E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
The Senate approved legislation to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act on Tuesday over the objections of a handful of Republicans.
Democrats were joined by several Republican senators in voting to renew the landmark gender and domestic violence law, which lapsed at the end of 2012 after lawmakers in the last Congress failed to reach agreement on a new extension.
Senators voted 78-22 to send their version of the bill to the Republican-controlled House, where it faces uncertain prospects.
Republicans have objected to elements of the reauthorization, most specifically a technical dispute over jurisdiction for Native American tribal authorities in the instances of certain crimes.
Still, proposals like the Violence Against Women Act have become a lightning rod in the realm of gender politics, especially as Democrats cast Republicans during last year’s election as leading a “war on women.” Democrats were all too eager to seize on GOP opposition to a contraception mandate, or controversial statements by Senate candidates Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock about rape.
Perhaps as that political pressure weighs upon Republicans, a group of 17 House GOP lawmakers wrote the party’s leadership on Tuesday urging them to take up the Senate bill passed this afternoon. If those Republicans were to join with every House Democrat in support of the bill, it would be enough to pass the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization in the House.
"Especially in communities like West Virginia where victims of domestic violence and sexual assault in rural and remote communities face unique obstacles in their efforts to escape abusive and dangerous relationships, support provided by VAWA can literally be lifesaving," said West Virginia Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, a relatively moderate Republican who's running for Senate in 2014. "I am urging House leaders to immediately reauthorize this essential Act."
Leave a Comment:
It's about friggin time!
Now, let's see if Otis the drunk can herd his tea bagger "cats" into action...
22 white men voted against protecting women
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/02/12/1556601/senate-passes-vawa-again/
See all Feisty has to do to save her place is type a period. Those poor folks in Congress have to sit on their collective a$$es in their aisle seats for eight hours.
ALL women should be protected from violence under the law = VAWA.
That means ALL minorities including Native Americans, LGBT, etc.
GOP House voted to disbar them from protection - how do they justify it when they say their prayers?
btw, Congress member can hold their seats by leaving items on them.
Dennis, yes - Rubio being among them. It's amazing how one vote can haunt a politician their entire life. This is one of those votes.
What is this obsession that the right wingers on this site have about who posts the first comment? What, are you guys really 10 year olds?
Now, onto an important issue. Let's see what the House votes. Let's hope they stop their nitpicking and get VAWA passed. This is an important law that has and does help the women, especially Native Alaskan women, in my state. It is a preventative tool that is used throughout the DV shelters, and it does do some good to those women and children who are trying to end the cycle of violence in their family.
WHY... I'm SHOCKED I say, SHOCKED!
Alaska Girl,
Since they can't defend 22 white men voting against protecting women, they have to find something else to bitch about!
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
especially as Democrats cast Republicans during last year’s election as leading a “war on women.”
And Media like NBC propogated this garbage every single day.
Alaska ... apparently Talk prefers his women with their hands in the kitchen sink and not on a keyboard. I resisted making this sound worse ...
Violence against Women is already a law in every state, just like violence against anyone is. This is a states rights issue, not a Federal one. To many laws have been passed giving Federal protection to certain groups. Everyone, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation needs the same protections to be provided by the States, which I believe most are.
This is just another politician posturing issue which is deflecting from the real problems facing the people, like the economy, jobs, spending and deficit reduction. I believe it's time to move past so called "discrimination laws". Another political posturing by the people in Washington pandering to their base with "feel good" legislation.
Todd Akin says "NO" - to the Violence Against Women Act.
sfcret
Yes, it feels good not to be violated.
I'm hopeful this time around. Can't understand what the fuss is about. Why wouldn't you want the closest public safety people to be able to prosecute women beaters? Unless of course you are one of those males who think it is his right to go into tribal lands and victimize the women knowing there is currently no chance of recourse for them. Then may God have mercy on your soul because women are starting to fight back. Yes the courts like to put them away for manslaughter for killing their partners after repeated beatings endured but soon this will change and men better wise up.
Hell women don't need a law just a gun.....problem solved.
I was frist once. Matter of fact, frist twice. I was happy I was frist, but it really takes a righty to complain becuase somebody if frist. It is typical of them, WAAAAAA, WAAAAAA, sniff, sniff, WAAAAAA. Nobody knows the trouble they've seen, no body knows but Boner.
Oh yeah the subject, much as this law is needed, I would bet there is a righty somewhere thinking that is where this country went wrong. When you could no longer whip your wife for "stepping out of line". Its just getting to be a tough world for old white guys, and I are one.
ozzieyo1-7277359
ozziey, seeing that you might be a problem, silence would be golden.
How so BCWC? Never harmed a women in my life. Simply passing a law will not stop the violence only a change in behavior by our society will. I would think a VABA should be considered if this is.
Crazy Michelle Bachmann will probably vote NO......she thinks it would be stepping out of line, if a woman does not submit to her husband..........she is submissive to Marcus.......
Real Neanderthals!
In GOPLand......women are childlike/property that must be controlled...unable to think, not allowed to think!
Wow, talk about disinformation @ #1.9.
1) In 2012 House Republicans refused to bring the Senate's bipartisan reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act to a vote.
BECAUSE:
2) House GOP didn't want to expand protections for Native American, immigrant, and LGBT victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.
And now there is ANOTHER attempt to get the nasty gits to do the right thing.
ozzie ... laws that are backed up lead to changes in behavior. Carrot and stick.
ozzieyo1-7277359 - adding a gun into an already violent situation may be the most ridiculous solution ever proposed. Congrats!
That is a very crazy post............You are part of the problem, especially since you believe guns solve every dispute/disagreement!
Oh dear, this exposes another reason why Rubio is a serious threat to democracy and women.
All serious minded republican women should be turning RED at this type of dictatorship from Rubio and the GOP.
Rubio, NO MAS por favor!
ozzieyo1-7277359
A gun? That's going to stop violence against women? Perhaps if they did have a gun though, they could show the 'legitimate rape party' how they FEEL about them trying to control their bodies.
blackcatwhitecat - What state do you live in? Are you saying that your state does not enforce assaults against women or anyone else for that matter? Why do you feel you need special protection/legislation against an assault? Don't you believe everyone deserves the same protections regardless of gender?
You said "laws that are backed up lead to changes in behavior." That is false, if someone is going to assault another he don't think of what the law is or does.
SmarterDumber than you, be a victim then.ItsAbout, Never seen legimate rape in the Republic platform but OK i'll defend your right to bear arms no matter how misguided you might be.
BCWC, sort of like the laws in the books for guns, immigration, domestic violence, etc?
myname123
I do believe that you meet all the immigration requirements to Afghanistan.
sfcret
so let's get rid of all laws ... jungle-jim time for all.
Rubio and the other 21 in the Senate want to protect the non-Indian abusers:
These non-Indian Predators can carry on the victimization of Native American Women without fear!
OK, myname, how's this?
The U.S. government ran a budget surplus of $3 billion in January, the Treasury Department reported on Tuesday, the first monthly surplus since September 2012. The surplus was driven by a 16% increase in revenues compared to January 2012, including from the expiration of a temporary payroll-tax cut at the end of 2012. For the first four months of fiscal 2013, the U.S. ran a deficit of $290 billion, $59 billion less than the same period in fiscal 2012. The government's fiscal year runs from October to September.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-january-budget-surplus-3-billion-treasury-2013-02-12-1491016
Well, what do you know know, Rubio has just sealed his faith as a loser in 2016. The party of stupid is at it at it again in their war on women.
If by media, you mean Rush Limbaugh, yeah calling an advocate of insurance converage for contraception a "slut" certainly kept the idea of a Republican War on Women alive.
