Reps. Moore, Conyers and Slaughter Introduce VAWA That Protects LGBT, Native American, Immigrant, Campus and Sex Trafficking Victims

(

Bipartisan Senate Version Of VAWA Deserves A Vote In House

WASHINGTON – Today, Representatives Gwen Moore (D-WI), John Conyers (D-MI), and Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY), introduced the Senate version of the Violence Against Women Act as an amendment to fix the partisan and discriminatory proposal put forth this week by House Republicans. The Senate’s version, which passed by a strong bipartisan vote of 78-22, extends the law’s crucial protections to LGBT, Native American and immigrant victims, provides for more rape kits as well as a national registry of forensic evidence from sexual assault cases, strengthens criminal anti-trafficking statutes, provides for temporary housing for victims and addresses domestic violence on American college campuses. Moore, Conyers and Slaughter urged members to support the bipartisan, inclusive Senate version of VAWA, instead of the partisan Republican proposal, which was written behind closed doors and waters down crucial protections against domestic violence.

“These games must end,” said Rep. Moore. “Republicans have introduced their version of VAWA, under the Senate bill number and the Senate title. I guess they thought no one would notice their bill fails to adequately protect LGBT, Native American, campus and sex trafficking victims and actually weakens current law. Their bill title may say VAWA, but it is far from the Senate bill that works to protect all victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking and human trafficking and passed with a strong bipartisan vote. Today I joined Representatives Conyers and Slaughter to introduce the real VAWA – the Senate VAWA. We have the support; we are waiting on Republican leadership to bring our VAWA bill to the floor for a vote.”

“The Senate has passed a strong bipartisan bill that contains critical protections for all victims of domestic violence,” said Rep. Conyers, Ranking Member on the House Judiciary Committee.  “The House, and victims of domestic violence deserve an up or down vote on this critical legislation.  But instead the House Majority is playing politics and pushing through a partisan version of VAWA that they know is dead on arrival in the Senate. It’s time for the House Republicans to join their colleagues in the Senate and stand up for all victims.”

“We’ve heard no explanation for why the Republican Majority is opposed to protecting the lives and persons of anyone in the United States from domestic violence,” said Rep. Slaughter, Ranking Member on the House Rules Committee. “As an original author of the Violence Against Women Act, it never crossed my mind that this law would ever be used as a vehicle for discrimination. The bipartisan Senate proposal deserves an up-or-down vote in the House, but unfortunately, we anticipate another closed rule on a discriminatory, partisan version of this landmark law, which has been responsible for reducing domestic violence incidents by over 60 percent since its passage.”

***Below, please find a fact sheet prepared by the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff comparing the bipartisan, inclusive Senate version of VAWA with the partisan, discriminatory House Republican version of VAWA.

House Republican VAWA Weakens S. 47

Partisan Substitute Deletes Critical Protections for Victims of Domestic Violence

          This week, the House will consider a substitute version of S. 47, the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013.  While the bill has been noticed as S. 47, the version before the House is significantly different than the legislation that passed the Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support by a vote of 78 to 22 and with the support of all Democrats, all female Senators, and a majority of Republicans.  The Senate passed bill incorporates years of analysis of the problem, and solutions proposed by law enforcement, victims, and victim service providers.  The House bill does not.

Rather than allow the House to take an up or down vote on the bipartisan Senate passed bill, the House Republican Majority is pushing through legislation that will pick and choose which victims of domestic violence are deserving of protection. The proposed House VAWA substitute is a Washington-based solution created without participation from people who work with victims in the field and without any input from House Democrats. Notably, the House substitute omits protections for LGBT victims by removing all references to “gender identity” and “sexual orientation,” despite clear evidence revealing that domestic and sexual violence affects LGBT victims at equal or greater levels than the rest of the population.

In addition, the House VAWA substitute significantly weakens the protections for Native American women. Rather than give tribes the authority they need to protect Indian women, the House substitute limits tribes to charging an abuser with misdemeanors punishable by no more than one year in prison, even if the abuser has committed rape, a vicious assault, or another serious violent crime.

