With all of the War on Women meme going on right now, the Senate Democrats are trying to speed through the reauthorization process for the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Because what decent person doesn’t want to stop violence against women? That’s like saying you hate puppies or ice cream. It just doesn’t make any sense.
Republicans trying to stall VAWA are bound to come off looking like jerks. Why do you hate womyn, Mitch McConnell? Why won’t you help these poor battered ladies escape their abusers, Chuck Grassley? What is wrong with you guys?
There’s nothing wrong with Republican Senators that don’t support VAWA, there’s something wrong with the legislation. Originally passed in 1994, the act has had bipartisan support through two 6-year reauthorizations, but this time around it contains new provisions and fails to protect against potential fraud and abuse.
The new legislation, sponsored by Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy, would create 5,000 additional “U-visas,” which are awarded to both legal and illegal immigrants who aid in criminal investigations. Except that people who apply for these visas don’t actually have to ever assist law enforcement. So an immigrant facing deportation could just apply for a U-visa. What does that have to do with helping battered women?
Another section of the bill invites marriage fraud. Most everyone knows that the quickest route to American citizenship is to marry an American citizen ... heck, they've made movies based on this “marriage of convenience” premise. Normally, the foreign spouse has to rely on their American partner to file the paperwork, but in cases of abuse, the petitioner may file for themselves with a VAWA Self-Petition. I’d like to think that no one would ever falsely claim to be abused in order to get a visa, but it’s a well-documented fact that sometimes people suck.
There is also over $600,000 in grants in the bill, which is not adequately tracked by the Government Accountability Office to determine effectiveness of VAWA programs. In other words, no one really knows where that money is going or what’s being done with it.
Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley introduced a version of the bill that addresses these concerns, but the Democrats rejected it. Apparently they don’t want to help abused women unless they can also open up ample opportunities for fraud and abuse.
Now who’s waging a War on Women?
Image via katmeresin/Flickr
Ashley Is a Widow Who Stays Strong...
This Hot Dad Wants to Vacuum Your Rug
This Hot Dad Wants to Do Your Ironing
KStew Refuses to Shower
Comments 21
The silence in the comments from the liberal leaning readers is deafening.
Like Rand Simberg said, "Misogyny and male chauvinism run deep in the roots of the modern Left."
Yet willfully blind & deaf women keep voting for them, as do some of the uninformed. Democrats want to keep women "on the plantation" every bit as much as they want to keep blacks there.
^ agreed
So, you'd have many suffer in order to prevent a few from getting help? Without totally dissolving this sort of legislation, you're never going to 100% prevent abuse. It's just a matter of how comfortable you are seeing others suffer just to stick it to the one who doesn't deserve it. You, clearly, are very comfortable with that notion.
Also, please for the love of god learn a little more about immigration. My husband is here on a marriage visa. Is it the "easiest" way to get here, relative to other methods? Perhaps. But that doesn't mean that it actually is quick, easy, or inexpensive. It's a long process, and not one that would be terribly easy to fake. We're still dealing with immigration four years later, and that's after two interviews and every single piece of documentation they've ever asked for or even suggested. I can't imagine what kind of person would allow a woman to live here for years, get abused, and then deport her with no money and no place to live. No, that's not stoning her to death, but mentally and emotionally, that is equally as violent.
The article is written, obviously, by someone who is seriously siding with the RR (Radical Right) and knows nothing about the domestic violence situation of women WORLDWIDE!!
The women who are directors and workers in shelters have adequately upbraided the writer and given factual, experiential evidence which I hope the writer and a few of the earlier, less well-educated commenters will read, too.
FOR WOMEN TO BE IGNORANT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS APPALLING AND BEARS OUT THE RESEARCH IN DR. PHYLLIS CHESLER'S BOOK "WOMAN'S INHUMANITY TO WOMAN."
These provisions are put in place for a reason. A woman from another country could be promised American citizenship if she marries an American. Once she's here, he can abuse her and not file the paperwork to make her a citizen. He can hold the fact that she's not a citizen over her head, and she's unable to go to the police. On top of that, like most cases of abuse, he'd probably control her money too, so she'd be unable to go back home. She's trapped.
And I'd like to see a link about the U-visas.
The other reason the act is being held up by the Republicans is because it has provisions to help LGBT individuals in abusive situations -- under the current act, they are not covered. Last time I checked, Republicans didn't want to help gays do anything but become un-gay.
The same people who have always been waging it, the democrats. I'm sorry, but wasn't it illegal to hit women before 1994? Also, this kind of issue is not federal. It can clearly be handled best on a state or local level. Why do liberals want to federalize everything? The federal government is large and unwieldy making it far more difficult to make adjustments based on need. These issues are much better handled by states. And, seriously, why do women need special laws to protect them from men? I thought we were just the same as men. If liberals really cared about protecting women they'd advocate for every woman to own a gun so she didn't need to depend on someone else to keep her safe. It is the democrats who you should find appalling. They are the ones who turned this into a political football by adding provisions that the US can clearly ill afford. No one should turn a blind eye to waste, fraud, and government corruption, no matter where it is found. No matter is so sensitive as to refuse fiscal responsibility.