The question I address in this project is how, why, and in what way new ideas, and new combinations of ideas, come to be instantiated in policy proposals. Given that a diverse universe of policy ideas exist, this project attempts to understand why legislators chose to incorporate some possibilities, but not others, at particular times. To answer this question, I focus on federal gendered pay inequity policy proposals in the United States beginning in 1945, the year when a sustained legislative effort to remedy gendered pay inequity began in the U.S. Congress. I find that gendered pay inequity policy content is characterized by relatively long periods of ideational stability punctuated by moments of sudden policy idea change. These moments of sudden change I refer to as policy innovation junctures. Since 1945, there have been four policy innovation junctures: Equal Pay Inception of the 79th congress (1945-1946); Married Mothers’ Benefits of the 90th Congress (1967-1968); Professional Women & Training Programs of the 101st Congress (1989-1990); and Policy Synthesis of the 105th Congress (1997-1998). The policy ideas generated during these junctures come to dominate policy efforts pursued during the long periods of stability, very often comprising any legislation that is ultimately passed years, if not decades, down the road. I call this model of policy idea change Punctuated Policy Innovation. I further find that policy innovation junctures are more likely to occur during periods of (1) political and economic stability, as well as (2) increased activism on the part of important women’s organizations; much of the content of these junctures is dependent on the wider policy agenda, which (3) present policy alignment opportunities for (4) motivated legislators to use their experience, leadership positions, and electoral safety to introduce new ideas into gendered pay inequity policy proposals.