The Republican substitute for VAWA also limits important protection for immigrant victims. Among other problems, the legislation fails to include a Senate provision making “stalking” one of the crimes that would allow a victim to get a U visa. Unlike the Senate bill, the House bill also jeopardizes foreign fiancés by omitting critical protections and enforcement mechanisms designed to properly regulate international marriage brokers.

Apart from these problems, the House Republican substitute of VAWA makes campuses less safe by eliminating important provisions in S. 47 that strengthened programs that help combat and prevent violent sexual crimes on college campuses. The House Republican substitute eliminates the SAFER Act, which would provide law enforcement with the critical resources it needs to ensure that perpetrators of sexual violence are brought to justice. The Republican substitute removes the bipartisan reauthorization of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act which provides essential protections for victims, as well as tools and resources for victims service providers and law enforcement.

Due to these concerns, the House Republican substitute is opposed by groups including the National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women, the National Congress of American Indians, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and members of the Senate.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

JUDICIARY: VAWA Reauthorization Hearing - Jolly Jerry Forgets Truth In Testimony, ICWA, TPR & Its Legacy - My Colored Commentary

U.S. Representative Cedric Richmond is the first elected official to state "Termination of Parental Rights" into the congressional record of Judiciary.

A quick overview on the history of VAWA.

The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security will hold a hearing on the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) which officially expired on September 30, 2018, but was briefly extended in continuing resolutions before expiring in December 2018. The hearing will examine the broad range of issues related to the harms inflicted upon women, men, and children in America through domestic violence, sexual assault and harassment, dating violence, and stalking, as well as Congress’ role in addressing these issues. The hearing will also explore the potentially devastating effect of not reauthorizing VAWA, and the tremendous impact a prolonged lack of funding could have on millions of survivors across the country.

Ratcliffe spoke in defense of Faith Based organizations being left out of the reauthorization of VAWA.  He raised the political partisanship in passing the extension.

No mention of CPS, foster care or adoption, but Julie Beck spoke about the Lesbian Powers of the LBQRSTUV Community in gender identity laws without broaching anything DNA database related.

She spoke about child sexual abuse.

Unfortunately, there was no one to properly expound upon the gender identity laws under chattel law, more intuitively known in the legal world as Ecclesiastical Law, which is being pushed through Public Private Partnerships in the rebranding of parental rights and the children's trust funds.

Fathers have been victims of VAWA in the layers of fraudulent billing in child support and child welfare programs, where there have been instances where a man identified as an aggressor strictly for the purposes of a mother obtaining services.

Yes, you have to check the box in order to access help.

Yes, the VAWA programs are crap, riddled with fraud, which brings a judicial determination to turn on the federal funding spigot for Targeted Case Management, Medicaid fraud.

Ramona Gonzales did speak of children being removed, without saying foster care, if there is a domestic violence situation which is why the national data of child abuse and neglect are corrupt.

Sarah Deer spoke of Native Tribes inability of prosecuting non tribal members or even crimes of child abuse and against women.

Odd how she never mentioned the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) or its history of how the tribal constitutions developed, who was behind it, and the tribal exile based upon the blood quantum rule, as opposed to the one-drop rule.

It is time to address, in formal hearings, ICWA and all the covert "military" operations, including drug, child trafficking and money laundering on the reservations.

Gohmert got raw by asking the LBQRSTUV Lesbian why women must have "women only spaces" by loosely comparing it to "blacks only spaces". She responded by saying, "if women could experience these women only spaces, they will see how wonderful it is."  I would suggest she spend time in a women's only prison or go help mothers who have had their children legally kidnapped get them back.

Gohmert just brought up female genital mutilation as a violence against women, carefully guiding to the fact that it happens to girls, not women.

Richmond spoke on Termination of Parental Rights, as one of his first cases out of law school. No one has ever spoken upon this before.  He also mentioned CASA.  He made history.

