Violence Against Women Act passes in House, but partisan battle looms
Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wis. gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 16, 2012, to push for the unrestricted reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. From left are, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of Calif., Moore, Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, N.Y., and Rep. Janice D. Schakowsky, D-Ill.
/ AP Photo/J. Scott ApplewhiteAfter an impassioned debate on the House floor Wednesday, the bill passed with 222 members voting in favor and 205 voting against. But now, both chambers of Congress must figure out how to reconcile the House bill with the Senate-passed version.
VAWA, which aims to protect victims of domestic violence, was originally passed in 1994 and has been reauthorized twice since then, with broad bipartisan support. The bill's reauthorization has become a source of strife this year as Democrats and Republicans squabble over the scope of its protections.
In April, the Senate hammered out legislation that included protections for Native Americans, undocumented immigrants, and gay, lesbian and transgender victims in addition to those already protected under the legislation. That bill passed late last month with bipartisan support.
The House version of the bill, however, stripped out those expansions. Even with the last-minute addition by Republicans of an amendment aimed at quelling criticism over the discrepancies between two versions, Democrats decried the legislation for excluding certain groups and undermining its broader purpose.
"Let's call this bill what it's really is. It's not the Violence Against Women act, but the Open Season for Violence Against Women Act," said Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., in a press conference Wednesday.
In debate on the House floor, Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wis., recounted her own experience as a rape victim when discussing VAWA.
"As a member of this body, as a survivor of sexual assault, battery, from age five through my teenage years, through my early adulthood, I can tell you that it is very traumatic to be here in this body today and to find my colleagues not taking the recommended updates -- that people who work with domestic violence victims, those advocates, law enforcement, DAs, the FBI, the Department of Justice, have put in front of them as best practices of what we need to defend all women from violence," Moore said.
In addition to outcry over the lack of protections for Native Americans and LGBT victims, Democrats have expressed particular concern about the Republican bill's measures pertaining to undocumented immigrants. They argue the bill would it make more difficult for some victims of domestic abuse to stay in America after reporting acts of domestic violence.
Another issue is the bill's mandate that work authorization be denied to immigrants who are the subject of a pending investigation or prosecution, which could prohibit some abused immigrants from finding work. Opponents say that would also discourage battered women from filing charges or leaving a situation of domestic abuse.
"Instead of seeking to expand protections, this new House bill puts victims of domestic violence in greater danger and excludes vulnerable populations from critical protections," said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, in a statement. "This House bill does not advance protections against discrimination, but would further stigmatize particular populations."
Republicans, however, contend that their bill is gender neutral and protects all - so there's no need to single certain groups out.
"This is a victims centered bill," said Rep. Sandy Adams, R-Fla., the sponsor of the GOP bill and a survivor of domestic abuse. "As we look to reauthorize VAWA, we want to make sure that we're not politicizing this issue, but just reauthorizing it. If you look at the bill, and what is in it, you will see that it is centered around our victims."
In remarks on the House Floor, Republican Rep. Virginia Foxx, of North Carolina, accused Democrats of politicizing the fight to protect victims of violence.
"It really pains me to see my colleagues across the aisle make the kind of accusations that they make about Republicans being unconcerned about the issue of violence against women," Foxx said. "How could they possibly accuse us of not being concerned about that issue? All Republicans are concerned about violence against anyone."
Despite the distance between the House and Senate version of the bill, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., expressed confidence Tuesday that the two chambers would be able to reach a compromise.
"I'm confident that we'll renew the Violence Against Women Act," he said. "As you may recall, it passed the Senate a few years ago on a voice vote. This is not something about which there should be any real controversy."
Popular in Politics
- Obama prom pictures surface
- Drones, Gitmo part of broad Obama counterterrorism speech
- Lawmakers push to punish sexual offenders in the military
- IRS' Lerner: "I have not done anything wrong" 792 Comments
- House passes GOP bill to speed Keystone XL pipeline approval
- Boehner calls out Obama administration's "arrogance of power"
- Former Miss America might challenge McConnell
- Christie: Keep politics out of Oklahoma disaster relief
Their bills in the state and federal legislatures (anti-choice, intrusory medical procedures, un-equal pay, etc.) that are targeting women speak for themselves.
Yoohoo! Republicans! Those three provisions -- on Native Americans, illegal immigrants, and gays and lesbians -- were NOT added simply to make your lives difficult. They were added because the people who actually work every day with battered women (and men) identified those as areas where the prior version of the Violence Against Women ACT wasn't doing the job. Advocates ASKED Congress to add those provisions, to correct problems VAWA didn't address. So by refusing to add those three provisions, you're saying you WANT to leave Native Americans and illegal immigrants and lesbians and gays at the mercy of their abusive partners. Gee, no wonder so many people who know how to spell the word "empathy" don't want to vote for you....
You obviously have not read the competing bills and know nothing about them. The Senate bill - a bipartisan effort - would give court jurisdiction to tribal courts of Indian Nations, something that requires a statute to effect; it would also increase the number of U-Type (4 year) visas to undocumented women so that their rapists can be tried and convicted and they will not be afraid to go to the police. It would broaden the definition of violence so that it could include gays and lesbians, which the current definition does not.
None of this is "specifying" or "pandering". It is eliminating holes in the law. But Republicans like people to suffer, don't they. After all, you do, don't you?
---
You claim to know so much about the bill yet you are still ignorant and are now twisting it around to include sexual perverts.
What the hell do they have to do with a bill concerning women?
If an gays get raped it is by another gay pervert.
Typical of your kind trying to get special rights over the rest of society like trying to ride the coat tails of the black civil rights movement.
They should have killed the damned thing. It's a progressive sham.
Sickening!
An angry little gay venting on here.
Take it some where else
None of this is "specifying" or "pandering". It is eliminating holes in the law. But Republicans like people to suffer, don't they. After all, you do, don't you?
In domestic vilonce cases the ploice arrest women if she attacked the man or both if he fights back.
This Act needs to be rewritten to be fair to both men and women.
It's all part of the same thing.
You can't see beyond your long nose.
Community violence prevention programs
Protections for victims who are evicted from their homes because of events related to domestic violence or stalking
Funding for victim assistance services, like rape crisis centers and hotlines
Programs to meet the needs of immigrant women and women of different races or ethnicities
Programs and services for victims with disabilities
Legal aid for survivors of violence
Seems like all that should be done at the state level but all in all I think the act does provide needed benefits. I even understand granting temorary visas to victims who are here illegally so they can act as witnesses in a trial to convict and incarcerate a vioent offender. Remember just because the victim maybe an illegal doesn't mean the offender won't attack you or yours next.