Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 656, I call up the bill (H.R. 4970) to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, and ask for its immediate consideration. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may…
Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 656, I call up the bill (H.R. 4970) to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, and ask for its immediate consideration.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 4970, as amended, currently under consideration.
I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I'm proud to stand in support of this important and life-saving bill.
According to national statistics, an average three women are killed by a
current or former intimate partner a day, every day, and 24 people per minute are victims of rape, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner. For me, these statistics are way too real.
Some of you may already know that at the age of 17 I dropped out of high school and joined the Air Force. I soon married by 18 and had a young daughter. For me, it was a blessing, but I soon found out that the man I married had a penchant for drinking and was very violent when he drank. I gave him the chance to be the father I thought he could be, and it didn't happen. So I took my daughter, our clothing, and we left.
Like many women who leave an abusive relationship, there were times that the only thing that kept me going was knowing that I was responsible for my daughter, and she depended on me to make a better life for both of us where we both felt safe.
Years later, I experienced another side of domestic violence while working as a deputy sheriff for the Orange County Sheriff's Office. I encountered many victims who had been abused, whether it was from domestic violence, rape, or stalking. These victims were always victims. That's what victims are, all inclusive. Back then, issues like domestic violence and sexual assault weren't really discussed; they were hidden behind closed doors, leaving many of the victims to either underreport or not report at all. They didn't turn for help because they felt helpless. So when the Violence Against Women Act was enacted in 1994, it brought attention to an issue that was underreported, or maybe not even reported at all.
Eighteen years ago, VAWA established within the Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services a number of life-saving grant programs for State, local, and Indian tribal governments. Since then, the act has encouraged collaboration among law enforcement officers, judicial personnel, and public and private sector providers to provide help for the victims of domestic and sexual violence. It also addressed the needs of victims of domestic and sexual violence who are elderly, disabled, children, youth, and individuals of ethnic and racial communities, including Native Americans.
Congress has twice reauthorized the VAWA grant programs with strong bipartisan support, once in 2000 and again in 2006. Keeping with the bipartisan nature of the act, the House bill, H.R. 4970, reauthorizes the grant programs in VAWA for a third time at the same funding levels as our colleagues in the Senate agreed to last month.
In addition to making several key improvements to the Senate bill, including nearly doubling resources for eliminating the backlog of unprocessed rape evidence kits, the House bill brings greater accountability to VAWA grant administration by ensuring that funding is spent on the victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, and not on Washington bureaucrats.
To achieve these goals, H.R. 4970 requires that the inspectors general of DOJ and HHS conduct an annual audit of at least 10 percent of all VAWA grant recipients and limits the use of funds for OVW salaries and administrative expenses to 5 percent of the annual authorization. H.R. 4970 also requires the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to improve the coordination of grants within the Department in order to eliminate duplication and overlap.
Make no mistake about it: this is a victim-centered bill which includes all victims--an all-inclusive, victim-centered bill. Turning this reauthorization into a political issue is not only wrong, but it is dangerous. It is dangerous. We cannot allow domestic violence in this country to become a campaign issue. It must be a reflection of our best efforts as Americans united against breaking a cycle of violence and helping victims become survivors.
I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me today in supporting this life-saving legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito). She is a cosponsor of the legislation.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Bono Mack), who is a cosponsor of this important pro- victim legislation.
I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson), who is also a cosponsor of this important pro- woman legislation.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), who is a cosponsor of the legislation and the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Madam Speaker, I yield 10 seconds to myself just to point out that the survey that we've heard about was received back, and the complaint was the lack of data that it received. I will remind my colleagues on
the other side that this bill and the current law protects all victims.
I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Schmidt), who is a cosponsor of the legislation.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole).
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) who is also a cosponsor of this very good legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Thank you, Mr. Conyers.
I will tell you, shame on them. Shame on them. This bill reauthorizes VAWA for 5 years at the same levels as the Senate. It protects victims.