Lieu spoke upon lack of resources for domestic violence survivors, homelessness, poverty, etc.  On a side note, your children can and will be removed, placed in foster care, under VAWA if you hail from "The Poors" (always said with clinched teeth).

How to stop discrimination and increase to access to domestic violence services for LBQRSTUV individuals: report fraud!

Yes, many Faith Based private contractors will not only turn their noses up at a LBQRSTUV individual seeking help, they will advocate termination of parental rights if there is a child involved.  Take for instance any christian child placing agency, perhaps, I shall use Bethany Christian Services, which is notorious for ignoring its foster children who are gay and ask for help from being raped.

Perhaps, we can go as far back as St. Vincent Sarah Fisher Residential Institution who never wanted to do anything when it came to little boys being raped by bigger boys, or men, because, homosexuality is frowned upon in self reporting to DHHS, which is why the typical form of help is to drug the pain away with Medicaid cost reimbursed services and  testing second generation antipsychotropic human subject lab rats for corporate sponsorship.

Heck, Faith Based child placing agencies will not even allow LBQRSTUV to adopt.

Grand Rapids does not allow LBQRSTUV youth into its homeless shelters, but I digress.

VAWA has turned into a Social Impact Bond experimental social services program and not a reparative response to the residuals of the peculiar institution, its original intent, a step to end human trafficking of women.

It seems Jolly Jerry of Judiciary forgot the Truth in Testimony, the bios, and legacy of VAWA, but then again, he was probably more focused on his impeachment proceedings because not everyone is allowed due process of the law, right?

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Conyers and Moore: House Republican Version of VAWA Turns Back on Victims of Violence

(WASHINGTON) – Today, the Republican leadership announced they will bring their version of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) reauthorization to the House Floor next week. As opposed to S. 47, which passed the Senate with a bipartisan vote of 78 to 22 last week, the House Republican version of VAWA omits protections for the LGBT, Native women, and immigrant communities. It also excludes provisions that combat sex trafficking, and that would have helped law enforcement address the backlog in DNA evidence kits. The GOP version is being brought to the House Floor in the complete absence of committee action and without the consultation of House Democrats. Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) and Congresswoman Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) issued this statement following the introduction of the bill:

Rep. John Conyers, Jr: “The House Republican version of VAWA is evidence that the Majority continues to pick and choose which victims of domestic violence are deserving of protection.  The Senate has passed a strong bipartisan bill that contains critical protections for all victims of domestic violence, but House Republicans are reverting back to partisan politics by pushing through a bill that will not pass the Senate. We should be seeking ways to expand and improve upon the historic Violence Against Women Act, not limit its ability to protect innocent victims.”

Rep. Gwen Moore: “The saying goes, ‘Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.’ This is the second time House Republicans have trotted out this VAWA Trojan Horse, only to try and gut critical provisions from the real VAWA that House Democrats proposed and a large bipartisan majority of the Senate passed. House Republicans have once again introduced a partisan bill that refuses to acknowledge the needs of all victims of domestic violence, human trafficking and stalking. There are too many women waiting on vital domestic violence services. It is time for House Republicans to end this charade and allow a vote on the comprehensive VAWA that passed the Senate earlier this month.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Conyers Joins President Obama, Applauds Signing of Violence Against Women Act

(WASHINGTON) – Today, Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) attended the President’s signing ceremony for the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (VAWA). Last Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 286 to 138, with 87 House Republicans breaking with their party, to pass the bipartisan version of VAWA that passed the Senate overwhelmingly by a vote of 78 to 22. The Senate version of VAWA includes critical protections for the LGBT, immigrant, and Native American communities. In addition, the legislation expands protections for campus security, and reduces the backlog for domestic violence evidence kits. Rep. Conyers has been a leader on the issue of combating domestic violence, working since 1994 when the original VAWA first became law, to expand protections to all victims of violence. Following the signing ceremony, Rep. Conyers released this statement:

U.S. Representative
John Conyers, Jr.

“It was an honor to stand alongside President Obama as he signed the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization into law. I am so pleased that Congress finally put partisanship aside to reauthorize this essential legislation,” said Conyers.

