A bill that would expand the state's existing pay equity laws and increase penalties for businesses that violate them passed the Oregon House of Representatives on Tuesday largely on party lines.

The bill, which now goes to the Senate, explicitly prohibits employers from paying people less based on race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, disability or age.

House Bill 2005 would also bar employers from using new hires' old salaries to determine their new pay and would prevent employers from firing workers for asking what their co-workers make or for filing an equal pay complaint.

It's already illegal for Oregon employers to pay workers less based just on their gender or discriminate based on select other protected classes. Depending on the violation, workers can be awarded a year's worth of unpaid wages and damages for certain types of violations or up to two years' pay, plus punitive and other damages, for other types of discrimination.

The proposed law would group workplace anti-discrimination laws related to wages under one umbrella. In doing so, it expands the cases where companies may be required to pay punitive damages or money for pain and suffering.

Ann Lininger, D-Lake Oswego, sponsored the bill and said it addresses issues that affect many workers.

"This is an abiding problem that we face," she said, "and we need better tools to help address the problem."

Lininger's bill passed along party lines: Nearly all House Republicans voted no. Rep. Rich Vial, of Scholls, was the lone Republican to vote "yes."

All who spoke during the marathon debate on the House floor were quick to point out that they support the concept of equal pay for women, minorities and other protected classes.

Republicans, the minority party, criticized the bill for unfairly penalizing businesses and mourned the lack of compromise in the Legislature.

Salem Rep. Jodi Hack, one of three women in the House Republican caucus, authored a competing bill that was nearly the same as Lininger's, but for a few sections. Despite support from a handful of Democrats, it failed by two votes.

Instead of adding the extra penalties on businesses, Hack's bill would have allowed businesses to proactively evaluate themselves on pay equity. If, during a lawsuit, a business could show it had made "reasonable progress" in eliminating pay inequity after its evaluation, it could be let off.

Hack said her bill worked with the business community, instead of against it.

"I would encourage Oregon employers to take steps to establish an equal pay environment on their own, rather than being punished into submission in a courtroom and leaving a black mark on the employee that they then carry with them in the future," she said.

In addition, Hack's bill would have added veterans to the classes protected in the bill. During Tuesday's debate, Lininger said she supported the idea and assured her fellow lawmakers that the Senate would likely consider the amendment.

Despite stereotypes, Hack said, Republicans care about those of different races, religions and sexual orientations.

"You name it, we care," she said. "Believe it or not, we do. And I'm tired of being made to feel like I don't."

House Minority Leader Mike McLane, R-Powell Butte, called Lininger's bill "a weapon" for trial lawyers and questioned whether the additional penalties were necessary. He accused Democrats of evoking "the war on women" and using "demonization politics" to hurt businesses.

"Do you want (employers) to be compliant, or do you want them to be punished?" he asked.

Despite the passionate speeches, Democrats said Hack's bill didn't go far enough, and voted it down. Before the vote on Lininger's bill, Republicans brought up more issues with the measure.

Rep. Julie Parrish, R-West Linn, said she was worried about the fiscal impact of Lininger's bill, which she called an unfunded mandate. If public employees were to sue under the bill, public agencies would have to pay up, leaving less money for day-to-day operations, she said. Parrish said this would ultimately widen the state's budget gap.

However, the Bureau of Labor and Industries has said it does not expect a big increase in pay equity complaints with the passage of this bill.

Rep. Greg Barreto, R-Cove, said Oregon has enough anti-discrimination laws at it is.

"The opportunity for litigation, the opportunity for risk is there," he said. "We don't have to make it worse."

Barreto said the bill, as well-intentioned as it is, could hurt Oregon's economy.

"If we don't start looking at some of these bills, and how they're going to affect us down the road, we are making a huge mistake," he said.

But Janelle Bynum, D-Happy Valley, disagreed.

"It's the year 2017 and we're still grappling with deep disparities in pay between men, women and people and color," she said. "It's hard to accept that we're still here."

Bynum, a small business owner and an African American mother, said these disparities start a cycle that can be hard to break.

"When my children grow up, I want them to know that their compensation is what they earned and what they deserved," she said. "House Bill 2005 moves us closer to that goal for all Oregonians: For workers, for businesses and for families."

-- Anna Marum

amarum@oregonian.com

503-294-5911

@annamarum