If the gentleman would yield, I can say that I do, and I know that we have a list of them.
I will tell you, Mr. Conyers, that I have sat quietly and tried to behave here, but I am offended when I hear that this does not protect victims. I am offended when I hear that we are politicizing something that was politicized
on the other side in the other Chamber and by the other side of the aisle.
So I have very much concern about that because, as someone who has been in the situation, who has been on the scenes of these crimes, we are trying to reauthorize something that is very important to victims across our Nation--victims, not politics. And that's where I stand on this issue.
I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me first clarify. The bill requires that U visa holders actually assist law enforcement. Current law does not. Let's make that very clear. The other thing is we do want them to cooperate because we do want those perpetrators off the streets. We want to make sure they're off the streets so that no other victim is victimized.
In the earlier version of the bill, I was very concerned about: What about the next victim? If we do this and we don't address this, what about the next victim? Which victim doesn't make it out of that house? And I've heard my colleagues on the other side talk about how we're trying to do something because of immigration. No. We're trying to do something to protect the victims and the next victims if we don't get the circle of violence stopped. It always repeats itself.
I reserve the balance of my time.
I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from South Dakota (Mrs. Noem), who is also a cosponsor of the legislation.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would just say that I agree that all victims need to be covered, and that is what this piece of legislation does. We do not segment out. We do not pit victim against victim. It is all victims.
I reserve the balance of my time.
I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
I reserve the balance of my time.
I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Gowdy), my dear friend, a former Federal prosecutor and an original cosponsor of this bill.
I oppose the motion.
Madam Speaker, Democrats in Congress and others have been accusing Republicans for months for waging a war on women. We've been called antivictim, elitist, homophobic, and racist. These ridiculous attacks stop now--right here, right now. It's a shame, really. We've always had a bipartisan vote on this issue. It has always been a bipartisan issue, but this year, it has turned into an election year politic.
The Violence Against Women Act was bipartisan legislation when it was enacted in 1994 and when it was reauthorized by a Republican-controlled House in 2000 and in 2006. Instead of coming together to reauthorize grant programs to help victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have created a phony war on women to score political points. These attacks are unfortunate and divisive. Domestic violence knows no political or socioeconomic boundaries. Neither should legislation to fund these important programs.
Critics of this bill outright dismiss the dozens of good, broadly bipartisan things that this bill does in its nearly 200 pages of text, and they have chosen to focus their attention on a handful of things it doesn't do. So let's be real about what the bill does:
It reauthorizes the VAWA grant programs for 5 years at the same levels as the Senate-passed bill. That's over $680 million a year in Federal funds to support these programs, and this is on top of the increase in funding for these programs that were adopted just last week by this House in the CJS appropriations bill.
It sets aside specific funding for sexual assault investigations, prosecutions, and victim services as well as reauthorizes State rape prevention education programs, programs to promote educational awareness to prevent violence and to improve services for young victims. The bill also improves emergency and transitional housing services for victims.
This bill provides greater protections to Indian women by designating domestic violence tribal liaisons within the U.S. Attorney's Offices, and it creates a new provision to allow victims of domestic violence or Indian tribes on behalf of victims to seek protection orders from U.S. district courts against Indian or non-Indian abusers.
When I made the decision to pack what few belongings I could carry and leave with my daughter to escape an abusive relationship, all I cared about was protecting my daughter and providing her a safe and healthy life. In my years of service in law enforcement, not once did a domestic assault or rape victim question where the help was coming from or which political party or organizations endorsed the law that made that funding possible.
The reason for that is this: This bill isn't about Washington politics. It's about people's lives.
If you vote against this bill today, you will vote to deny help to millions of victims. Opponents are willing to sacrifice helping millions of American women escape their abusers in the name of political gamesmanship, so I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the motion to recommit and ``yes'' on the final passage.
I yield back the balance of my time.