“Since 1994, VAWA has helped to reduce domestic violence by more than 64 percent. The 2013 reauthorization expands VAWA so that it now applies to all victims of domestic violence, including the LGBT, immigrant, and Native American communities.

“The issue of domestic violence is a serious problem in the United States. But, in reauthorizing VAWA, Congress and the President have taken another important step in making strides against domestic abuse.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

What truly needs to be addressed with the reauthorization of VAWA is the well documented fact that children are Legally Kidnapped by Child Protective Services on the grounds of "failure to protect".
The children are placed in foster care, funded by Medicaid, leveling the grounds for elongated stays in care and potential adoption all because victims of domestic violence are challenged with "providing for the necessary needs of the child.

This also places the fathers, whether a true perpetrator of the crime, in a position of being designated as 'unfit', severing their ties to their child whom they love.

VAWA is a wonderful promulgative  component for advocating for women in abusive relationships, but is it not time to include the children?  It is not secluded to the archaic racial classification label of inferiority.

Just another legislative misnomer for the multi-billion dollar child abuse industry.

Trust me, I will be having serious conversations with U.S. Representative John Conyers, Jr., whether he likes it or not.

STUDY: More Than Half Of Black Girls Are Sexually Assaulted

A NEWSONE EXCLUSIVE REPORT

Sixty percent of black girls have experienced sexual abuse at the hands of black men before reaching the age of 18, according to an ongoing study conducted byBlack Women’s Blueprint.

More than 300 black women nationwide participated in the study and 700 more are being sought to take in the survey by March 2012.

RELATED: An ‘Unlikely Victim’ Of Domestic Violence Speaks Out

Farah Tanis, Co-Founder of the New York-based organization and co-author of the study, says the issue of domestic and sexual abuse in the black community is rarely discussed and that a sixty percent rate should be a wake-up call to black women.

“A similar study which was conducted by The Black Women’s Health Imperative seven years ago found that that number was about 40 percent,” Tanis says. “So that means there is an increase and we need to stop neglecting that issue.”

Dec. 1, 2011, left to right, Tanya Williams, member of Black Women's Blueprint; Olivia Dowd, Outreach Coordinator, Black Women's Blueprint; Kareen Odate, Acting Director of the Center for Women's Development at Medgar Evers College; Farah Tanis, Co-Founder and Executive Director of Black Women's Blueprint (NewsOne Photo/Terrell Jermaine Starr)

D.C. Has No Love For Women Of Color

The study comes just as U.S. Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) introduced legislation reauthorizing the landmark Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) this week.

While domestic violence advocates praise both senators’ efforts to strengthen the bill, Tanis and other advocates who deal specifically with minority women are advocating for language in the new act that specifically allocates funds to communities of color. More specifically, Tanis and her organization are seeking funding for small community groups which have closer cultural ties to women of color that larger organizations don’t have.

Rita Smith, the Executive Director of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, a Denver-based national organization that develops policy on domestic violence issues, says smaller domestic violence groups are often better equipped to work with women of color than larger, more traditional organizations.

“Reports from these local communities to their national representatives has made it clear for some time that victims who are Latino, African American, Asian and Native American have not been served adequately by mainstream programs,” Smith says. “For some communities it is important to establish services that address the cultural, spiritual or immigration status needs of victims, and while some mainstream programs attempt to respond to those needs, they are not universally addressing them in sufficient numbers.”

VAWA, as it is currently written, does include language that allots “grants for outreach and services to under-served populations.” But no racial language is written into the act. Federal law prohibits legislation that earmarks government funding based on race.

Back in 2005 when VAWA was being reauthorized, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) fought unsuccessfully for race-specific language to be kept in a final draft of the act. He and several of his congressional colleagues expressed what they felt was Washington’s utter disregard for women of color.

“This language was necessary because the bureaucrats at the Department of Justice were ignoring communities of color when considering grants from domestic violence, rape prevention and other organizations,” Conyers argued in Congress.

Rep. Hilda Solis (D-Calif.), also lobbied for stronger language to be including in VAWA.