If I was a woman living in a state where a senatorial candidate actually voiced his opinion that there was such a thing as "legitimate rape" (and still got more than one vote during the election), I think that I'd welcome federal protection, too.
everyone is protected except white men
Who knew - we don't need no friggin' laws. All we have to do is say naughty, naughty, and people will magically stop murdering, stalking, raping, stealing.....Gad, I coulda had a V8!!
Hmmm..., one would think there are already laws against violence...
The VAWA provides funding to states to help provide additional police and safe housing resources (Safe House) to help women that are being violated and abused.
The funding is once again where the less densely populated states receive more federal assistance (as a percent of each dollar) than the funds they pay in federal taxes.
WHY DON'T YOU FIX THE ECONOMY!! FOCUS LIKE A "LASER" ON JOBS AND THE ECONOMY!!
Amazing how incompetent our politicians and president is!! The worry about gun control (that won't work anyway), illegal immigration, same-sex marriage, violence against women, gays be allowed in the Boy Scouts, and so on.
But why don't you worry about the economy and that Iran and North Korea are testing nuclear weapons!!
Come on people!! Work on the priorities first!!
jw101
... aw little fella, are you having a rough time?
I wish the article had stated why some Republicans voted against the bill. It certainly sounds like something I'd support, but as we all know, the devil is in the details...
More moronic fuc%$&*# laws, designed purely to create wedge issues, and do squat $hit to actually solve a real problem. Go ahead liberal crap for brains, focus on the these imaginary issues and continue to kick the can down the road or vote present if you will, on the real issues. God you people are beyond stupid!
BCWC, you are the one stating that women are victims grow a pair and quit dating/marrying losers and if they raise a hand to you blow their freaking head off. Oh, and quit whining about how criminals are treated.
Congrats ozzie ... you have made it into my Binder of Weirdos.
Okay, here are your details....
White men... in fact, all men who are not Native Americans... can go on a reservation and beat and rape any Native American... whether it is a woman or a child... and the tribal police are not allowed to arrest or prosecute them.
They rapist is left to the white man's law; can't allow the dirty savages to put their hands on or pass judgement on anyone but their own kind. Rapists are never charged with the crime of rape of Native Americans. The crime is pleaded down to a misdemeanor and the walking talking slugs get soft probation sentences and a green light to go do the same crime again and again.
Reservations are open hunting grounds for human predators. So the next time you see an article about the high incidence of suicide among young Native American girls and boys, think about what you have just read here. They have no protections against rape and abuse.
The Republicans fiercely object to the part of the bill that says Tribal Police can arrest and prosecute anyone except Indians, regardless of the crime. They have to watch their women and children being raped and abused and the abusers get away with it.
I thought binders were Faux Pas?
ozzieyo1-7277359
I see some self-knowledge is sinking in. Congrats again. Merit badges are on the horizon, aim straight like Obama does.
The Act passed through Congress with bipartisan support in 1994, clearing the House by a vote of 235–195 and the Senate by a vote of 61–38, although the following year House Republicans attempted to cut the Act's funding. In the 2000 Supreme Court case United States v. Morrison, a sharply divided Court struck down the VAWA provision allowing women the right to sue their attackers in federal court. By a 5–4 majority, the Court overturned the provision as an intrusion on states' rights.
The Violence Against Women laws provide programs and services, including:
-Federal rape shield law.
-Community violence prevention programs
-Protections for female 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 female victims with disabilities
-Legal aid for female survivors of violence
What's with the reference 22 "white" men?
The heart of the contention centers around the coverage for gays/lesbians, American Indians living in reservations, and undocumented people. There is also concern from some of the "nays" about the $1.6B funding.
Make-up your own minds, but at least do it with facts instead of the D vs R mentality.
Oops … meant to say 22 Republican men (Tim Scott is one of the 22)
Sorry !!
Freud mein Freund
Ozzie pay no mind to the the French Canadian Pederast(stupid cat boy) that fancies himself as Savior Faire.
OK, for the readheaded chick and all her minions... what happend to being treated equally? You want to be in combat, want the same pay, what to concidered "equal", but you need special laws and programs??
What's equal about all that? And no, fido, there is no “war on women”. It's about time women in American stop playing the victim and start being responsible citizens. If a man rapes you, press charges. If a man hits you and you've no reason to be hit (if a woman hits me, then I'll hit her back... I'm not going to be a punching bag) press charges. I'm sick and tired of females in our socitey wanting to be equal but no the same.
No more paid for by my $$ abortions. No more paid for by my $$ controceptives. No more paid for my $$ for special progarms for "battered women".
I deman we treat women equally as they treat men or expect men to be treated.
My question to Mr. Boehner is; if you are so concerned about government spending why did you flat out waste millions of taxpayer dollars fighting this bill in courts if you were just going to vote and pass it today?
BCWC, I know right, Straight at my freaking wallet! I'll pass but thanks for the encouragement.
Caesar, OUI (So BCWC doesn't have to google translate)
I don't understand why this is necessary. Aren't violent crimes against anybody - male, female, black, white, etc. already illegal? Since the act lapsed last year, did that suddenly make it OK for men to batter women? I doubt it. So someone please explain why Congress is spending time, energy, and money on this? The only reason I can see is to turn one side against the other. In that political game, there are no winners.
Dennis, Columbus, Ohio wrote "22 white men voted against protecting women"
Nonsense. Do women need more legal rights and laws to protect them than men to be equal ?
Why don't any Presidents address male problems?
Lower male representation in higher education. Higher male school drop out rate.
Longer working lives (men work more than women) despite having a shorter life.
A nearly 100% male workplace injury and death rate
Men are the poorest people in America (homelessness)
Federal funding for breast cancer (#3 cancer) exceeds funding for #1 Lung Cancer and Prostate cancer combined
10% paternity fraud rate
This is one of the most stupid and useless bills ever!
If you don't know why I am saying this, then you are not to smart.
If you disagree, please tell me why this is a good bill... but show me where this isn't already covered by previous laws already on the books.
This bill makes men look like agressive attackers and women as helpless victims... Way to kill your feminism movement ladies...
and they title this the Violence Against Women Act... Wow how cool! GREAT NAME...
so if you vote against it, no matter how bad the bill is... stupid people will be like "Why did you vote against the Violence Against Women Act, do you like to beat up women?"
Just stupid.
I pray that you will THINK before you type...
Go back and read 1.44 and you will have your explanation. The Native American sites have been discussing this for well over a month. We have been following the conversations and heated discussions between the parties and the insistence of the Republicans that the provision that Tribal Police be allowed to arrest and prosecute rapists on reservations be dropped from the bill.
MMMMM Beer...
You hit the nail on the head! lets go and waste another few million dollars on some stupid bill... it will make the women feel great. maybe we can get more democratic votes?
BCWC - You said above the following: so let's get rid of all laws ... jungle-jim time for all. There hasn't been a VAWA for awhile and I didn't see or remember a increase in domestic violence because there was no Federal Law. Also you didn't answer my question as to what state you live in.
Dennis - The Federal Government is running deficits and have a spending problem. The taxpayers cannot keep funding laws that the states already do or is responsible for. Your point by point services should be and I would surmise that the States are the best equipped to handle them. It's just more of the Federal Government dictating to the states or taking away the responsibility of the States.
Let's just look at one situation: Man comes home, abuses wife, wife calls police and has husband arrested. State courts are capable of trying the man and giving an appropriate sentence in accordance with the law. Feds don't like it, so they step in and either retry or take jurisdiction away from the state. Now reverse the situation: Wife comes home and abuses, shots, stabs, etc., husband. Husband calls police, wife is arrested and tried in state court. Feds don't/can't step in because men are not protected by VAWA.
