Violence Against Women Act Shot Down
- By Simple Politiks
- 8 January, 2013
- 16 Comments
NEWS
What is the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)?
The Act provides federal money to protect women and children in abusive situations. That protection varies from support for kids in abusive homes, to help for women seeking restraining orders or divorces, to education for law enforcement. It was first passed in 1994 and has been re-authorized twice, with more or less bipartisan support.
.
Since it was passed into law in 1994, the Violence Against Women Act has provided life-saving assistance to millions of women and families across the nation. For battered women, the law has provided critical law enforcement protections and often a way out from a life of abuse.
Shortly after the holidays the House leadership decided to keep this bill from the floor. In its re-authorized form the bill would have extended domestic violence protections to 30 million LGBT individuals, undocumented immigrants and Native American women.
As stated in the above excerpt, this law was initially passed in 1994. Since then it has been re-authorized two times, typically with bipartisan support.
Before the House leaders shot down this bill the Senate had passed it with bipartisan support, 68-31 being the vote. This vote was conducted in April of 2012.
Copyright © 2013
I would not hold out any more hope for the 113th Congress than we saw with the 112th, which just closed. Playing gotcha’ politics is much more important to John Boehner than anything to do with the welfare of the country as a whole.
I am trying to make sense of all the nonsense. By the way thank you for dropping by my post: I had interviewed a young man that worked with Obama in a unique capacity and had the privilege of interviewing him. Thought you might like it. http://alesiablogs.wordpress.com/2013/01/07/guest-interview-president-obama-story/
Thank you, I’ll be sure to check it out soon!
I am following you now by the way. I find the news on wordpress refreshing. I am tired of the media so hardly watch TV anymore.
As do I. Plus, as a college student it is a bit difficult for me to anyways. I just make sure I stay updated by following dozens of sources on Twitter. I also watch the Colbert Report and the Daily Show haha, both for comedy and awareness. It doesn’t show me real news, but it does lead me to it.
You’ll see me put both news and opinion out there quite a bit (if you haven’t already read one of those). Be sure to share your opinion if you feel passionate about the issue, I’m always trying to learn more and hear arguments from all perspectives. Only way I can come up with the best answer to these political problems…
You are a wise person for being young! It is better to hear all sides before closing in on the best answer as you say. I am a conservative by way of my pocket book, but feel very passionate that we need to be always opening it to take care of our less fortunate. When I had Luke ( my autistic son) my whole life changed and I needed the help of the govt. plain and simple. http://alesiablogs.wordpress.com/about-luke/
As an RN, I have had the pleasure of taking care of 1000′s of folks from all walks of life. WE must honor everyone even if do not believe the same way they do.Oh I guess I better get off my high horse now and get some clothes washed today!!!
Thank you again, it sounds like you have a great deal of experience with other people. That gives you a rare and important perspective on this world. Wish you all the best.
Take care.
Just because a program is old (1994) doesn’t mean that it is an effective ujse of taxpayers money. If it includes as much sueless “pork” as the Sandy Bill, it deserves to die or be modified.
Which is why I didn’t take an opinion on this piece. I thought it was worth writing about, but I didn’t know the exact details of the bill. This made me uneasy and unable to accurately decide whether the House was justified in letting it die or not.
Are you aware of a source or two which describe the unnecessary “pork” in this bill?
I think it’s important for these women to be protected, but there’s no need to continue unnecessary spending. If there is a substantial amount of this type of spending then it should be modified. If there is not, then the House was wrong in stopping the vote.
Oh, and I’m also just about to finish up an article on the Sandy relief bill. I was able to find much more information on this one. I think you’ll enjoy reading it, be sure to look out for it in the next 30 minutes.
As a teen, I was the victim of domestic violence. As a child, I watched my mother be a physical victim while my sister and I were emotionally abused. I have also seen my mother take her lesbian coworker to the hospital after her lover beat her so badly that she had cuts on her face and a broken wrist. I don’t know about the “pork” on this bill but I really wish they would just stop doing that. Too many serious issues are being derailed, people who desperately need assistance aren’t getting it because someone else decided to add a clean air initiative or something else that has nothing to do with the intent of the bill in question. It’s disgusting.
Yeah, as far as I know there aren’t any modified versions yet. The House leadership should have at least explained why they shot it down.
Thanks for liking my blog Phony US War On Drugs. With so many (too darn many) worthwhile battles to be fought, like VAWA, it is sad that so many resources are squandered on self-serving objectives, as is happening again in Guatemala and, yes, my Canada, against native peoples.
VAWA being shot down is just another slap in the face to women in this county. Many politicians don’t seem to give a crap about women’s issues unless it’s trying to rule her uterus. Ugh, we look like complete Neanderthals compared to many other first world countries. It’s embarrassing.
No kidding, at first I thought Violence Against Women Act said Votes Against Women Act. Needless to say, I got a bit confused…
Hahaha, I’m not surprised!