“By addressing domestic violence in these communities in a way that understands their culture and honors their values, we greatly increase the chances of making a difference for women of color who are being abused,”  she said.

Washington’s historic rebuff to race-language provisions does not surprise Olivia Dowd at all.

An outreach coordinator for Black Women’s Blueprint, Dowd feels policy makers have something of an elitist outlook concerning which organizations should get funding and who should be in charge of managing the resources.

She says she has been in domestic violence sessions with mostly black women where she, despite her years of on-the-ground experience with women of color, often has to play second fiddle to a 20 or 30-something white woman with a graduate degree but lacks the sophisticated sass and ethnic intuition black women need to be uplifted emotionally from abusive relationships.

“OK, this is the deal. Take this ‘V’ and put it on your head and then another ‘V’ because you are warrior women so get over it,”Dowd said, mocking a traditional letter-game exercise that encourages women in recovery to express themselves.

“As black women, that’s how we talk to one another. That’s how we grew up. As oppose to being the white missionary saying ‘Oh, the poor natives, how bad! Let me kiss your wounds.’ [Black women] don’t work like that. That doesn’t work with us.”

Call To Action

Domestic violence advocates say black women should be particularly active in writing and calling their congressmen to support the reauthorization of the VAWA because it affects them more than any other racial group. In fact, Black women experience domestic violence at a rate 35 percent higher than white women.

Advocates say VAWA needs to include language that:

1.) Puts control of domestic and sexual abuse prevention in the hands of the community, and placing less emphasis on law enforcement. “Police are not the only answer,” Tanis says.

2.) Empowers members of immigrant communities who, for example, would go to their Vodoun orSanteria priest for help before reaching out to a more traditional source of assistance like a domestic violence hotline.

3.) Specifies the different facets of domestic abuse and that verbal violence should be legally prosecutable.

4.) Recognizes that sexual assault in black community is a growing epidemic that requires special attention and resources.

5.) Encourages and educates men, especially black men, on the issue domestic and sexual violence.

This final point, is perhaps the most contentious issue of domestic and sexual violence in the black community.

Kereen Odate, Acting Director at the Center for Women’s Development at Medgar Evers College in New York, says black women are reluctant to discuss sexual and domestic abuse for fear of “vilifying the black man.”

Odate says there has always been something of an unexplored history of sexually dysfunctional behavior in the black community that dates back to slavery. For example, Odate cites mating practices that forced black male slaves to have intercourse with female slaves as the origin of shame that keeps black communities silence about domestic and sexual abuse to this very day.

“You were raped,” Odate says, “but you weren’t raped because it was for the for purpose of making more kids to work on the plantation, so there’s a whole history involved.”

Tanis, citing the 60 percent sexual assault rate, urges black women to be more proactive in advocacy issues like supporting VAWA because no one else will fight for needs on Capital Hill.

“Its critical, whether or not we feel comfortable talking and doing something about it,” Tanis says”

Guest commentary: Congress must not weaken the Violence Against Women Act

U.S. Representative
John Conyers, Jr.

For nearly 20 years, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) has been effective at protecting victims of domestic and sexual violence and holding perpetrators accountable. Domestic violence has dropped by more than half since the legislation became law in 1994.

Yet the House of Representatives is set to consider a bill this week that would repeal and weaken some of VAWA's most critical protections.

VAWA has long enjoyed overwhelming bipartisan support. Bills to reauthorize and further strengthen its protections passed by near-unanimous votes in 2000 and 2005. Bipartisanship was also on display last month when Senate Democrats and Republicans passed their own bill to strengthen VAWA with supermajority support.

But the bill now being pushed by House Republican leadership is different. Unlike every VAWA reauthorization before it, this bill would leave women less protected than under current law. The bill would endanger victims, embolden perpetrators of violence, and eliminate essential law enforcement tools to keep women safe. It is a giant leap backward.

House Republican leaders argue that opposition to their bill is hollow partisanship. But a diverse and wide-ranging coalition of domestic violence organizations, women's groups, faith-based groups, and law enforcement agencies beg to differ.

