Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves Out LGBT, Immigrant Protections


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves Out LGBT, Immigrant Protections Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves Out... - 5/17/2012 5:29:42 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
Posted: 05/16/2012 6:43 pm Updated: 05/17/2012 9:29 am

House Republicans on Wednesday passed their bill to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, despite protests from the White House, most Democrats and even some Republicans for not doing enough to protect LGBT, Native American and undocumented immigrant women.

The bill passed 221-205 on a largely partisan vote. Six Democrats voted for it and 23 Republicans opposed it. Just two GOP congresswomen voted against it: Reps. Judy Biggert (Ill.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Fla.).

The House measure, like the Senate-passed bill, would reauthorize VAWA for another five years. But the Senate version is more comprehensive and House Democrats had been pressing for a vote on that bill instead, to no avail. VAWA is typically reauthorized with broad support and little debate, but in the context of a presidential election year and with the so-called "war on women" taking place, even an issue relating to violence against women has become a charged, partisan fight.

The White House threatened to veto the bill earlier this week, on the grounds that it "rolls back existing law and removes long-standing protections for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault." And just after the House vote, Vice President Joe Biden, an original sponsor of VAWA in 1994, issued a statement trashing the bill.

"The House has passed a version of the Violence Against Women Act that will roll back critical provisions to help victims of abuse. I urge Congress to come together to pass a bipartisan measure that protects all victims. VAWA has been improved each time it's been reauthorized, and this time should be no different," Biden said.

During the House debate, Democrats charged that the GOP bill would actually leave victims of domestic violence worse off than they are under current law. Unlike the Senate bill, the House proposal discourages undocumented immigrant women from reporting abuse without the threat of being deported. It also makes it harder for Native American women to seek justice against their abusers, and it leaves out protections for the LGBT community altogether.

Republicans "rarely miss an opportunity to exclude LGBT Americans from important rights and benefits," Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) said. "They're saying if you're a woman in a relationship with another woman, then you don't deserve the same protections from domestic abuse or sexual assault."

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/house-passes-violence-against-women-act_n_1522524.html

Profile   Post #: 1
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 5:41:39 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
I dont see it passing the senate, talkabout redundancy and a waste of time and money.

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 5:45:46 PM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
Why are you lying?

The bill didn't leave ANYONE out, it covers EVERYONE... It just didn't have special wording to make the LGBT people feel special... Notice it didn't single MEN either?

_____________________________

http://www.extra-life.org/

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 5:47:30 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
House Democrats Urge Senate Version of Violence Against Women Act

Several Democratic congresswomen said Wednesday that the House should adopt the Senate version of a bill to renew a 1994 domestic violence law.

Seven lawmakers from the Asian, black and Hispanic caucuses, including Representatives Judy Chu of California and Sheila Jackson-Lee of Texas, appeared together on Capitol Hill to rebuke House Republican leaders for offering their own version of the bill — one that they say tips the balance of the law in favor of abusers. They charge that Republicans are rewriting the federal domestic violence law in a way that would exclude some protections for immigrants, American Indians and gay men and lesbians.

The 1994 law has sailed through the renewal process twice before in 2000 and 2005, but it has become the latest front in an election-year battle for female voters, who will be critical in deciding which party controls Congress and the White House.

The Republican-authored House bill, offered by Representative Sandy Adams of Florida, a woman, is expected to pass the House on Wednesday, despite opposition from Democrats and more than 300 objections from law enforcement groups, providers of social services, Catholics and evangelicals.

“This is just unbelievable that we could be here, you know,” said Representative Nydia M. Velázquez of New York. “Whatever happened with compassionate conservatism? Whatever happened with respect for women’s dignity and integrity, you know? The role of us to protect humans’ life, and this bill is short on that.”

House Democrats say the Republican-authored law would raise requirements to prove domestic violence and sexual assault, erase confidentiality protections for immigrant women and alert abusers when their victims seek help. They say it would eliminate a path to citizenship for immigrant victims who cooperate with police and cut “culturally competent services” for Muslims, gay men and lesbians, and victims who don’t speak English.