MmmMmmBeer, nice name :). To answer your question(and point out Jonathan's lack of education on subjects he loves to comment on once again), yes it did make it OK for some men to batter, rape, and even kill Native American women without being prosecuted. This bill closes that loophole among others. From the New York Times:
Jonathan,
The bill provides resources that are not otherwise available. It does not do any of the things you mention.
It's fair to question whether or not it's worthy of the price tag, but the assertions in your statement are just plain incorrect and outlandish.
BTW, when you tell people they are "not to smart", it would be good to use the proper spelling of the word "too".
sfcret - we've seen first hand how states "protect" their constituents and their rights. Abortion is legal in this country and yet we have states that have undermined that law to a point where it is almost impossible to find a provider. If we have to double-down in order to ensure the safety of American citizens, then double-down we will.
This law has been in effect for ~20 years, and has never been controversial before - it has been reauthorized 4-5 times with almost complete bi-partisan support.
I wish they would fix it so it doesn't have to be reauthorized, like most other legislation.
It didn't become "controversial" until this year when the RWNJ/Tea Baggers decided it was somehow "anti-men," which is stupid, but that is the propaganda being pushed by the RWNJ media.
Since 95% of domestic violence is inflicted on women by men, I say it's not "anti-men" until the violence stops.
.
FORWARD! :-)
PS: ladies, (and men who care about women!) please call your congressperson and tell him/her to support passage of this bill in the House!
Perhaps conservative posters complaining about the VAWA now would care to explain why it has always had nearly full support and YEA votes from republican legislators when it was first passed and for renewal since it was first passed....until the tea-nuts came along.
The GOP support before and GOP opposition to the VAWA today is more proof just how off the track the GOP train has fallen. Compassionate, family values? Only if it is their family.
The Conservative answer to our Federal funding issues is to push everything down to the state level.
Here in Ohio our Republican Governor has cut State spending by pushing costs down to the local and county level. In doing so he has been able to cut taxes on citizens and businesses.
At the County and local level they find themselves with serious budget problems and have been forced to reduce or cut services even eliminating fire and police departments because the tax payers refuse to vote for any tax increases of any kind/type what-so-ever.
As the Federal Government eliminates programs or cuts funding for programs it will help with the Federal budget but the states with lower populations may not be able to pick up the tab to continue these programs.
Next you will see states and businesses in states that can afford these programs begin to use them to recruit more businesses and skilled workers. Small states will suffer more than they already do all in the name of States' Rights.
Mimi -
Always respect your posts. The issue you raised is very valid and the VAWA does address this. That is one good parts of the bill. It is also loaded with special perks for the "undocumented" and even "Cuban undocumented." Please see my post on page 2.
Like most laws passed by Congress, this probably started as a noble intention, but spiraled down into fiasco.
I would rather have seen a bill titled "Authorization to Extend Federal Law Enforcement Powers on Tribal Lands." Could have been taken care of in a few pages and in clear English. Instead we get 102 pages of hard-to-read amalgamated crap and payola to government buddies.
You people just refuse to read any comments that don't fit with your theories. I'll type this again, and I'll keep typing it if I have to....
The part of the bill that is causing the Republicans to gnash their teeth and froth at the mouth is the part about expanding the rights of Native Americans to have the authority on THEIR OWN RESERVATIONS to arrest and prosecute those who rape and assault women and children and even the men there.
Non Natives come on to the reservations and rape Native Americans knowing they will not be prosecuted for the crimes. They are charged under the white man's law, pleaded down to a misdemeanor, never spend a moment in jail, and walk.
None of you spend any time reading the Native American sites so you have no idea of the magnitude of the problem; it has been brought before Congress many times and blatantly ignored. It was not in the last bill, and the Republicans don't want it in this one.
In reference to the post at 1.67 by Dennis - Since when is it the Federal Governments responsibility to fund state programs? Of course state governors and legislators won't provide funding because "Uncle Sam (sugar daddy)", will borrow money to fund the programs.
FYI Dennis, There is just as much waste and fraud at the state levels as there is in the Federal government. States have to get their act together and make the hard choices instead of relying on the Federal Government. CA for instance is wasting billions on a high speed rail project which they can't afford. If someone keeps giving you money, what incentive do you have to face the problem with local/state resources?
What percentage of the Party of No voted for this...1%.....0.05%?
Why does the Party of No hate women and why does any woman vote for them?
Just asking....
@mpa...
I know. But this time I just can't care about the pork. The rapes and assaults on Native American women and children has spiraled so far out of control it is beyond epidemic.
Even illegals have caught on to the fact that they will not be prosecuted for raping and beating Native Americans. It's a sick and racist attitude that has prevailed in America since Europeans set foot on the North American continent and refuses to diminish.
Those of us in the Native American community that I blog with were discussing the idea that the Democrats were well aware that a lot of the extra language they placed in the bill would be a stumbling block for the Republicans and they could have left it out and presented another bill later... they should have just got this one passed for the protection of Native Americans.
You can assault a GLBT and you WILL be charged with a hate crime and prosecuted. Likewise, you can assault a Latino or any other illegal and you WILL be charged with a hate crime and prosecuted.
You can run a Native American off the road, drag him from the vehicle, beat him unconscious and near to death with chains, baseball bats, and tire irons, leave him bleeding in the ditch, and when law enforcement gets around to responding to the scene, the Native American will be asked, "What did you do to cause this?" And if the perpetrator is charged, it will be a miracle if he sees the inside of a jail or courtroom.
Never - The Republicans don't hate women but it appears the Democrats feel women need special protection, could that be because of the female voting bloc?
Assault is assault no matter who is the victim or assailant. What about cases where the woman assaults the man, and it happens more than one things, should the Federal authorities step in and take jurisdiction.
Why would the issue about Native Americans make the entire bill unacceptable? Could we possibly address the situation on Reservations at another time? Why would anyone vote against the Violence Against Women bill? Does this mean that the 22 Republicans and the rest of you wing nuts on this vine who seem to be against this bill are all for Violence Against Women? I am increasingly surrounded by insanity from the Right. The re-election of a Black Man and the paranoia about Mexicans taking over the Country and the Government taking away your guns is becoming like the monster under the bed. You crazies on the Right must wet the bed in fear each night.
kimH - Why do you feel women should have special laws to protect them? What is wrong with the state laws currently on the books that address Assaults, Battery and other crimes? Why do women need the Federal Government to pass laws just for them? Didn't women just get the right to serve in combat units and don't women want the same rights as men when it comes to education, jobs, promotions, pay., etc., so why special federal protection in cases of violence?
Are you brain dead, deliberately obtuse, or do you just not give a damn about rape and assault as long as the person being raped and assaulted is an Indian?
Address the issue about Native Americans "another time?" We've been waiting since 1492 for it to be addressed.
What part of "rapists on reservations ARE NOT PROSECUTED FOR THEIR CRIMES" did you not understand?
The Nations want Tribal Police to have the authority to arrest and prosecute ANYONE on Tribal lands who commit a crime... not have to call in another law enforcement authority who will take them off the Reservation and whitewash the crime to a misdemeanor and let them walk away with no consequences for raping Native American women and children.
You are okay with the rape of women and children as long as they are Native American... is that what you are saying? Screw the Indian protections as long as everybody else is taken care of?
mimi - You keep harping on the same thing but you offer no proof or even any facts as to what you are alleging, so please back your statements up. I don't know what State you live in but there are many Indian Reservations and we don't seem to have that problem.
VAWA is a pork bill designed for political effect. It's already been determined to be unconstitutional. I thought violence against anyone was against the law. The feds are overreaching again.
I repost my Monday post ... and bravo to the Senate
“You are not our protectors…If you were who would there be to protect us from?” … a conundrum posed to the male gender.