U.S. Representative
Zoe Lufgren

The leading domestic violence organizations, including the thousands of service providers in the National Network to End Domestic Violence, strongly oppose the bill because it would "weaken, rather than enhance, protections for victims of domestic violence." Leading researchers in universities across the country echo their concerns over how the bill will "roll back and eviscerate protections."

These are the real people on the front lines against domestic and sexual violence in the country. They are not partisan organizations seeking to score political points.

Neither are the faith-based groups, including the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the National Association of Evangelicals, that also harbor deep concerns over the sections of the bill repealing protections for battered immigrant women. Many of these protections have been in the law for almost 20 years. A recent letter to Congress states that that they are "deeply troubled" by the bill's efforts to "roll back protections in current law for battered non-citizens, making them more vulnerable and, in some cases, endangering their lives."

The National Organization for Women (NOW) denounced last Tuesday's passage of the bill in committee. The Evangelical Church and NOW usually don't agree. But both groups share similar concerns and oppose the House bill.

A coalition of law enforcement officers with expertise in domestic and sexual violence cases has also expressed in a letter to Congress their "strong opposition" to provisions in the House bill. Among other things, the bill fails to include provisions requested by law enforcement organizations -- including the Fraternal Order of Police and its 330,000 officers -- critical to investigating crimes and prosecuting offenders.

In contrast, the few supporters of the House Republican bill we know of include anti-immigrant organizations, groups that purport to represent the interests of men accused of domestic violence and one international marriage brokerage company reported to have a financial incentive in eliminating protections for "mail order brides." A Federal jury in 2006 found that the head of this company, who lobbies for the changes contained in the House bill, intentionally withheld information about VAWA protections to a pregnant and severely battered immigrant woman to protect her company's "95% success rate."

House Republicans can continue to dismiss opposition to their bill as knee-jerk partisanship. But the broad coalition opposed to the bill tells quite a different story.

John Conyers, a Democrat from Detroit, represents Michigan's 14th District in the U.S. House of Representatives and has filed to run for re-election in the 13th District. Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat from San Jose, Calif., represents that state's 16th District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

GOP Etch A Sketch can’t erase war on women

GOP Etch A Sketch can’t erase war on women

By John Conyers, Jr.

U.S. Representative
John Conyers, Jr.

Republicans are sensing a monumental misstep with their attacks on women’s rights this election season. So they recently took a page from their presumptive presidential nominee and reached for the Etch A Sketch. There is no war on women, according to them, and never was. It was just a figment of our imagination.

But evidence of a war is all too clear. The latest battle is, ironically, being waged on a dangerous bill introduced by House Republican leaders to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act.

The VAWA first passed with strong bipartisan support in 1994. Subsequent efforts to increase its protections passed Congress with little controversy. The Senate continued this tradition last month by strengthening protections with a bipartisan supermajority.

But the House Republican bill is a far cry from the Senate bill. It not only fails to include the Senate’s improvements, like protections for Native American and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender victims, it eliminates long-standing protections for immigrant women — leaving them more vulnerable to abuse.

The VAWA was designed to protect all women and empower law enforcement to go after abusers. Of prime importance are protections for immigrant women — particularly vulnerable because of their dependence on spouses for immigration status. Abusers often use threats of deportation and permanent separation from children as powerful tools to control their battered wives.

The VAWA’s principal protection gives victims the ability to petition for their own immigration status. By letting women take control of their own lives and provide for their children, the law helps them leave abusive relationships and cooperate with police to hold perpetrators accountable.

The House bill butchers this protection by violating a sacred component of the process — that the wife’s petition be kept secret. Rather than preserve confidentiality protections, the bill would have immigration officers contact abusers whose wives are seeking protection — tipping them off to the fact that their wives are taking steps to leave.

This is a horrendous step backward. It is well-established that the most dangerous time for a battered wife is when she begins the separation process. When the abuser first realizes that his wife is asserting control over her own life, he often retaliates. The House Republican bill would make the government complicit in this.

