Spending on Domestic Violence becomes a Pawn in the Culture Wars
Posted: February 11, 2012 Filed under: Violence against women, War on Women, Women's Rights | Tags: domestic violence 13 CommentsThe Purity Police that are now omnipresent in the Republican Party are now balking at refunding programs aimed at helping victims of domestic violence because those victims include illegal
immigrants and the GLBT community. Just when I think my outrage may diminish, yet another item that primarily benefits women becomes a pawn in their culture wars. Are they appealing to their base or just trying to get our minds off the slightly improving job situation and US economy?
The NYT scathing op ed has been lost in the war on women’s access to birth control waged by the Catholic Bishops. This is something we should not overlook.
Even in the ultrapolarized atmosphere of Capitol Hill, it should be possible to secure broad bipartisan agreement on reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act, the 1994 law at the center of the nation’s efforts to combat domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking. The law’s renewal has strong backing from law enforcement and groups that work with victims, and earlier reauthorizations of the law, in 2000 and 2005, passed Congress with strong support from both sides of the aisle.
Yet not a single Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee voted in favor last week when the committee approved a well-crafted reauthorization bill introduced by its chairman, Senator Patrick Leahy, and Senator Michael Crapo, a Republican of Idaho, who is not on the committee.
The bill includes smart improvements aimed, for example, at encouraging effective enforcement of protective orders and reducing the national backlog of untested rape kits. The Republican opposition seems driven largely by an antigay, anti-immigrant agenda. The main sticking points seemed to be language in the bill to ensure that victims are not denied services because they are gay or transgender and a provision that would modestly expand the availability of special visas for undocumented immigrants who are victims of domestic violence — a necessary step to encourage those victims to come forward.
Did you read that? Every, single Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee voting against the reauthorization. Did you notice that it was reintroduced by a Republican and a Democrat? How have we arrived at this point when every single bill is gone over with a microscope to ensure that select right wing single issue groups are appeased?
A lot of this effort seems to be due to Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley. Frankly, I wonder what he’s trying to hide.
Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, not only wants to eliminate those provisions, but has his own version of the bill that contains “a huge reduction in authorized financing, and elimination of the Justice Department office devoted to administering the law and coordinating the nation’s response to domestic violence and sexual assaults.” Grassley’s funding cuts are above and beyond the $135 million reduction in funding from 2005 levels already contained in the bill the Judiciary Committee Republicans unanimously rejected.
This Act has served us well and deserves to be refunded, renewed and strengthened.
One-third of violent felons in state criminal courts are charged with domestic violence; 50 percent of these offenders have killed their victims. Many of these murders occur during the time when couples are waiting to go to trial, highlighting the critical need for efficiency in court proceedings. Similarly, providing special domestic violence courts and court-appointed advocates can save foster children nearly 7 and a half months in the court system; that means they will experience fewer out of home placements and have significantly improved educational performance.
The programs reauthorized in the Domestic Violence Judicial Support Act do just this, allowing courts to specialize, thereby making them more efficient, consistent and able to incorporate a stronger focus on rehabilitation of offenders and deterrence of repeat offenses. These programs are not only the right thing to do, they also save states money. For example, training judges in effective case oversight resulted in significant foster care savings for several states. A 2009 Department of Justice Study found that Kentucky saved $85 million in one year alone through the issuance of protection orders and the reduction in violence resulting from the issuance of such orders.
Sexual Orientation and immigration status should not be issues in criminal investigations involving violent crimes. Please take time to ask your Senator to re-authorize funding of this very important Act that was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1994 that was strengthened during his administration and during the George W. Bush years. It’s ridiculous to see that very important public health and safety issues have been plagued by attempts to appease angry, right wing ideological thugs.
Saturday: Hey Girl…get your geek on!