Mary Edwards Walker, the only woman ever to receive the Medal of Honor.
February 14 has a new and deeper meaning this year and it is not about chocolates and roses. It is about the ‘gift’ of violence women receive throughout the world on a daily basis. It is V-Day, 1 Billion Rising … the ladies of the world are saying enough is enough.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FYMGybqFfI&feature=player_embedded
The Senate which was to deal with the VAWA Thursday evening dallied and rescheduled for tonight. I wonder if there is something in the hallways that whispered to them that it would be a hard slog to pass in the House and thus Congress could avoid another embarrassing moment on the world stage. Senate passage is all but in the bag as all but one GOP female Senator is onboard. The House with its vaudeville of regressive clowns on the other hand will seek some argument from the fabled past of woman as a happily married homemaker protected by some lovable hunk of sweaty Patriarchy grunting his way to another mouth to feed.
You think not? The family values boys have sent out their foot soldiers, the God fearing breeder hens, and much cackling has been posted in the last few days by the likes of Phyliss Schlafly and Penny Nance among others. The regular cast of boogeymen make all an appearance on their stage: scary feminists, scarier LGBTs, scariest socialists (and all those other ‘flag of the evil side’ words used for Democrats).
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/8/nance-why-congress-ought-ditch-vawa/
Just the facts mam, just the facts. The word fact has become a warning sign for me, as I know there are generally none to follow the trumpet call of ideology. Katherine Rosario, in an all too frequent example of this ruse, offers up-
`”Unfortunately, as we have pointed out, there has been no scientifically rigorous evaluation of VAWA’s effectiveness.”
Then follows up with this tripe-
“They’ve [Liberals] got rhetoric and emotional appeal on their side. We’ve [Conservatives] got facts on ours.”
http://heritageaction.com/2013/02/vawa-failure/
Everyone has their fact sheet but all that was offered up were but two opinions that juggled dog whistle numbers continuously copied from one opinion blogger to the next until lo and behold a ‘factoid’ was born. I did email this opinionated bastion of the ‘Facts’ the link below but I am sure her filters are set for Liberal ‘spam’.
http://4vawa.org/pages/vawa-fact-sheets
V-Day … what it is all about … watch it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gl2AO-7Vlzk
more at …
http://onebillionrising.org/
Gentlemen, we need to listen, to understand and to change. We are worth 50% less when women are not treated as our equals. The violence delivered to women is not only by way of the fist but across the board monetarily and politically. I for one will be hugely surprized in the President if there is no mention of this in the State of the Union, it was one of Hilary Clinton’s major accomplishments to bring this issue to the fore on the world stage.
BCWC, thank you for reposting this. I missed it on Monday.
It's a wonderful thoughtful post.
Violence Against Women Act?
The House Republicans want to modify the name of the law to reflect their thinking - the House Republicans thus re-name the law as 'War On Women Act.'
BCWC - I have to admit, I never thought I'd see the day when the GOP/TP became the party promoting pro-choice. Seems they want the choice to either beat their wives, or not, depending on their mood.
GOP SAVIOR VOTES NO ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT... HOURS BEFORE STATE OF THE UNION RESPONSE
What will Rubio tell the women en Espanol????????????????????????
It has to be I'm not a LADIES MAN!!!
Pendejo?
My only question is: Why did this need to be RE-authorized. Why wasn't it permanent in the first place?!? Do we need a constitutional amendment to make (relatively) permanent something obvious like this in this country?
BinNH
It needed to be refunded. As my dentist would say, "No money, no teeth."
Again, what “war on women”???
Special treatment because of your gender is discrimination.
As I posted above:
What happend to being treated equally? You want to be in combat, want the same pay, what to concidered "equal", but you need special laws and programs??
What's equal about all that? And no, fido, there is no “war on women”. It's about time women in American stop playing the victim and start being responsible citizens. If a man rapes you, press charges. If a man hits you and you've no reason to be hit (if a woman hits me, then I'll hit her back... I'm not going to be a punching bag) press charges. I'm sick and tired of females in our socitey wanting to be equal but no the same.
No more paid for by my $$ abortions. No more paid for by my $$ controceptives. No more paid for my $$ for special progarms for "battered women".
I deman we treat women equally as they treat men or expect men to be treated.
BinNH, I believe, but not certain, that there is a sunset clause in the provision which brings it up for re-authorization every few years, and has to go through funding procedures. One of the other reasons that Republicans have been against it is because of the inclusion of the LGBT community to be "sheltered" under this law. As most of us know, many in the Republican party are against gay people and are treated as second class citizens.
Sadden: you are ignorant. The law may be the Violence Against Women Act, but it does include provisions for men who have experienced domestic and sexual abuse. Pull your head out of your ass, but then again, he who yells the loudest is more often than not a man who physically/emotionally abuses women. I think based on your rant, you would be such a person. Tell me, Sadden, do you kick your animals as well?
Oh, not finished with your sorry ass, Sadden. "Battered women". Really? You put that into quotation marks because you don't believe that there are women who suffer long term physical abuse by their partners do you? I would bet $10,000. that if you are married, and you go off on such a rant, your wife is stone cold silent, quivering in her chair hoping that she will not be the recipient of your rage, this time. You are a disgusting and vile piece of human waste. Your comments prove what you are.
AlaskaGirl - Sadden is a demented far righter. He doesn't really believe women should have any rights. This is his way of expressing that sick notion. And, he can't get an intelligent, successful and strong woman to converse with him so he hates us! No great loss!
When it comes to misogynists as our pal above, they deliberately confuse talk the talk with walk the walk. Perhaps he watched the last video link I posted and is off for a bucket of acid.
"He how yells the loudest..." I wasn't aware I was yelling...
But then, I'd expect that from the left... mountian out of a mole hill. Expecting equal treatment of women is forigen to you, eh? You LIKE to be treaded differently... again, expected.
Always it's "I want without putting in my share" with the left... always "give me"...
When it's time to actaully BE treated equally, you cry "foul".
It's strange you'd be angry when someone wants you to be treated equally... just shows how you truly think...
Battered women have the same rights that battered men do. Men are far more likely to be a victim of a violent crime. Why does a large block of money go to protect women but not to protect men or children?
There is not a single shelter for battered men or men fleeing with children from an abusive mother. Not one. And women's shelters will not accept a man even with his children. Even girls are protected from child genital mutilation under Federal law while boys continue to be subjected to forced genital cutting AKA circumcision. An anti-circumcision law that protects both boys and girls costs nothing.
It's quite clear. Women vote for themselves. Men vote for men, women and children.
And, "seeking", in what way did you get " He doesn't really believe women should have any rights"? How can you make a statement on how I believe or not?
As far as "he can't get an intelligent, successful and strong woman to converse with him so he hates us"... was there one on here that posted? All I saw was "whine, whine, whine... treat me special... cry cry cry".
Not what I would call an "intelligent, successful and strong woman"... that'd be a woman that said, "I do not want special treatment."
You won't get that from the left.
Sadden, this issue should not even be a left or right thing. It's called being a decent human being and making sure that those in our society who are victims of abuse are helped. I can see that talking to you is in fact like talking to a brick wall, which only further cements my thoughts as to you being an abuser. I have personal and professional experience in this field, and you have all the symptoms and characteristics of being an abuser. Please don't hit your wife/gf tonight, and please don't kick your dog anymore.
Ian Blokesworth, the second paragraph of your sentence speaks of your ignorance, not all of it, but most. There are shelters for men who have suffered abuse. The problem we have in our society is that man are less likely to make a claim of spousal/partner abuse because of the stigma attached to it. Men are not supposed to get beaten by their women, no siree, they look like pussies if they do(to the ignorant), so the statistics on abused men in this country is very under counted because many men will not speak out, which sadly accounts for lesser funding.
