Jump to content
elmcitymaven

House GOP blocks Violence Against Women Act

 Share

146 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Yes, yes, I know it's Maddow.

Congress had a lengthy to-do list as the end of the year approached, with a series of measures that needed action before 2013 began. Some of the items passed (a fiscal agreement, a temporary farm bill), while others didn't (relief funding for victims of Hurricane Sandy).

And then there's the Violence Against Women Act, which was supposed to be one of the year's easy ones. It wasn't.

Back in April, the Senate approved VAWA reauthorization fairly easily, with a 68 to 31 vote. The bill was co-written by a liberal Democrat (Vermont's Pat Leahy) and a conservative Republican (Idaho's Mike Crapo), and seemed on track to be reauthorized without much of a fuss, just as it was in 2000 and 2005.

But House Republicans insisted the bill is too supportive of immigrants, the LGBT community, and Native Americans -- and they'd rather let the law expire than approve a slightly expanded proposal. Vice President Biden, who helped write the original law, tried to persuade House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) to keep the law alive, but the efforts didn't go anywhere.

And so, for the first time since 1994, the Violence Against Women Act is no more. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the Democratic point person on VAWA, said in a statement:

"The House Republican leadership's failure to take up and pass the Senate's bipartisan and inclusive VAWA bill is inexcusable. This is a bill that passed with 68 votes in the Senate and that extends the bill's protections to 30 million more women. But this seems to be how House Republican leadership operates. No matter how broad the bipartisan support, no matter who gets hurt in the process, the politics of the right wing of their party always comes first."

Proponents of the law hope to revive the law in the new Congress, starting from scratch, but in the meantime, there will be far fewer resources available for state and local governments to combat domestic violence.

As for electoral considerations, Republicans lost badly in the 2012 elections, thanks in large part to the largest gender gap in modern times, but if that changed GOP attitudes towards legislation affecting women, the party is hiding it well.

Update: Reader AG asks about the House version that was approved several months ago. As I reported at the time, the House gutted the bipartisan Senate bill with a watered-down version, which was widely seen by everyone involved as a joke that undermined the interests of victims. It had no support in the Senate and drew a White House veto threat. House Republicans knew this, and instead of revisiting the issue and/or working with the Senate on a compromise, GOP leaders simply decided the law was not a priority. The result was this week's outcome.

http://maddowblog.ms...-women-act?lite

larissa-lima-says-who-is-against-the-que

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Timeline

:lol: Good to see the GOP is comfortable with clinging to the one demographic they have left - the white male. The women, the minorities, screw em! Clearly it worked very well for them in November and they're eager to do it all over again next election season. I can't wait.

I don't think you're paying attention. Rachel Maddow is a lesbian. You know what that means, don't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name=^_^' timestamp='1357161482' post='5899126]

I don't think you're paying attention. Rachel Maddow is a lesbian. You know what that means, don't you?

She favours short haircuts and sensible shoes?

larissa-lima-says-who-is-against-the-que

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name=^_^' timestamp='1357161482' post='5899126]

I don't think you're paying attention. Rachel Maddow is a lesbian. You know what that means, don't you?

A lesbian WOMAN. The worst kind of lesbian, if you ask me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lesbian WOMAN. The worst kind of lesbian, if you ask me.

There are many men on here who claim to be male lesbians. They must be the better type of lesbian.

This really is a patriarchy. I mean, the men even get to be better lesbians! mad.gif

larissa-lima-says-who-is-against-the-que

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name=^_^' timestamp='1357161880' post='5899143]

I don't think you want any gays cooking your food. Might be a health hazard.

That's true. I had a cousin who caught gay from a toilet seat once. A summer at church camp cleared it up though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: China
Timeline

ya, if the wording had been changed:

1. to leave out same-sex couples and

2. to not redefine illegal alien to mean immigrant (instead of illegal alien)

then

it would have passed.

What's the problem, really?

Edited by Darnell

Sometimes my language usage seems confusing - please feel free to 'read it twice', just in case !
Ya know, you can find the answer to your question with the advanced search tool, when using a PC? Ditch the handphone, come back later on a PC, and try again.

-=-=-=-=-=R E A D ! ! !=-=-=-=-=-

Whoa Nelly ! Want NVC Info? see http://www.visajourney.com/wiki/index.php/NVC_Process

Congratulations on your approval ! We All Applaud your accomplishment with Most Wonderful Kissies !

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Timeline

ya, if the wording had been changed:

1. to leave out same-sex couples and

2. to not redefine illegal alien to mean immigrant (instead of illegal alien)

then

it would have passed.

What's the problem, really?

the gay agenda must be pushed at every possible opportunity.

the gays never stop pushing. push, push, push. it's because they spend so much time in the gym, they have a lot more stamina.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Country: Brazil
Timeline

That's true. I had a cousin who caught gay from a toilet seat once. A summer at church camp cleared it up though.

on a hotter than normal day they must have escorted him to a outhouse, lifted him upside down over a one-holer, then lowered his head below the seat level ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: China
Timeline

sorry, doesn't wash, with the wording in the bill.

nice try though.. I feel your pain in yer largess-backside, I really do.

Sometimes my language usage seems confusing - please feel free to 'read it twice', just in case !
Ya know, you can find the answer to your question with the advanced search tool, when using a PC? Ditch the handphone, come back later on a PC, and try again.

-=-=-=-=-=R E A D ! ! !=-=-=-=-=-

Whoa Nelly ! Want NVC Info? see http://www.visajourney.com/wiki/index.php/NVC_Process

Congratulations on your approval ! We All Applaud your accomplishment with Most Wonderful Kissies !

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...