Watch Live: Congressional Hearing on IRS Scandal

Live Now on TheBlaze Radio: ‘The Buck Sexton Show’

TheBlaze TV

The Politics Surrounding the Violence Against Women Act

Mar. 1, 2013 7:21pm Christopher Santarelli

The House passed the Violence Against Women Act Thursday much to the delight of Democrats who continue to call conservatives obstructionist over the bill as it passed the house with support from only a third of Republicans. Conservatives argue though that there are legitimate reasons to hold out against this act, no matter how hard voting against something called “The Violence Against Act” may play politically.

The bill includes questionable amendments that cut from the Office to Monitor and Combate Trafficking Persons and an endorsement of the decriminalization of prostitution for minors.

Speaker John Boehner brought this bill to the floor, bypassing the committee process, knowing it was not going to get GOP support but also knowing it was going to pass. It’s the third time House leadership has carried out this type of bypass procedure, angering some in the Speaker’s caucus.

On “Real News” Friday the panel discussed the Violence Against Women Act and whether or not Republican Leadership has the right to hurry inevitable bills through Congress to avoid allowing dissenters to make a scene, which they believe will damage the party.

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (10)

BookMDanno
Posted on March 8, 2013 at 11:48am
This is so wrong on so many fronts: when did the Framers decide a strong central gov’t was created to regulate the everyday life of its, uh, subjects? There’s obvious waste in the duplication ( state, federal–by statute AND agency, county, TOWNSHIP, city–come on!, when will we run out of money and stop justifying oppressive levels of oversight?). Two: The recognition/elevation of certain demographics is profoundly unAmerican in my book. Make the violence legislation what you want—FOR EVERYONE–regardless of gender, creed, orientation, blah blah blah, so we ALL fit in, as Americans, not as some narrowly-defined demo targeted for ‘special’ significance. We’ve got to STOP this pandering!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
jdgalt
Posted on March 5, 2013 at 2:37pm
VAWA is unconstitutional and wrong in too many ways to list. No one who voted for it in either house should be allowed to stay in Congress.

For starters:

1. Violence against women is a matter for state law. Congress has no power to legislate on the subject outside of DC and military bases.

2. The government at all levels must assume people innocent until proven guilty. VAWA lets a woman take away a man’s home without even accusing him of doing anything wrong: “I’m afraid of him” is sufficient. That’s not due process. Oh, and he also loses his gun rights forever.

3. The bill subsidizes feminazi political groups with tax money, a first amendment violation.

And 4. Sometimes violence is justified, but the law forbids judges or cops ever to even consider that fact. Indeed, the women know this and often recant, but VAWA forces them to always arrest someone anyway, which of course is always the man, regardless of who was right.

In short, VAWA goes way beyond the pale. It is an act of war against the American people.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Byrrni
Posted on March 2, 2013 at 3:17pm
Why in the world do we need this? Don’t we already have laws to cover rape and assault? If these are enforced there should be no need for special laws, now should there? Violence against ANYBODY is supposed to be illegal!
The trouble is, even if someone does get convicted, he/she will probably not serve more than half the sentence, if that. “Good behavior” will have them out long before justice is done. Lawbreakers are contemptuous of our legal system. Our prison system provides more amenities than they have at home, in many cases.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Scruff
Posted on March 2, 2013 at 1:41pm
Just based on the title of the legislation (The Violence Against Women Act), wouldn’t it be better to vote AGAINST it, rather than vote FOR violence against women. You’d think even the morons who think this is all a good idea would call it “The Safety for Women Act”. Is it 1984 yet?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Pogue
Posted on March 2, 2013 at 12:17pm
This Bill is a back door way of disarming America. It essentialy makes everyone a criminal for hurting someones feelings, it seeks to make everyone a convict of Domestic Violance.
Remember the Lautman Ammendment.
Don’t let this bill pass!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Verceofreason
  Posted on March 2, 2013 at 5:41pm
  All gals need and LIKE a good beetchslap now and then,
  Todd Akin said so.
  
  Report this comment
media-bias-steals-elections
Posted on March 2, 2013 at 12:11pm
The government is for the People, not the lawyers?

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s47/text

If you submitted a term paper like this in college you would fail? Let me put it this way, if you have to make more than 10 changes to a previous bill, you rescind the old legislation and publish the new one without giving us a “where’s waldo” puzzle palace to go through? Where’s paragraph (xx), what was changed?

Is it too much to ask of Congressional staff’s who get paid twice what their contemporaries are paid in the private sector? Can you imagine Microsoft writing their help manuals this way? I am not ashamed of America, I am disgusted by the fact that politicians could be doing things differently, but refuse to care?

I read the American Thinker piece, hitting F3 for the term decriminalization or misdemeanor for prostitution for minors does not come up. We’ve got to do better than this, anchor tags have been around since 1998, post the bills online, with anchor tags, so if Mark Levin says I’ve got to paint my toe nails purple, give me the anchor link please?

Lots of “feel good words” followed by reduced funding? Illegal aliens being detained and people in the prison system are now “protected” by this law, a law so effective, they have to explain there is a back log for rape kits? Kind of like firing a shotgun at a door without looking?

This is Joe Biden’s pride and joy?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
BigPinkKnipples
Posted on March 2, 2013 at 11:25am
We the people Love our females. Will except the few that sneak more protection for gays and lesbos.
Woe is the goverment, they are suppoes to carry out the law of God which is the foundation of ours.
In the old testament we are to take the adulters and gays and lesbos and sexualy perverted out of the city and stone them to death. Now in our kinder days goverment you have choosen not to excute the law of God at least this part. I hope you who sit in the set of power now remember you had your chance.
Side point now we don’t have gays . We have woman with out side pluming.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
uffda
Posted on March 2, 2013 at 4:02am
This act as with most acts will go on peoples’ “never heard of it” list.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
justiceday
Posted on March 2, 2013 at 1:19am
This Bill is a joke, name one woman who came forward and said they benefited from this Bill. If the US government actually followed it there wouldn’t be so many victims of military rape. The Democrats did this to try to make the Republicans look bad and forced many to vote for a Bill they knew had issues and really does nothing.
If the democrats really cared about women they would be doing something about the problem of military rape and not just talking about it.
http://www.theusmarinesrape.com/HideTheTruth.html

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.