" I can see that talking to you is in fact like talking to a brick wall.." I feel the same way... it's always "poor little me" without taking responsibility for your situation or actions. In this day and age, the "battered spouse syndrom" isn't a viable excuse. There are to many avenues to approach to get one's self out of those situations. If one goes back into that situation, why would I have to have sympothy for them? Playing the victim in the obama world is played out... you can't scream "equality" and, at the same time, scream, "I'm the victim". It just doesn't work.
If you wish to pander to these people, have at is... I'm tired of footing the bill.
And, for the hate-filled Alaskan, you've no more "professional experience in this field" on this thread than anyone else posting.
I am not, in any way, shape, or form, an abuser... a fact you missed the mark on. Your own predjudices clouded your views, and that's the problem with people like you. Keep your mind open and use your brain, it will serve you much better. Your hate, and the hate of people like you, are what is keeping our Country in the sorry shape It's becoming.
you've no more "professional experience in this field" on this thread than anyone else posting.
Oh, really? Sure about that? For three and half years I was an Adult Advocate at a Domestic Violence/Sexual Abuse Shelter, which included extensive training and daily contact with abused victims, both women and children. No, not a hater at all, I just call bull @!$%# when I see it, and I am pretty good at recognizing abusive people. I know it sucks that you are being called out on it, but them's the breaks.
"Democrats were all too eager to seize..."
First Read is all to eager to seize Dem talking points...
Ignoring the massive "Obamaphone fraud" uncovered by the Wall Street Journal today?
Doesnt fit the NBC Obama-worship template, does it?
GOP... You realize that this is an inherited program, right?
Probably not... It wouldn't matter to folks like you anyway.
Oh, maybe you can helps us with making a connection to the VAWA and "obamaphones". Is it just an attempt at a free shot or do you have AADD?
Inherited programs should be cut when they are found to be a fraud and waste of tax payer money.
Todd, I can't agree...
If there is fraud in a program and it's an effective an contributory program, then fix it.
Obviously, if it's deemed a waste by Congress it should be discontinued.
Yes, programs that support wasteful spending should be cut. Can we add the 54 billion given to the fossil fuel industry while they are making record profits too? Oooops, wait, that's a GOP sacred cow.. can't do that.
GOP Comeback - you're an idiot. The "free phone" program started in 1996. What's your next whine? And, what additional lies will you post!
GOP Comeback, not only was it started in 1996, it's paid for by the cell phone companies as an agreement to settle lawsuits from the FCC.
Chip, I'm all for fixing a damaged program, but how do you fix a program like the free phone program? It's all about prioritizing what we spend our limited resources on.
I volunteer every weekend to pick up donated furniture and deliver it to needy families. One common trait I've witnessed is the needy families I deliver to are never without (smart) cell phones and flat screen TV's. If you cannot afford a bed for your child, how can you afford an iPhone and 50" Samsung Smart TV? That is called spending priorities gone wrong. Our government is even worse at prioritizing the tax spending, especially since we borrow almost half of every dollar we spend.
This piece of legislation will pass the House with no problem. I think the people who vote against it are just voicing their opinion that something in the Bill is wrong and they want to bring that to the attention of the public. Just my opinion.
Seeking and IAMMYOWNWOMAN - Shame on you ladies for trying to confuse these boys with facts. Heads will explode!
It is a shame that in this day and age there is still so much domestic violence. My sister was a victim and when i tried to stop him he beat me up and threw me out of a moving car. Anything we can do to protect women in a dangerous situation is O.K. with me.
OMG lisa.
Pat Boston MA, The sad part is she's still with him.
lisa, I wish I could say something to make you feel better about the situation. I really do. It's sad.
lisa---your sister is lucky to have a sister like you. I see your later comment that she is still with him. I hope you are able to at least communicate with her because some day she will need you again. {{{hugs to you}}}
Imagine 22 profiles in courage not voting for the VAWA act. Geesh.
Steeler Fan, She hasn't spoken to me in 11 yrs. That's how much control he has.
lisa s -
So many people - including, apparently, many of our "leaders" - tend to see this issue in terms of anonymous statistics. Maybe that helps them rationalize their positions, I don't know. But thank you for sharing your family's personal heartache. Your sister is lucky to have you in her corner, and hopefully someday she'll find her way back to you. I have a feeling you'll still be there for her if and when she does.
lisa---what a sad story; my heart aches for you and for your sister. Will say a prayer for her.
Hugs to you Lisa ... apparently laws new and old need to be drummed into these bastards heads again and again.
Pat, Joann, Steeler, Thank you for your kind words. Violence against women still a large problem and people that are effected need to speak out. This is an issue that needs to come out of the shadows.
lisa - it's such a control issue and it takes place, gradually, over time. I've never understood it. I hope your sister realizes, if she finally reaches a point she's had enough - that you are there for her. Good luck!
{{{hugs}}} to you Lisa and your sister!
Hugs to you lisa, you tried!
Perhaps one day, your sis will realize that love is not supposed to hurt!
Feisty,Seeking, and chilled, Thank you it's not something that's easy to talk about. But it is something that needs to be said.
lisa - when I was in Public Relations my company put on a Domestic Violence seminar with industry leaders, the FBI, local law enforcement and domestic violence survivors. It was a very educational experience - but very troubling. I wish you the best and hope your sister some day realizes she deserves better.
Seeking Sanity, Thank you
To Lisa and the others who shared their stories on this thread----I am so in awe of your courage and so appreciate you coming forward. As JoAnne says, it helps to make this personal, not just dry statistics. Makes it even more disappointing to think that 22 Senators voted against the VAWA and that its passage in the House is not a sure thing.
I hope you were strong, Lisa, and pressed charges against this guy. If you didn't, you did yourself and your sister no favors. There is no reason for hitting or abusing one's spouse, be they male or female. Anyone that abuses one's spouse NEEDS to be brought up on charges and thrown in jail.
Period.
IF you didn't press charges, then you're no more than an enabler. I truly hope you did the right thing for your sister.
lisa - the most startling example I saw during our conference was about the CEO of a large company who beat his wife so badly she almost died. Of course he denied it and got away with it. She had to flee their home - when she recovered - and change her name, etc. When the weather is bad she has excrutiating pain and can barely walk.
No one wants to believe the abuser is someone like this man so it is hard to convince authorities. It's a really sad situation.
Sadden - you don't have a clue and have no business making accusations about a subject you don't understand and don't want to understand.
Lisa, sorry to be so late offering you my support. That was a brave thing you did, trying to protect your sister. My brother once intervened when he saw a woman being abused, and he got punched trying to help her- only to have the woman "stand by her man." So sad, these cases are vexing and scary. You did your best.
Speeking Insanity was in public realations ??? LOL !!!! I wonder how long it took before she called someone moron, stupid, vulgar, crude, classless, low-information, idiot, idiotic, liar ...... etc, etc adnauseam before she got FIRED and quickly shown the door !!!!!!
Sadden, you just STFU right now! You have nothing to say about this. You are completely clueless and you are part of what is wrong in this country.
Lisa, hugs to you, and I hope that one day your sister will turn to you again for help.
