Though the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) fell three states short of ratification, the women's movement seems to have learned from its mistakes and made some changes in its tactics, organization and focus. Specifically, feminist organizations—now stronger than ever—are stressing grass roots political activities and issues which are economic as well as social.

Feminist groups seem to have been most successful in influencing public policy when they have focused on role equity issues rather than role change issues. As Joyce Gelb and I explained in a recent book on women and public policy,

Role equity issues are those policies which extend rights now enjoyed by other groups (men, other minorities) to women and which appear to be relatively delineated or narrow in their implications, permitting policy makers to seek advantage with feminist groups and voters with little cost or controversy. In contrast, role change issues appear to produce change in the dependent female role of wife, mother and homemaker, holding out the potential of greater sexual freedom and independence in a variety of contexts. The latter issues are fraught with greater political pitfalls, including perceived threats to existing values, in turn creating visible and often powerful opposition.

Of course, many issues deal both with role equity and role change. When feminist groups have failed, it has often been because their opponents have emphasized the role change aspects of an issue.

Many of the issues which are primarily questions of role equity are economic. Thus, it was probably wise for the National Organization for Women (NOW) to emphasize in its ERA effort that the average female worker earns 59 cents for every dollar earned by her male counterpart.