Posted: February 11, 2012 Filed under: morning reads 91 CommentsHello news junkies… the political scene is bumming me out even more than usual. See the top story on memeorandum as of 2:35 AM Friday night/Sat. morning…or go directly to the Think Progress piece, entitled “GOP Ups The Ante, Introduces Legislation To Allow Any Employer To Deny Any Preventive Health Service.” (Also, stay tuned because later this weekend the one & only Minkoff Minx will have a barn-burner on all the mass hysteria over free Magdalene pills!) It’s not even just that alone, though. Don’t even get me started on the rest of the current event stories that are dominating the headlines in general–not only are they bumming me out, but they are boring the daylights out of me–Wonk the Vote, a bona fide news junkie. That is, if they aren’t making me want to cry my eyes out first (see bombings in Syria, via Reuters). I guess you could say I have a case of Political Affective Disorder, though that’s nothing new. I’ve been dreading the 2012 cycle for the last four years anyway. Perhaps my condition is just reaching a tipping point, because I am utterly depressed by the fact that–during a week when American women have had to fight tooth and nail for their basic autonomous, civil rights and health care not to be torn asunder by C-Street– “One Million” Moms finally mobilize…to try to defeat the… Evil Dancing Ellen?!? Gahhhh. This is the moment “one million moms” have been waiting for? What, is Ellen’s association with JC Penny going to mean the onesies they sell are going to have some kind of gayish-cooties and turn America’s babies into adult RuPauls big giant day-glo orange crying John Boehners or something? Come on, don’t these “activists” already have enough supermarket freezer cases across the country to protect from Ben and Jerry’s Schweddy Balls?
Though–thanks to the karma chameleon–these busy-bodies have fallen flat on their grizzly mama arses, handing Ellen an even more loyal fanbase than ever called “1 Million People who Support Ellen for JC Penny”! (I’m one of those growing millions, btw…if you haven’t joined already, Sky Dancers, please check the Millions for Ellen page out on Facebook.)
All this to say…it definitely smells like manufactured political theatre across BOTH aisles at work to me (and we’re not even officially into the general election yet.) I’m deeply cynical about this. Wedge issues during an election year and all that. Sorry, I’m not all Woo-Hoo President Oprecious over his fake-saving of our rights–which never were in contradiction with the constitution anyway. From right to left, it all seems calculated for emotional-political effect on some oligarch’s part. Plus, I’m still waiting on someone to make sure none of my oh-so-fungible tax dollars never go to war, torture, or capital punishment. Just my… ya know… very humble, girly-wonk two-pieces-of-copper.
At any rate, I’m super-duper-dejected by all the news leeching off of the body politic’s oxygen tank at present, so I’m going to focus the rest of this round-up on a few links this week that either left me a) happy, b) intrigued, or c) thoroughly entertained.
Oh, and also on Ryan Gosling.
If you’re like me, and you love the “Hey Girl” flashcards all over the internet, both for the eyecandy quotient and the sheer hilarity+nerdy-girl-utility of it all…You’re welcome. If you’re with Historiann and you don’t understand what’s so appealing about Mr. “baby goose,” then my apologies. It’s only one Saturday morning. You’ll live. 😉
So here’s the happiest link I read all week, via Sci Am:
A PET scan's bright areas reveal the concentration of amyloid beta, a protein that forms a plaque in Alzheimer's patients. The scan compares the brains of a healthy patient (left) and a patient suffering from Alzheimer's (right). Image: Alzheimer's Disease Education and Referral Center, NIH
Cracks in the Plaques: Mysteries of Alzheimer’s Slowly Yielding to New Research
Science is bringing some understanding of the heritability, prevalence and inner workings of one of the most devastating diseases
By Daisy Yuhas | February 6, 2012 |This has been a big week in Alzheimer’s news as scientists put together a clearer picture than ever before of how the disease affects the brain. Three recently published studies have detected the disease with new technologies, hinted at its prevalence, and described at last how it makes its lethal progress through the brain.
The first study strengthens the body of evidence that says early-onset and late-onset Alzheimer’s should be classified as the same disease. The other two studies shed light on how the tau protein–the buildup of which causes the protein to tangle and kill brain cells–spreads through different brain regions.
As the adage goes, knowledge is power…can’t wait until these “cracks in the plaques” build up to a critical mass of findings that inevitably breaks the myelin-implicated mystery wide open and points the way to the cure!