I was with my ex husband for almost 12 years before I finally left him. I was physically and emotionally abused quite frequently. When he started displaying his temper towards our then 5 year old daughter is the time I decided I had to risk everything and get out. With the love and support of my family and some friends, I was able to get my own place for me and my daughter(we went from a large 3 bdrm home to a one bedroom apt), a friend let me use her extra car because my ex took the car away from me, until I could buy one on my own. It took alot for me to pretty much leave everything I had built up and start over again with only $600. in my bank account, but I did it for me and my daughter. I did not want her to grow up like that because I sure as hell didn't. It took a long time and some counseling, but I made it through and I rebuilt a life for me and my daughter that did not include violence in our house. Never again will I be treated that way, and no person should ever suffer that. VAWA helps those that need the help and want the help. I wish I had known about it then, but that's okay, I had the help I needed. I am one of the lucky survivors of domestic violence, others are not. What I know is that those that have a loved one in this situation is that you can never give up on that person because one day they will hopefully be strong enough to leave and they are going to need all the love and support you can muster.
My gosh, Lisa, what a sad and scary story.
Alaska girl, Thank you for sharing. I am glad you had the support you needed. It is a difficult problem. Both my daughter and me have volunteered at women's shelters. They need all the support and volunteers they can get.
Alaska Girl,
Seems we have more in common then previously thought!
When my ex grabbed my daughter who was one at the time and hit her so hard her knees buckled... there was no looking back!
I did a decent job of protecting myself, but was not about to raise a child in that enviroment.
Bastard still bore the scars from when he made the mistake of thinking it was a good idea to hit me over the head with an ice-cube tray, the day he died!
Congrats to you for making the right decision!
You GOT it sistuh!
Jody, Amy BCWC, Thanks, If you don't have time to volunteer. Womens shelters are always in need of Business suits for the women so they can enter the workforce. They often leave with next to nothing.
Feisty, I would say that strong willed women tend to gravitate towards each other, and by the looks of it, there are a number of us.
Yes, Lisa is right. For just over three years I was an Adult Advocate at the local shelter here, and we would get clothing donations from people and one of the jobs as an advocate was to go through the clothing and sort out what could be used for interviews and such. So, ladies, when you go to clean out your closets this spring, bag up the clean clothing and please take it to your local shelters. That goes for your children's clothing as well. Most shelters also, if they have the room, will take donated household items in good working condition, or kitchen ware. We kept a list of items and when women were moving into their own place they could take these things with them to help them rebuild their life. And, of course, all items are tax deductible.
Alaska girl, You are a very brave lady. You have a wonderful evening. As Feisty would say {hugs}
Thanks, Lisa. Means alot. You as well.
Lisa and Feisty,
Your stories reveal the need for this refunding of the law. Networks, women shelter, and mental health resources are needed for women and their children to leave a violent situation and a safe place to stay to begin to rebuild their lives.
I work for a non profit agency. We have a tear off phone number in all our women's bathroom stalls to call the local domestic abuse hot line. People use them. We also provide volunteers and other resources to the agency that has set up safe houses in residential neighborhoods for women to stay without fear of the abusing husband or boyfriend will track them down. this agency has more calls for safe houses then they have currently.
Domestic violence hits every ecomonic, social, educational and ethnic group.
Women are not any ones personal property, punching bag or object of some guy's frustration,anger that leads to physical or mental violence.
Lisa, Feisty and Alaska Girl - Hugs to all of you and to anyone who has been lucky enough to live through this. My x never hit me but he raised his hand to me once and I told him if he ever again entertained the idea of hitting me he better take his best shot and kill me because he would regret it till the day he died. That incident was the beginning of the end. Regrettably, this is so common - both physical and emotional.
Lisa, I am sorry to learn about your experience with your sister. That is so sad, and my hope for you is that she is aware you are there for her if she needs you. It must be a painful situation for you. Do you know how she is doing? I hope Ok.
AG and Feisty.....you gals are amazing, I proud to know you.
It is astonishing to me in this day and age, this legislation even has to to be discussed. This should automatically refund without any discussion other than to increase the funds.
We will remember those that didn't vote for it.
Cry "victim", ask for hand outs, but never, under any circumstances, accept resposibility.
The Credo of the Liberal Left.
Sadden American, No one is a victim here. We are just women who fought back.
Sadden is the victim of his own ignorance and I would say that he himself is quite the abusive person. I truly feel sorry for the man or woman in his life, not to mention any dog or cat that is in his care.
AlaskaGirl . . .
Not something that I like having in common with you wonderful ladies but I do. I stepped up to my father when he was pummeling my mother when I was 18. Took quite a beating and pressed charges. My mother was FURIOUS with me for not retracting the charges. He went to jail on weekends for an entire summer. I remember the judge looking at my father and saying, "look at her - that is your Daughter!"
I don't understand it. None of us do. Lisa, I am so sorry for your sister. I would gather pretty much all of us who post know of someone in a similar situation and as much as we would like, we cannot remedy the situation on our own.
Take care . . .
Equal justice under the law. Certain laws are enacted that seem to make some more equal than others. Hate crimes...crimes against women. Since so many African American men are murdered each year should we have a violence against African American men act? Where does it stop? Mind you I understand the intent, but I wonder why we can't just throw the book at those commiting the crimes, no matter who the perpetrator is--no matter who the victim is. The perceived need for these laws tells me that we may not be enforcing laws that are already on the books with equal justice.
LOL, yer funny making an argument for common sense and simplicity! Dont you know that both barely exist in this universe?
Morlock: So what does that say about society in which we both live and to which we both play our small roles? If society can't enforce laws properly that are already on the books, what good will more laws do? Will their very existence lead to equal application of justice or will these new laws be applied just as badly as all the old laws?
Passing new, redundant, and even ineffective laws makes some people feel better - and results in VOTES!
mpa: I didn't want to go there because of the knee jerk reaction that will occur, but I concur with your assessment completely.
q- We live in an era where everyone is special and everyone needs special protection. Attacking anyone who is different than you is a hate crime. Let's pass more laws we won't enforce since there is nothing more important to deal with other than a war, huge debt, porous borders, high unemployment, high drop out rates, broken school systems, etc, etc.....
It also keeps the politicians employed. Think about it, we've had congresses for over 200 years passing law after law every single year. You'd think they'd run out of things to write laws about, and they pretty much have, so they just keep inventing new laws that say or do the same thing as old laws or pander to special interest groups, or in this case they renew an existing law that was redundant to begin with. It's called job security.
Anilof -
yep.
I seriously doubt it will pass the house since the republicans have proven that they believe women should have no rights, especially concerning their own bodies.
Especially since the left believe all women are interested in is sex and reproduction. The far left has lowered the standards of a woman to a randy womb. Equal rights went out the window. Now it is nothing BUT abortion and birth control. Sorry if it offends but that is the message that is making it into the real world. Not the far right, not the huffington post world, the real world.
I'm interested to know what exactly they were voting against. Perhaps there are some provisions in the act that have nothing to do with violence against women. This is where having line item votes or vetoes would be appreciated. I hate seeing items slipped into bills that have nothing to do with the purpose of the bill.
One thing that they object to is the fact that law would implicitly cover gay and lesbian couples. It seems that right-wingers just can't stop thinking about gay sex.
Barry-NJ
One thing that they object to is the fact that law would implicitly cover gay and lesbian couples. It seems that right-wingers just can't stop thinking about gay sex.
Particularly, that one Larry Craig toe taping in the men's bathroom.
@Barry- Why would a violence against women act cover men?
Todd -
It also covers elderly men and women, and woman over fifty as a separate subset.
Then they should change the name of the bill to reflect that it covers lots of groups. I don't like the false naming of bills in order to attract public support.
They should, but they won't. If you've ever "1984" by George Orwell, you would recognize this as "Newspeak."
The "Affordable Care Act" (Obama Care) did not lower the cost of aspirin, hospital visits, medical procedures, etc. It would rightly have been called the "Medical Insurance Overhaul Bill."
A warm and fuzzy title allows for political gamesmanship in the event you don't win - Our opponents hate women!"