The House bill further dismantles the VAWA protections by eviscerating the U visa process, which is critical to protecting women from severe abuse. The VAWA has long authorized police officers to recommend victims of serious crimes for U visas if necessary, both to protect the victims and to ensure their continued cooperation. Two-thirds of U visa recipients are victims of domestic violence, sexual assault or rape.

The House bill would deny a victim protection unless she reports the crime within 60 days. This essentially abandons those who need protection most — women who can’t come forward because of a continuing threat of retaliation or the social stigma and psychological damage attendant on heinous crimes such as rape.

We don’t bar the prosecution of a serious crime for failure to report it within 60 days. Why deny a victim protection and law enforcement the tools it needs to secure the victim’s cooperation for such a failure?

The House Republican bill would also eliminate a long-standing provision that allows victims with U visas, which offer temporary benefits, to get permanent protection through green cards if they cooperate fully with law enforcement. Eliminating this opportunity would likely result in less cooperation, fewer prosecutions and more criminal conduct that endangers women.

The VAWA has had two purposes: to protect victims and to help prosecute perpetrators. The House Republican bill undermines both — eliminating existing protections for women and depriving police of the tools needed to hold offenders accountable. All this serves to undermine years of community-policing efforts that are widely credited with reducing violence against women across the country.

Republicans may have reached for the Etch A Sketch. But the picture they have drawn can’t easily be erased.

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) is the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/75959.html#ixzz1u9076Woy

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

JUDICIARY: AS THE HOUSE TAKES UP A SEPARATE REAUTHORIZATION OF THE DEBBIE SMITH ACT, THE SENATE MUST PASS THE FULL VAWA REAUTHORIZATION - October 23, 2019

Today, the House will vote on H.R. 777, the bipartisan Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2019. Reps. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Ann Wagner (R-MO) introduced the original version of H.R. 777 on January 24, 2019. The legislation on the House floor today is an updated version of the bill.

Earlier this year, on April 4, 2019, the House passed the Debbie Smith Reauthorization as part of H.R. 1585, the bipartisan Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act.  Six months later, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has still not taken up and passed the critically important legislation, adding it to the Senate’s graveyard of House bills waiting to be passed and signed into law.

Democrats strongly support the passage, once again, of the Debbie Smith Act and will continue to insist that the Senate pass the full bipartisan VAWA Reauthorization. The authorization of VAWA expired on September 30, 2018 when Republicans controlled the House, Senate and the White House.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) spoke on the House floor in support of the Debbie Smith Act. Below is an excerpt from his remarks on the House floor:

“It is critical that we do all that we can to prevent sexual assault and that we ensure survivors receive the essential services they need, which is why we passed the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act earlier this year.  We continue to urge the Senate to do the right thing and pass that bill. And we will also—again—pass provisions to reauthorize the Debbie Smith Act by advancing this bill today…I urge my colleagues to support this bill – and to continue to fight to support the more comprehensive measures in the Violence Against Women Act.”

Chairman Nadler’s floor statement is available here.

Fact: The Debbie Smith Act helps to reduce the backlog of untested rape kits and other unanalyzed DNA evidence.

The Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 2019 reauthorizes the Debbie Smith Act and the Debbie Smith Backlog Grant program for an additional five years, through FY 2024.
The bill ensures that grantee states and localities prioritize DNA analysis of crime scene samples from:  rape kits, other sexual assault evidence, and also, cases without an identified suspect.
The bill also conditions eligibility for the Debbie Smith Backlog Grant program on the assurances that the DNA section of the laboratory to be used to conduct DNA analyses has a written policy that prioritizes the analysis of samples from homicides and sexual assaults.
Law enforcement has increasingly recognized that the backlog of DNA evidence awaiting entry in state databases can prevent law enforcement officials from solving many heinous crimes – which has made the Debbie Smith Act recognized as such a crucial program.
Fact: The Violence Against Women Act, enacted in 1994, is landmark legislation responding to our nation’s crisis of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.

