Via Glenn Reynolds, I see that the Equal Rights Amendment has been reintroduced. While this is largely symbolic and unnecessary (for the reasons Eugene Volokh points out), it’s nonetheless a very shrewd move.
An election move?
To whose benefit?
Well, we’re always in the middle of an election, so any move can be seen as an election move, but Bob Krumm links a report showing the people behind it:

Democrats in the Senate and House plan to resume “the fight for women’s equality” on Tuesday, when they reintroduce the Women’s Equality Amendment.
Sens. Ted Kennedy (Mass.) and Barbara Boxer (Calif.) and Reps. Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler, both of New York, plan to join Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority, in making the Tuesday afternoon announcement.

Doesn’t look very bipartisan, does it? (Is there some reason why not?)
Clearly, the Dems are thinking ahead. This puts the Republicans in the very difficult position of having to “oppose” equal rights for women, or else have to explain why the ERA is “not needed anymore.” Obviously, it is hoped the latter will look lame to the voters, and especially to the gender gap voters.
Who knows? If the Democrats selected a woman as their candidate for president, this might even transform sex from a non-starter into a legitimate campaign issue.
I’d say the Democrats have done their homework well.
This can’t do anything but make the Republicans look bad, because there’s no way for them to triangulate their way out of it.
(What won’t make much difference is whether the ERA is a good or a bad thing.)
UPDATE: NOW is endorsing Hillary Clinton for president.
I’m sure it’s just a coincidence.
UPDATE: Thank you, Glenn Reynolds for the link! Welcome all. (Now, there’s a coincidence!)