Ok, this next one didn’t make me happy per se, but it made for some pretty stimulating geek-grist… it’s another one from SciAm (guess Bostonboomer–who did a Science-y post last night–and I have been on similar wavelengths!):
Click to go to the Nature article... The current continents (left) are set one day to merge into the supercontinent Amasia (right), centred over the Arctic. Mitchell et al, Nature
Next Supercontinent ‘Amasia’ Will Take North Pole Position
Next supercontinent will form over the Arctic Ocean.
February 8, 2012 |
By Kerri Smith of Nature magazine
In 50 million to 200 million years’ time, all of Earth’s current continents will be pushed together into a single landmass around the North Pole. That is the conclusion of an effort, detailed in the February 9 issue of Nature, to model the slow movements of the continents over the next tens of millions of years. (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.)
One World, One Continent, One Love after all! So maybe in about 50 million to 200 million years, the military-industrial complex will finally wane a little? Hey, a satyagraha-loving Wonk can dream… 😉
Until then, we have plenty of idiocrats to keep us entertained…especially everybody’s least favorite body politic fluid, Rick santorum! Speaking of whom–my last “read” is a “political” link that just made me laugh my heineken off, via a blog called “Tyranny of Tradition” (this is satire–or is it? Hard to tell the way Rick santorum oozes his crazy for all to see these days):
February 10, 2012Rick Santorum Declares War On Heavy Metal
Rick Santorum has been on the offensive lately, but his target has not been Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney or even President Barack Obama. For the past week, Santorum has been using his campaign to take aim at an issue he feels to be the single most dangerous force in America today: Satanism in heavy metal. “If you listen to the radio today, many of these brand new, so-called heavy metal music bands like Black Sabbath, Venom, The WASP and Iron Maiden use satanic imagery to corrupt the minds of young people,” announced Santorum at a 10,000 dollar a plate sock-hop in Valdosta, Georgia on Thursday.
To which my very first automatic response was…Inert Gasses Declare Non-Reactive War on Rick Santorum! And, I had the perfect Lolcat in mind when I thought it too:
Alright, well that’s all I’ve got… turning this over to y’all in the comments. What’s on your reading lists this weekend? Anything extra nerdy? This is the place to share!
Obama’s Compromise Provides Universal Insurance Coverage on Birth Control
Posted: February 10, 2012 Filed under: birth control 65 Comments
Here’s the statement from Planned Parenthood on this policy.
Statement by Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, on Obama Administration Announcement on Birth Control Coverage Benefit:
“In the face of a misleading and outrageous assault on women’s health, the Obama administration has reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring all women will have access to birth control coverage, with no costly co-pays, no additional hurdles, and no matter where they work.
“We believe the compliance mechanism does not compromise a woman’s ability to access these critical birth control benefits.
“However we will be vigilant in holding the administration and the institutions accountable for a rigorous, fair and consistent implementation of the policy, which does not compromise the essential principles of access to care.
“The individual rights and liberties of all women and all employees in accessing basic preventive health care is our fundamental concern.“Planned Parenthood continues to believe that those institutions who serve the broad public, employ the broad public, and receive taxpayer dollars, should be required to follow the same rules as everyone else, including providing birth control coverage and information.
“As a trusted health care provider to one in five women, Planned Parenthood’s priority is increasing access to preventive health care. This birth control coverage benefit does just that.
“The birth control benefit underscores the fact that birth control is basic health care, and is fundamental to improving women’s health and the health of their families.
“That’s why women have consistently applauded the Obama administration for one of the greatest expansions for women’s health in decades.
“Unfortunately there are significant and immediate threats to women’s health and access to birth control in the House and Senate that would completely take away access to birth control and severely undermine women’s health.
“One bill, the Rubio-Manchin bill, would allow any business or corporation, on the basis of personal religious belief or moral conviction, to take away birth control coverage from their employees.
“Employers should not be allowed to impose their personal beliefs on employees regarding birth control coverage or basic health care.