VAWA enhances judicial and law enforcement tools to combat violence against women.
The bill improves services for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking.
The legislation provides services, protection, and justice for young victims of violence.
VAWA strengthens the healthcare system’s response to domestic violence, dating violence & sexual assault and provides safe homes for victims.
The legislation helps provide economic security for victims of violence and preserves programs for communities of color & enhances protections for native American women.
VAWA fact sheet is available here.

Here’s what the groups are saying: 

National Alliance to End Sexual Violence: "Survivors of sexual assault need comprehensive policy responses, and the Debbie Smith Act is one important tool in the criminal justice response to sexual assault. We applaud the House for passing the Debbie Smith Act not just once but twice as part of the Violence Against Women Act that passed the House last April. We hope the Senate will soon follow suit so that in addition to addressing the rape kit backlog, survivors have access to comprehensive services and our communities have resources to invest in prevention." Terri Poore, Policy Director, National Alliance to End Sexual Violence

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Democrats Fight to Protect All Victims of Domestic Violence

House Judiciary Committee Democrats oppose Republican bill to roll back existing protections for immigrant women and omits protections for vulnerable communities included in Senate passed bipartisan bill       

(WASHINGTON) – Today at markup, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) and Committee Democrats opposed H.R. 4970, a Violence Against Women Act (“VAWA”) Reauthorization bill that omits protections for vulnerable communities and removes existing protections for immigrant women.  The bill omits language designed to protect Native American women by allowing tribal authorities to prosecute their abusers.  It also omits language to ensure lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered persons do not face discrimination when seeking services from VAWA funded programs.  This language is already included in a bipartisan bill passed by a supermajority in the Senate.  

Additionally, H.R. 4970 rolls back longstanding protections for immigrant women, who are particularly vulnerable because they are reliant on their spouses for immigration status.  It eliminates the confidentiality of VAWA petitions for protection by allowing immigration officials to contact a battered woman’s abusive spouse, tipping off the abuser to the victim’s efforts to leave.  The bill also weakens the so-called “U Visa” process for victims of serious crimes such as rape and sexual assault, and it eliminates existing provisions that allow recipients of U visas who cooperate with law enforcement to apply for green cards.  These changes impede law enforcement officials’ ability to use these visas to protect victims, prosecute serious criminals, and make our streets safer.

                       

All Democratic Members and one Republican opposed H.R. 4970 on the vote for final passage.  House Judiciary Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) released this statement following the markup.        

               

U.S. Representative
John Conyers, Jr.

“I cannot consider a bill that worsens existing protections for vulnerable women a reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act,” said Conyers.  “Since the Violence Against Women Act originally passed in 1994, Congress has worked on a bipartisan basis to not only reauthorize the law, but improve upon it.  Until today, every subsequent reauthorization considered by this Committee strengthened the law to make it easier for victims to escape their abusers and for law enforcement officials to prosecute them.  This bill does the opposite.

“This bill omits important provisions that would help protect Native American women and ensure that all victims regardless of sexual orientation can access services without facing discrimination.  Worse, it actually eliminates existing protections for immigrant women, ending the confidentiality of their VAWA petitions, and putting these women in further danger by allowing immigration officials to contact their abusers.  It erects additional hurdles for crime victims seeking a ‘U’ visa, making it more difficult for law enforcement officials to gain the cooperation of immigrant women fearful to speak against perpetrators.  This bill doesn’t just fail to move the law forward, it takes a giant step back. 

“That is why hundreds of advocacy organizations oppose this legislation, including: the National Task Force to end Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women; the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs; the National Council Against Domestic Violence; the National Network to End Domestic Violence; the National Congress of American Indians; the National Organization for Women; the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; and the Human Rights Campaign. 

“The Senate set aside partisan differences to protect the most vulnerable members of our society.  The Senate bill, which passed with a supermajority of Democrats and Republicans, including every woman Senator, is a true reauthorization of VAWA, as is the bill introduced in the House by Representative Gwen Moore.  This Body needs to consider one of those bills.”    

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©