The Violence Against Women Act is once again the subject of partisan bickering, this time courtesy the House GOP, causing the White House to issue a veto threat over the House's depleted version of the bill.
The VAWA has been reauthorized twice in its 18 year history with overwhelming bipartisan support, but that's before it met the 2012 Congress. A few weeks ago, GOP Senators objected to the bill's extension of provisions to illegal immigrants, Native Americans and gay or transgender individuals. (Again, hats off for being simultaneously anti-illegal immigrant AND anti-Native American; that's called range.)
Despite this opposition, the VAWA passed the Senate with 68 votes, with every female member of the GOP crossing party lines to vote for it.
But the House has been making a ruckus for a few weeks about an amended version of the bill that doesn't contain those extra provisions. Now it turns out the House version is supported by one of those noxious men's groups that runs around going "women's rights WAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH discrimination WAAAAAAAHHHHHHH" while accomplishing absolutely nothing. They argue that the VAWA is discriminatory against men, as if men are usually the aggressors in domestic violence situations.
Anyhoo, ThinkProgress takes em down:
Their accusation is hard to take seriously. The Senate version of VAWA “builds on the efforts of previous reauthorizations to better address the needs of male victims of domestic and sexual violence” and by prohibiting VAWA-funded programs from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation (gay men) and increasing the number of visas offered to undocumented victims of domestic violence (so-called “U Visas”) does more to help abused men than the House alternative.
The Obama administration is unimpressed. It issued a veto threat on Wednesday, saying the House bill
adds burdensome, counter-productive requirements that compromise the ability of service providers to reach victims, fails to adequately protect Tribal victims, lacks important protection and services for LGBT victims, weakens resources for victims living in subsidized housing, and eliminates important improvements to address dating violence and sexual assault on college campuses. Among the most troubling components of this bill are those that jettison and drastically undercut existing and important, long-standing protections that remain vital to the safety and protection of battered immigrant victims.
If the House passes its version, it will head to a committee, and probably disappear down a sewer grating or be left in someone's desk. Given that the GOP already has a massive problem with women voters, stalling a no-brainer bill providing resources for domestic abuse victims seems beyond idiotic.
Perhaps to protect against this, the House had Rep Sandy Adams (R-Fl.) author the bill. See, it's written by a women, so you can't be against it! Adams appeared on MSNBC and repeated the mantra that the bill was more inclusive before the Senate amendments that made it more inclusive. Meanwhile, Lisa Murkowski has broken ranks with her party to implore the House GOP to pass the Senate version of the bill.
---
Related: GOP Drafts Its Own Violence Against Women Act, Because The First One Prevented Too Much Violence Against Women
Want to keep up with the craziness in Congress? Click PoliticOlogy
Follow: Evan McMurry @evanmcmurry | PoliticOlogy @OlogyPolitics
Comments (0)
Be the first to comment!