“Another bill, sponsored by Senator Blunt (R-MO), would drastically undermine women’s health and allow any employer or health plan to refuse to cover any health care service they object to on religious or moral grounds.
“That’s why Planned Parenthood, and women across the country, won’t let up for one minute in our fight to protect the birth control benefit and women’s health.
As far as I can tell, this change does several things. First, coverage occurs now and the one year adjustment period has ended. Women in these religiously affiliated institutions will get coverage now instead of a year from now. The Insurance industry has dropped co-pays and for plans for religious organizations, insurers must contact all their insured and offer contraception with no co-pay. Second, the outrage at the fetus fetishist sites is on high. Third, all the major women’s groups and abortion rights groups see this as good. I’m relieved and I was really seeing RED this morning.
Just because I’ve been on a major roll about the idea of “religious conscientious objections” and SCOTUS, I thought that I’d share this with you in case any complaint reaches SCOTUS. It’s
from TPM and it’s called How Scalia Helped Obama Defend The Birth Control Rule. This “accommodation” will prevent any litigation from reaching SCOTUS.
The Obama administration is already facing lawsuits challenging its requirement that insurance plans cover birth control as a violation of religious freedom. Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) has flatly called the regulation unconstitutional. But although it’s unclear how much traction the legal challenges will gain, especially in light of the White House adjusting the mandate Friday, the President and his backers have one unlikely man to thank for helping their cause: Justice Antonin Scalia.
“One thing I think is crystal clear — there is no First Amendment violation by this law,” Adam Winkler, a constitutional law professor at UCLA, told TPM. “The Supreme Court was very clear in a case called Employment Division v. Smith, written by none other than Antonin Scalia, that religious believers and institutions are not entitled to an exemption from generally applicable laws.”
The Reagan-appointed conservative justice authored the majority opinion in the 1990 decision Employment Division v. Smith, a critical precedent to the birth control case, decreeing that religious liberty is insufficient grounds for being exempt from laws. The Supreme Court said Oregon may deny unemployment benefits to people who were fired for consuming peyote as part of a religious tradition, seeing as the drug was illegal in the state.
“To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself,” wrote Scalia, an avowed Catholic and social conservative, quoting from a century-old Supreme Court decision and giving it new life. His opinion was cosigned by four other justices.
Thanks to this decision more than any other, Winkler said there’s no reason to believe the constitutional argument against the rule has any legs. And while the high court later ruled to create a ministerial exception in anti-discrimination laws (to shield the Church from liability in forbidding women to become priests), it has not altered the Smith precedent insofar as it applies to the birth control rule. “So it would seem extremely difficult” for the courts to overturn it on that basis, Winkler posited. “I don’t think there’s any real argument.”
Also, I woke up outraged and at the moment, after spending the entire morning looking ALL of this over, I’m relieved. For all the talk of it being an accommodation, it seems to follow court precedent on accommodations but in reality seems to expand and speed up access. Here’s a link to The Center for Reproductive rights and their press release.
Said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights:
“The Obama Administration is as good as its word. Millions of women across the country will have equal access to contraception without co-pay, without fear that their employers may refuse to cover this critical health service.
“Now, the relentless crusade against women’s access to birth control must end. Members of Congress must support full and equal health care for all American women and immediately reject any further efforts to deny coverage of contraception as a critical preventive healthcare service.”
Senators Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) recently introduced legislation that would prohibit the federal government from mandating that employers cover no-copay birth control in their insurance plans. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) blocked an attempt yesterday by Senator Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) to add an amendment to an unrelated highway bill that would allow exceptions to the coverage if employers were religiously or morally opposed to it.
“We will be watching the implementation of the Administration’s regulation closely to ensure that no woman is denied access to contraceptive coverage by her employer,” Northup said.
Live Blog: Obama Announces “Accommodation” on Contraception Rule
Posted: February 10, 2012 Filed under: just because 121 CommentsWe all expected it, but I’m still enraged and horrified. I’m beyond livid. I don’t know if my blood pressure will ever get back to normal.