I'm waiting to see how long it takes for the GOP leadership to start calling it a "job killing" bill.
First things first.
How much Pork and unrelated junk is attached to this otherwise laudable bill??
Neil, very good question.
If there is an area of reform that would benefit the country and streamline the legislative process, it's earmarks!
Here it is:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?c113:./temp/~c113EpS57Z
Be sure to let us know which parts you consider "Pork and unrelated junk".
Can any of you enlightened liberal progressives explain to me how the 'Violence Against Women Act' improves upon or fills in gaps with existing criminal laws? We "teabaggers" do have a hard time with comprehension after all...
So true. They claim that we should all be treated equally on one hand, but then talk out of the other side of their mouth wanting special bills for race, genders... Crime against any person should be treated as such. No special laws required, unless you think some deserve better than others.
Have any of you READ the damn bill? I always love the commenters who know only what NBC has fed them.
in some states, women are required to pay for the rape kits used to collect the evidence from their bodies. This law mandates that no victim, in any state, has to pay this fee.
I feel sorry for you if you think this law is unnecessary, however if you knew how prevalent domestic violence is, which is usually but not always directed at women, perhaps you would see the necessity of focusing on protecting women.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/vawa_factsheet.pdf
Well Tea, Luther, and mpa you have your reason (giving by someone who "READ the damn bill"). So are you going to apologize or continue being ignorant and having reading comprension problems?
See my post on the next page and explain how a bill that gives special consideration to any undocumented female and her children, special special consideration to Cuban immigrants who are victimized, dollars to trade unions, and "earmarks" millions for judge training is a good bill.
Thanks. Would you like to apologize now or later?
As a victim/survivor of Domestic Violence, this is the only thing that makes sense! Let's just hope that those republicans that didn't want this passed never have any woman/girl in their families become victims! But then again, maybe if they had to live with it, they would change their attitude! Not every thing is about them! This is about safety for men and women as DV does happen to men too! They just aren't smart enough to report it!
Domestic violence does happen to men too, we have had several cases in Maine in recent years. Men in these situations have benefited from services set up to help women through this law, like the National Domestic Hotline. Domestic violence is different from other kinds of crime, as you well know, janetfs, I am very glad you survived the situation you were in. More survivers should speak out!
janetfs,
I am glad you found the courage and support to leave the situation. it is not easy but as a survivor you know what is on the other side. God bless you and thank you for sharing your commnet on a public blog. There might be a woman reading this thread that needed to hear that they can get help and stop the violence.
22 senators voted against this bill, all GOP. Thugs are determined to not go quietly into that good night: They have only paid lip service to their acknowledgement they are wholly out of touch with evolving standards of a civilized society. They will either perish under their own weight or establish the American equivalent of the Third Reich........that's how they Roll, albeit on rather squared wheels..
Just like the Sandy bill you libs/livs vilify those who didn't vote for it. Did you read the bill, the entire bill and find that there was nothing in it worth stalling it? The pork and crap in Sandy bill alone was 1/3 the cost. Wonder what, like another poster said, pork was in this that had nothing to do with DV or VAW.
22 of them saw something they didn't like. Of course all the Dems voted for it. It was their mythical war on women crusade that helped get Obama reelected.
PARTY DRONES are sooooo boring.
Your watching way too much FOX or FAUX News---start thinking for yourself instead of letting them formulate your thought process.
So Talk, you think that women should have to pay for their own rape kits. Mpa has a point you party drones are so boring and ignorant.
You keep telling yourself there's no "war on women" while you cons continue to vote against laws designed to protect women's rights.
You better read it again. I'm on your side
Well, what do you know know, Rubio has just sealed his faith as a loser in 2016. The party of stupid is at it at it again in their war on women.
Yeah.. Just look at how Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Al Gore et al. Have treated their women. You do not even know what is in the Bill you are just told to cheer for it so you do.
I know "We have to pass it to see what is in it" right?
Did they ever strike-hit their wives? No wonder you people are going to keep losing.
Why not just outlaw violence.. what makes the bill so special? Especially since there are so many women guilty of manslaughter and murder. Ohhhh wait.. we need one just for women. I see. I'll bet Arias is looking forward to this as her defense.
It's special because it helps protect our moms, sisters, and daughters. The bill authorizes $659 million over five years for VAWA programs. It also expands VAWA to include new protections for LGBT and Native American victims of domestic violence, to give more attention to sexual assault prevention and to help reduce a backlog in processing rape kits. Created in 1994, VAWA has helped to strengthen programs and services for victims of domestic violence, dating violence and stalking.
This fifty something former Navy brat (my dad served 30 years) is with you on this one Navy Vet. Thanks for your years in the fleet.
Chucky b: So what about all the other victims of violence? What happens to them if they aren't in your specified groups?
Specified groups??? You mean women? I think stalking and rape are much more of a problem for women, but please contact your congressman if you think you might need some extra protection too.
What about our dads, brothers, and sons? Chopped liver or just second class citizens? Oh wait, it is them that commit all domestic violence and they are never victims.
This is just pandering to a special group. We have laws against violence against ANYONE now. This helps how?
Gotta be an anchor clanker....dumb as a bollard
Why do republicans hate women?
yes, specified groups. African American men are murdered and assaulted in high numbers, yet I don't see a Violence against African American Men act.
Ojob: This libertarian hates all violence against all people. Why do liberals condone statutory rape (Menendez--by going to the parties in the DR where it occurred, he condones it), vehicular manslaughter/murder of women (T. Kennedy), Use of women as playthings (maybe even rape?) and sexual harassment (Bill Clinton)?
Blind faith is blind ignorance...
No wonder you people are going to keep losing elections! The republican party can't get over and stop acting stupid.
navyvt
Why don't you go read the act to see what it does. Violence against anyone is against the law. But you really should read the act. It is not just a law against violence. Read the act and then may be you would not say such silly things about violence against African American men act.
Senators who voted against the bill included Republicans John Barrasso (Wyo.), Roy Blunt (Mo.), John Boozman (Ark.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), John Cornyn (Texas), Ted Cruz (Texas), Mike Enzi (Wyo.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Chuck Grassley (Iowa), Orrin Hatch (Utah), James Inhofe (Okla.), Mike Johanns (Neb.), Ron Johnson (Wisc.), Mike Lee (Utah), Mitch McConnell (Ky.), Rand Paul (Ky.), Jim Risch (Idaho), Pat Roberts (Kansas), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Jeff Sessions (Ala.), Jeff Thune (N.D.) and Tim Scott (S.C.).
I wouldn't expect any different from most of these fine fellows but Tom Coburn is somewhat of a surprise.
Cut the Republicans some slack, clearly they were just playing to their base...men who like to beat and rape women. Who else supports Republicans these days?
Amy, I still see some "Women For Mitt" bumper stickers down here in NC....go figure.
Amy, seriously? The Republican support base likes to beat and rape women? I hope you are being sarcastic.
I think the article was fairly specific as to the Republican objections:
Nothing about beating and raping there. The names of the objectors are, for lack of a better term, the "usual suspects" - of whom those of us who follow congressional action would expect to vote against legislation heavily favored by the opposing party. I have to believe their motivations are strictly political, I can not imagine any of these guys harbors any abnormal level of malice towards women. I suspect objections have something to do with states rights as well. That would also be consistent with the listed objectors.
I grow weary of the broad-brush characterizations of Republicans being women-haters, etc etc etc. It is not right. That some members of congress oppose the VAWA (I do not oppose its passage personally - I have more of an idealogical problem, it is disturbing to me that such legislation is perceived to be necessary in the first place) means just that - they oppose a piece of legislation. For me saying they are waging a war on women is an illogical stretch.