The lawmakers urged Republicans to drop their renewal bill and take up the Senate version, which passed in April with the support of 15 Republicans and expands the law to protect American Indians, gay men and lesbians. The White House has also threatened to veto the House bill, citing its lack of protections for women on American Indian reservations and college campuses, and for gay men and lesbians.

“The irony here is that no one is asking Republicans to go out on a limb,” said Ms. Chu, a former rape counselor.

But Republican women took to the House floor to support the House bill against the onslaught of criticism.

Representative Lynn Jenkins, Republican of Kansas, said the House legislation “takes enormous strides” to protect victims, but it would also curb fraud. She said the House version of the bill limits overhead expenses and requires the Justice Department to conduct annual audits.

“Any attempt to exploit this important law as partisan political issue is contemptible,” she said.

But Ms. Velázquez said that Republicans’ claim that the changes were necessary to curb fraud are a “red herring” that has not been backed up by “one shred of evidence.”

“We’re here today to say with one voice that we will not turn back the clock, we will not abandon these women, and we reject this bill,” she said.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 5:53:25 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

Why are you lying?

The bill didn't leave ANYONE out, it covers EVERYONE... It just didn't have special wording to make the LGBT people feel special... Notice it didn't single MEN either?



So why didn't they just renew the old version of the bill? It was good enough in the past--it had been working. It is only because the House bill actually does strip does strip protections from certain segments of the population.

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 5:56:57 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
I was curious about this:

quote:

alert abusers when their victims seek help


So found this article:

House GOP Would Let Domestic Abusers Know Their Victims Called For Help

and am still confused.

quote:

The GOP-led House’s version of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) would not only strip away Senate-passed protections for undocumented, LGBT, and Native American victims, it also contains a dangerous provision that violates an undocumented victim’s confidentiality by allowing immigration officials to speak with, and ask for evidence from, his or her abuser.

Visas offered to undocumented victims of domestic violence are called “U Visas” and the Senate version of the bill expanded the number of U Visas offered to victims. The House bill not only strips out the additional visas, it also contains a new provision enabling government officials to inform “the accused” that their victim blew the whistle on their abuse:

During the adjudication of each petition under this paragraph, an investigative officer from a local service center of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services shall conduct an in-person interview of the alien who filed the petition. The investigative officer may also gather other evidence and interview other witnesses, including the accused United States citizen or lawful permanent resident, if they consent to be interviewed.

Undocumented victims already fear calling the police because they risk deportation in doing so. This portion of the bill adds on another level of fear by alerting their abusers that they’ve sought help — under current law, immigrant victims enjoy a right to confidentiality that would be seriously undermined by this bill. Allowing perpetrators of domestic violence to play any role in the deportation or protection of their victims is a cruel fate, but alerting an abuser to a victim’s complaint adds yet another level of emotional abuse on top of the physical abuse that the victim already faces.


Don't the police have to talk to police as part of the investigation? Or maybe when women are seeking help for DV the help just consists of getting them out and prosecution of the perp is not necessarily included. Would someone please elaborate?

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 6:08:58 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Another point of view
http://wispolitics.com/index.Iml?Article=270096

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 6:12:48 PM   
Karmastic


Posts: 1650
Joined: 4/5/2012
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

Why are you lying?

The bill didn't leave ANYONE out, it covers EVERYONE... It just didn't have special wording to make the LGBT people feel special... Notice it didn't single MEN either?


fyi...OP just did a copy paste of an article, they aren't advocating.

but i agree, had the same sentiment last time a similar yellow journalism article sensationalized and demonized the republicans because they didn't want to include this same specific language that names classes of people that are already covered (as is every woman, at least citizens).

i call it yellow journalism because of shit like this:

quote:

Republicans "rarely miss an opportunity to exclude LGBT Americans from important rights and benefits," Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) said. "They're saying if you're a woman in a relationship with another woman, then you don't deserve the same protections from domestic abuse or sexual assault."


and it's also interesting that the article recognizes the issue has become partisan, then goes on to spout a party line shillish attack on republicans.

i think there IS an argument for sometimes naming certain classes of people who have been historically discriminated against when drafting protectionist laws. i'm still having trouble understanding how LGBT, a group who has been historically discriminated against, should be named as specific protectees. considering the name of the bill (violence against women), i'm not even sure half the LGBT community is covered.

therefore, i read this is a total fucking wasted effort by/for the LGBT community on a meaningless battle, and a mental masturbation exercise to make some women and democrats feel superior to republicans.