At 12:15, our faux Democratic President will genuflect to a hoard of pedophile-enabling old men who really should be in jail right now for the hard they have caused to children and families. I thought we needed a live blog to follow the media circus that leads up to Obama’s upcoming impersonation of a scared little boy who is afraid there are monsters under his bed. After that we can document the reactions of the DC press corps–who knew they were mostly elderly Catholic prep school boys?
RH Reality Check says the change is going to be good for women.
Today, the White House did the right thing for women, public health and human rights. Despite deep concerns, including my own, based on what transpired in the past under health reform, the White House has decided on a plan to address the birth control mandate that will enable women to get contraceptive coverage directly through their insurance plans without having to buy a rider or a second plan, and without having to negotiate with or through religious entities or administrations that are hostile to primary reproductive health care, including but not limited to contraception.
Under this plan, every insurance company will be obligated to provide contraceptive coverage. Administration officials stated that a woman’s insurance company “will be required to reach out directly and offer her contraceptive care free of charge. The religious institutions will not have to pay for it.”
Moreover, women will not have to opt in or out; contraceptive care will be part of the basic package of benefits offered to everyone. Contraceptive care will simply be “part of the bundle of services that all insurance companies are required to offer,” said a White House official.
“We are actually more comfortable having the insurance industry offer and market this to women than religious institutions,” said the White House official because they “understand how contraception works” to prevent unintended pregnancy and reduce health care costs. “This makes sense financially.”
The way it works is this: Insurers will create policy not including contraceptive coverage in the contract for religious organizations that object. Second, the same insurance company must simultaneously offer contraceptive coverage to all employees, and can not charge an additional premium. This provides free contraceptive coverage to women. The reason this works for insurance companies is because offering contraception is cost-neutral and cost-effective; companies realize the tremendous cost benefits of spacing pregnancies, and limiting unintended pregnancies, planned pregnancies and health benefits of contraception.
I doubt if this will mollify the Catholic bishops, and I still have a problem with the President responding to their complaints in the first place. Their goal is obviously to get their foot in the door so to speak, so they can continue to press for outlawing contraception along with abortion.
Dakinikat says that Terry O’Neill was on the Ed Show last night. She said that Obama has been talking personally to the bishops but has refused to deal directly with any women’s groups. Unbelievable!
Greg Sargent: Has Obama found a way out of the contraception mess?
On a conference call with reporters just now, senior Obama administration officials announced the outlines of the “accommodation” the White House has settled on with regard to the contraception controversy.
The gist is that women who work for religious institutions that object to offering birth control coverage will get contraception for free, directly from their insurers. The institutions won’t have to pay for it. The White House argues that this preserves both the “liberty” of those institutions and the core, inviolate principle that all women will have equal access to birth control, no matter where they work.
On the politics of this “accommodation,” Sargent writes:
Obviously you can argue over whether the administration should have reached any accommodation at all, and the politics of this, as Kevin Drum notes, could still prove a morass for the administration. Some on the left will see the administration’s efforts to appease the U.S. Conference of Bishops as unnecessary appeasment. Meanwhile, it seems all but certain that the Conference of Bishops, which had previously insisted that the rule be scrapped altogher, will not be mollified in the slightest, and Republican officials and the 2012 GOP candidates will still continue attacking the Obama administration over this, pushing not only the “war on religion” line but also the subtext, i.e., that Obama is forever looking to expand the reach of government.
But the Obama team is betting that any further objections to this policy will unmask opponents primarily as hidebound foes of birth control at any costs, a politically difficult position to sustain, rather than as defenders of religious liberty. Indeed, this looks like an effort to reframe the debate to Obama’s advantage: If Team Obama has its way, the argument will now be about whether all women should have access to contraception, and not about whether these institutions should have their religious freedom impinged upon.
They’ve already been exposed, as far as I’m concerned; but I guess Obama feels he has to convince the Catholic boyz in the DC press. Good luck with that. Frankly, Mark Shields, Chris Matthews, and E.J. Dionne are dead to me now, regardless of how they react to this. Dead. To. Me.
What do you think?













Recent Comments