are a popular idea among Democrats for addressing inequality. Though Seattle plans to increase minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2017 and other states will increase their rates, "Obama's call for Congress to do the same has gone nowhere," Grovum reports. In some places, Democrats and Republicans have both supported wage increase, and even some Republican-leaning states like Arkansas, Alaska and South Dakota have increase on their fall ballots.

The economy is slowly recovering from the Great Recession, and lawmakers in some states have cut back on the safety net because of concerns that if the government is too helpful, workers may not as quickly re-enter the workforce. "Creating good jobs, they say, is the best way to address inequality," Grovum writes.

"Rather than focusing on inequality, it's how do we actually help the poor and help individuals in need?" asked Rachel Sheffield of the conservative Heritage Foundation. "If we look at our policies from our welfare system they don't promote that, they don't promote work and self-sufficiency. Our welfare system has failed to do that." Some states have decided not to continue waivers from the federal government to allow their citizens to receive food stamps without meeting particular work requirements. "The moves were cast as welfare reform to push people back into the workforce," Grovum writes.