< Message edited by Karmastic -- 5/17/2012 6:13:06 PM >


_____________________________

[Awaiting Approval]

If my experience level makes you feel superior, that is your problem, not mine.

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 6:19:54 PM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:


The House and Senate versions of VAWA have several key differences:

The Senate adds language that explicitly mentions gay and transgender Americans for protection, while the House version is gender neutral. Republicans contend that their measure allows all Americans to receive protection because it does not specify who qualifies for various programs. Democrats, however, say that local law enforcement could use the lack of specificity to discriminate against gay or transgender people.

The House bill does not include a Senate provision that would allow Native American women to take American citizens who abuse them to court within the tribal legal system. Republicans say that the Senate measure is unconstitutional and replace it with a proposal that allows Native American women to apply for protection orders from local US courts. Democrats contend that without the Senate’s proposals, Native American women abused on an Indian reservation are often left without legal recourse.

The House bill does not allow for a path to citizenship for illegal women who have been abused and agree to cooperate with the police investigation of the crime. Moreover, it holds the cap on temporary visas offered to women cooperating in legal investigations to 10,000, below the Senate’s increased 15,000 level. Republicans say the citizenship provision is akin to amnesty for illegal immigrants. Democrats, on the other hand, say that women fearing deportation may never come forward to take abusers off the street under the House bill...

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2012/0516/House-passes-Violence-Against-Women-Act-grudgingly

Edited to add link.



< Message edited by subrob1967 -- 5/17/2012 6:20:44 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.extra-life.org/

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 6:20:16 PM   
Karmastic


Posts: 1650
Joined: 4/5/2012
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
i read that article, as well as the one from Lucylastic (thx).

i have the same questions. it would seem that prior bills specifically prohibited authorities from punishing illegal immigrant women who sought protection by specifically preventing them from alerting the feds (immigration authorities)? it's kind of a federal duty for a federal officer to report a federal crime (illegal immigrant). so i guess if no feds were involved, this still wouldn't be an issue?

and i also don't get the issue with contacting the abuser. is this not what happens during a police investigation?

if i'm wrong about something, or not informed, please educate me.

_____________________________

[Awaiting Approval]

If my experience level makes you feel superior, that is your problem, not mine.

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 6:30:47 PM   
Karmastic


Posts: 1650
Joined: 4/5/2012
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
disclaimer: i know you're just quoting some article...you didn't take a stand.

quote:

...Democrats, however, say that local law enforcement could use the lack of specificity to discriminate against gay or transgender people.


this might be true, and monkeys could fly out of my ass - so what? maybe we should include specific protection for Gay Haitian immigrant men? and how about transgender men, but only pre-op?

the police have a duty to enforce the law. the law in question protects everyone. having a specific provision to protect LGBT will not prevent police with an abusive inclination to do anything differently.

quote:

The House bill does not include a Senate provision that would allow Native American women to take American citizens who abuse them to court within the tribal legal system. Republicans say that the Senate measure is unconstitutional and replace it with a proposal that allows Native American women to apply for protection orders from local US courts. Democrats contend that without the Senate’s proposals, Native American women abused on an Indian reservation are often left without legal recourse.

more bullshit. it allows native american women to take american citizens to an american court. why in the fuck should an american accused of abuse be dragged in front of a tribal court (that's gonna be fair) just because his victim was native american? what matters (what court has jurisdiction) is where it happened. not who the victim is. imagine sending an american to every court in the world where their victims live regardless of where the alleged crime occurred. why fuck up 200 years of jurisprudence?


quote:

The House bill does not allow for a path to citizenship for illegal women who have been abused and agree to cooperate with the police investigation of the crime. Moreover, it holds the cap on temporary visas offered to women cooperating in legal investigations to 10,000, below the Senate’s increased 15,000 level. Republicans say the citizenship provision is akin to amnesty for illegal immigrants.

come on now, let's be honest. what else would you call it? that's what it is. it gives amnesty to an illegal immigrant.