So Mark, what about those other pieces of legislation the cons were against? Things like laws regarding equal pay or covering contraception in health insurance? You talking about one piece of legislation but ignore the pattern of behavior that stretches back for years. I remember cons being against the Equal Rights Ammendment because it would "turn women into lesibans and witches" and things haven't improved much since. As for their reasons for being against VAWA, sorry but I'm not buying it. It sounds more like an excuse than to admit they were against having homosexuals be covered by the law.
The real question is how many millions in NEW spending did this bill authorize? They could have renewed the existing VAWA bill which was and still is protecting women or they could have made changes to it to increase protections. These are all great, but I betcha if you look real close, you'll find the spending increases which is where you'll probably see some Republican opposition.
Alverant,
Points taken.
I assume you are using the legislation you are referring to and conservative objection to to them as evidence of a war against women. I have to disagree, on a global basis conditions for women have improved dramatically over the past few decades during which the ERA was being considered, and since it has been abandoned. Interesting to note a prime objector to the ERA was a woman (NOT a deflection, just an observation). I am not well versed in the actual content of the ERA but am not opposed to the concept at all - again, as I said above, any opposition I have is ideological, that there is a need for such legislation I find objectionable.
Here's where my conservative side comes out. Certain times legislation and government intervention is necessary and justified. A well designed law can trigger change, if the conditions are right. But status improvements for specific groups of society that are a result of changing factors such as economic conditions, behavioral mores, just social evolution in general are far more beneficial and long lasting than mere legislation. Equal pay should be a function of the free market (bearing in mind freedom implies responsibility), not government mandate, and contraceptives? Too much religion mixed up in that one and religion though trumpeted to greater volume by the right is certainly a problem with the left as well.
I realize that is all rather academic and people who live now are concerned about the quality of their lives now, not so much what things might evolve into for their descendants.
Never considered the homosexual aspect....
Why do we have to have a renewable law for violence against women? Shouldn't this be the law? God help the sistas that go with these frightwing buffoons.
R Kapoor - it's about the almighty dollar.
I wonder if the drunk Speaker of the House will sober up and put it to a vote.
Women of America must come together and rise above these old white men keeping them from moving to the 21st century. Even their God wears pants - ever notice?
Question? Why would any Republicans object to legislation benefiting women and helping to cut down on violence against them? I am of no political persuasion, but it seems to me that they, ( Republicans ) would be shooting themselves in the foot for voting against something like this. Way to alienate the female voter base you dumb-asses.
I suppose there are no women who are bright enough to realize that positively uncapped deficit spending is going to bank rupt the country?
Some of you people are very insulting to women.
I suppose there are no women who are bright enough to realize that positively uncapped deficit spending is going to bank rupt the country?
Some of you people are very insulting to women.
Another poster claims that they object to it covering homosexuals. I'm not quite sure I'd agree with a violence against women act that includes men. Perhaps they should call it the violence against everyone act and just make it cover all people.
mpa - this board is about violence against women not your stupidity. Yes, we women know about the economy and that is a totally different subject. Please, since you have no reading comprehension skills, have someone explain it to you. YOU and morons like you are an insult to men - but hey, you're a PERFECT Republican - not a brain in your head!
Seeking (and clearly not finding) -
If you have read my posts for any time, you know that I find ALL PARTY DRONES (either party) to be boring and worthy of pity.
This board is about a piece of legislation. Check out some of the specifics in that bill that this moron bothered to read. I am sure that 192 pages would have been beyond your capabilites.
Thanks for the gratutous insult though.
This hurts but here goes....
I saw my grandfather beat my grandmother
I saw my father beat my mother and I'm not talking about a slap...I'm talking beat
You guys that are saying it is no different than any other assualt don't have the first f**king clue.
as someone who also grew up in an abusive home, its a slap in the face for them to not pass this..if its missing something, work with the author and amend it..funny how the GOP always manages to find a way to do it when they want to!
I watched my mother beat myself and my siblings on a regular basis. I watched herburn my hand to 2nd degree. I didn't see it , but she stuck a knife an inch im my little sister''s leg.
Women are equal opportunity offenders. Care to guess who commits 60+% of family-related child homicides?
That would be women. They so need extra protections.
FrankH and david saint, thank you for exlaining how domestic violence is different from other kinds of crime. And the fact that it often impacts children is also a reason it needs special attention.
mpa - you're lying. 60+% of family-related child homicides are committed by the father. IF what you said truly happened it is horrible for you and your siblings. But, your lying doesn't make it any better. Your mother should have been put away and I would have helped round her up!
MPA is correct, most child homicides are committed by the mother:
http://unhinfo.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/homicidechildrenyouth.pdf
"Most homicides of young children arecommitted by family members throughbeatings or suffocation. Although victims include approximately equal numbers of boys and girls, offenders include a disproportionate number ofwomen. " -page 2
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174580/
Thanks, Shawn. (in)Sanity never lets facts stand in the way of his/her attacks.
Wonder if the Boner will have the ballz to bring this up? If it was an anti-abortion rights bill they would have it on the calendar for tomorrow.
Navy Vet, Talk to The Hand, Quovadis....you really embody scum. You are an embarrassment to real men. Now go back to scratching your belly and wondering why you don't have a woman in your life.
Just asked a question chucky. Oh and those women for Mitt bumper stickers you see here, that would be the women who didn't buy into the "war on women" rhetoric. You know, the ones who can think for themselves.
Talk - women who can think for themselves NEVER discuss anything with idiots like you! And, they would never have supported idiotic Mitt. We know better. But, you clearly hang around with women who have low intelligence. You could never stand being around a strong, intelligent and successful woman and none would have anything to do with someone like you!
Talk, you mean the women who are OK with being treated like a womb life support system or thought they should have to pay for their own rape kits or are OK with being paid less for doing the same work as a man? Grow up and join us here in Reality. The GOP is waging a war on women's rights. To claim otherwise is to turn a blind eye towards what the cons have done in the past 10+ years.
If you are an example of what you are talking about, no I couldn't. Even the liberal women I know can have an intelligent conversation and see both sides of a story without the constant demeaning, name calling and pure and simple my way or the highway that you do seem to exude. And we are the best of friends because of our differing opinions. We complement each other.
You're right. I don't like know it all's or closed minded people of any gender whose definition of a conversation is "shut up and listen to me b!tch". And you would be surprised the women I have around me despite your opinion.
Talk - amazingly statistics don't agree with you. 83% of family homicides are done by the male of the family! See, lying doens't pay because for those of us who know what we're doing - we can look facts up. However, that does NOT excuse any woman who acts the way you SAY your mother did. I hope someone locks her away for the rest of her life if what you said is true.
You bring out the worst in a woman when you lie and try to make things up - believing a woman will just buy anything you sell.
And, no, you don't converse with liberal women - or if you do you talk completely different than you do here. No liberal woman would have anything to do with the likes of you!
The VOICE OF LIBERAL WOMEN has spoken.
Hilarious.
BTW oh you of little comprehension. I said nothing about any homicide rates but yet you berate me. Suggest you gather your thoughts and direct it to where you were had. At Shawn and mpa lotsanumbers with whom, I agree.
As I stated above,
I converse in response to the person or persons that I am TRYING to have a conversation with. I don't walk into their houses to have them say "Hey the dumbass, idiot, moron, is here" as I have on this board.
Do we honestly need more laws that further divide us into separate protected classes. Here is a novel idea. Do away with laws that protect women from violence, gays from violence, minorities from violence and just embrace the laws that protect all of us from violence.
And the GOP thinks they only have a messaging problem....
We don't need legislation that makes some of us more equal than others. How about making this stuff racial and gender neutral.
You really do not have a clue what this is all about, do ya??
Please explain woodbutcher.