Let’s Seek Justice For Women: Unfortunately, VAWA Doesn’t Do This…
By the WAVE Editor
April 24, 2012
Fasten your seatbelts. It’s going to be a bumpy ride.
The Violence Against Women Act comes up for a vote for reauthorization in the Senate this week and supporters are expected to pull out the stops to win support for this “fundamentally flawed” piece of legislation.
Not unsurprisingly, the editorial board of the Washington Post urges that VAWA be reauthorized:
Let’s hope that bipartisan support — a fixture in the law’s history — does not fall prey to presidential politics and the increasing stridency concerning which party best represents women’s issues….
This year Senate Republicans opposed the bill in the Judiciary Committee because of provisions that extend protections to gays, lesbians, transgendered people, Native Americans and battered immigrant women. They essentially accused Democrats of using the cloak of battered women to force approval on what they see as controversial social issues. “Maybe then they could accuse you of not being supportive of fighting violence against women?” Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) told the New York Times
No, Senate Republicans didn’t oppose the bill because they don’t want to protect gays, lesbians, and transgendered people, Native Americans, and battered immigrant women. The editorial board of the Washington Post should know better. Shame on them!
The bill before the Senate erodes due process for the accused, relies on often meaningless restraining orders to “protect” women, who all too often end up being brutalized despite VAWA, and spends money without auditing. The legislation also enshrines a view of domestic violence that is based on feminist ideology of female victimhood. This approach has led to the breakup of families and a refusal to recognize the other half of the domestic violence problem: men who are abused by women, a documented phenomenon many feminists prefer to ignore.
As for Native Americans—yes, the bill before the Senate grants new powers to tribal courts in a way that is very likely unconstitutional. The provision that provides a path to citizenship for illegals who allege abuse deserves, at the very least, more scrutiny.
Speaking before today’s Washington Post endorsement, radio host Laura Ingraham nevertheless had the best response:
The Violence Against Women Act, which I have previously exposed as a grab-bag of radical feminist giveaways, was at the center of the pitch. Their “argument” boils down to this: if GOPers in Congress don’t vote to reauthorize it, they basically favor the bludgeoning of women across the U.S. Dana Milbank in the WashPo provided this devastatingly substantive analysis: [it’s] a “title that only a fool or lunatic would oppose.”
Joe Biden showed up to whisper sweet-nothings about the bill, further illustrating the purely political gamesmanship involved. “Just imagine the moral disapprobation (big word, Joe!) of society if this Congress refuses to reauthorize VAWA,” he pondered.
In a genuine quest for justice for women, GOP Senators Chuck Grassley, Kay Bailey Hutchison, and John Cornyn offered an alternative version of VAWA. It made many improvements over the original.
In a piece headlined “Let’s Seek Justice for Women,” Senator Cornyn noted:
Our bill contains some commonsense proposals that would bolster VAWA and also remove a series of controversial provisions from the Democratic alternative.
Unfortunately, due to partisan politics, it will not become law. That’s why I have introduced a stand-alone Justice for Victims Amendment that would: (1) increase the funds available to reduce the rape-kit backlog; (2) create a national sexual-assault forensics registry to help with audits of untested evidence; (3) strengthen penalties for domestic violence, sexual abuse and child-sex trafficking; (4) make it easier for the U.S. Marshals Service to track down and apprehend fugitive sex offenders; and (5) urge the website BackPage.com to eliminate its “adult entertainment” section, which has been used to facilitate child prostitution.
These reforms would improve VAWA and fix some deficiencies in our criminal-justice system.
This amendment actually helps women and other victims of domestic violence.
But supporters of VAWA in its current form apparently care more about scoring political points than mere justice for women.