_____________________________

[Awaiting Approval]

If my experience level makes you feel superior, that is your problem, not mine.

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 6:39:31 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:


quote:

The House bill does not include a Senate provision that would allow Native American women to take American citizens who abuse them to court within the tribal legal system. Republicans say that the Senate measure is unconstitutional and replace it with a proposal that allows Native American women to apply for protection orders from local US courts. Democrats contend that without the Senate’s proposals, Native American women abused on an Indian reservation are often left without legal recourse.


more bullshit. it allows native american women to take american citizens to an american court. why in the fuck should an american accused of abuse be dragged in front of a tribal court (that's gonna be fair) just because his victim was native american? what matters (what court has jurisdiction) is where it happened. not who the victim is. imagine sending an american to every court in the world where their victims live regardless of where the alleged crime occurred. why fuck up 200 years of jurisprudence?


In the Democrat's scenario, it's happening on tribal land. What's the current problem with prosecution? Lack of resources?

(in reply to Karmastic)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 6:40:55 PM   
Twenty9male


Posts: 111
Joined: 5/14/2012
Status: offline
I honestly think White males are the group that are treated the worse yet where's the protection there?

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 6:46:28 PM   
Karmastic


Posts: 1650
Joined: 4/5/2012
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Twenty9male

I honestly think White males are the group that are treated the worse yet where's the protection there?

*grabs popcorn*

_____________________________

[Awaiting Approval]

If my experience level makes you feel superior, that is your problem, not mine.

(in reply to Twenty9male)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 6:49:41 PM   
Karmastic


Posts: 1650
Joined: 4/5/2012
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
i see this as another law to target a problem (violence against women) that current laws DO cover, but aren't as easily enforced without this legal enhancement and protection type of bill. that's fine with me.

but no one has given any reason why specific classes of women should be named/included, nor how LGBT is a good class to specifically name.


< Message edited by Karmastic -- 5/17/2012 6:51:01 PM >


_____________________________

[Awaiting Approval]

If my experience level makes you feel superior, that is your problem, not mine.

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 6:50:53 PM   
Arturas


Posts: 3245
Status: offline
quote:

Violence Against Women Act


According to CBS news,

quote:

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.


This is a good thing. Not a bad. Need to add more? Add more protections if necessary. What, are a lot of women beating women and need something to specifically address this? Why? What is the issue here? Thanks.

_____________________________

"We master Our world."

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 7:01:56 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
the dems all ready passed a more comprehensive version which covers EVERYONE.

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 7:09:19 PM   
Karmastic


Posts: 1650
Joined: 4/5/2012
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

the dems all ready passed a more comprehensive version which covers EVERYONE.

EVERYONE is already covered, pursuant to the U.S. Constitution.

_____________________________

[Awaiting Approval]

If my experience level makes you feel superior, that is your problem, not mine.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 7:13:09 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
LMAO Im talking specifically about that BILL the Dems passed, does not differentiate for LGBT, Men/ Natives or illegals


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Karmastic)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves... - 5/17/2012 7:36:12 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
Is the issue is who is covered in terms of funded DV programs?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_Against_Women_Act

The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) is a United States federal law (Title IV, sec. 40001-40703 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, H.R. 3355) signed as Pub.L. 103-322 by President Bill Clinton on September 13, 1994. The Act provided $1.6 billion toward investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women, imposed automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted, and allowed civil redress in cases prosecutors chose to leave unprosecuted. The Act also established the Office on Violence Against Women within the Department of Justice.

VAWA was drafted by the office of Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE), with support from a broad coalition of advocacy groups. 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.[1] 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's conservative wing overturned the provision as an intrusion on states' rights.[2][3]

VAWA was reauthorized by Congress in 2000, and again in December 2005.[4] The Act's 2012 renewal was fiercely opposed by conservative Republicans, who objected to extending the Act's protections to same-sex couples and to provisions allowing battered illegal immigrants to claim temporary visas.[5]

...Programs and services

The Violence Against Women laws provide programs and services, including:

- 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

(in reply to Karmastic)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves Out LGBT, Immigrant Protections Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.250