Republican Leadership Split On Whether To Protect Native American Women

[grunt11b]

By Erik Stegman

With only three weeks left for Congress to pass the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), one man is standing in its way: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA). The House passed a version of VAWA last May by a narrow 222-205 vote, which stripped protections for LGBT, immigrant and Native American women included in an earlier Senate version of the bill. The Senate version passed by a now-rare 68 vote super majority, including every female Senator.

So, what’s the hold up? Protections for Native American women. As law enforcement, victims, and advocates have turned up pressure to pass the widely-supported Senate bill before the end of the year, other Republican House leaders have changed course and offered a compromise. Two members of senior Republican leadership, Reps. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Tom Cole (R-OK), an enrolled member of the Chicasaw Nation, introduced a stand alone bill that responds to their caucus’ concern about the Senate bill. The concern is over a provision that restores local tribal authority to prosecute domestic violence against Native American women. The Issa-Cole compromise adds protections for defendants with a new option to remove the case to federal court. In fact, Issa tried to offer this language as an amendment during committee consideration of the bill, but was shut down by Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) who didn’t even allow a vote on it.

Although it is expected that the Majority Leader has worked through a compromise with advocates on the LGBT and immigration provisions, he has dug in his heels on stripping the Native American protections, even in light of the Issa-Cole compromise language.

As the Majority Leader ponders how to move forward, he may want to take a cue from Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI), another fellow Republican: “Rape is rape, and there’s no splitting hairs over rape.”

More: Republican Leadership Split On Whether To Protect Native American Women | ThinkProgress

Here we go again, more gender warfare. Why dont you idiots on the left concentrate on real issues instead of stupid shit like this? Your phoney wars on blah blah and blah are exactly why this country is so fucked up right now.

 

[Lakhota]

By Erik Stegman

With only three weeks left for Congress to pass the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), one man is standing in its way: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA). The House passed a version of VAWA last May by a narrow 222-205 vote, which stripped protections for LGBT, immigrant and Native American women included in an earlier Senate version of the bill. The Senate version passed by a now-rare 68 vote super majority, including every female Senator.

So, what’s the hold up? Protections for Native American women. As law enforcement, victims, and advocates have turned up pressure to pass the widely-supported Senate bill before the end of the year, other Republican House leaders have changed course and offered a compromise. Two members of senior Republican leadership, Reps. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Tom Cole (R-OK), an enrolled member of the Chicasaw Nation, introduced a stand alone bill that responds to their caucus’ concern about the Senate bill. The concern is over a provision that restores local tribal authority to prosecute domestic violence against Native American women. The Issa-Cole compromise adds protections for defendants with a new option to remove the case to federal court. In fact, Issa tried to offer this language as an amendment during committee consideration of the bill, but was shut down by Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) who didn’t even allow a vote on it.

Although it is expected that the Majority Leader has worked through a compromise with advocates on the LGBT and immigration provisions, he has dug in his heels on stripping the Native American protections, even in light of the Issa-Cole compromise language.

As the Majority Leader ponders how to move forward, he may want to take a cue from Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI), another fellow Republican: “Rape is rape, and there’s no splitting hairs over rape.”

More: Republican Leadership Split On Whether To Protect Native American Women | ThinkProgress

Here we go again, more gender warfare. Why dont you idiots on the left concentrate on real issues instead of stupid shit like this? Your phoney wars on blah blah and blah are exactly why this country is so fucked up right now.

You mean like the House teabaggers concentrated on vaginas...? I consider justice for violence against Native American women a real issue.

 

[Politico]

There is nothing to discuss. Shitting Bull is just listening to the voices in his head.

There is medication that can help nowadays.

 

[Lakhota]

I love it when guests can see such uncaring responses from wingnuts. Currently 164 guests viewing.

 

[squeeze berry]

I love it when guests can see such uncaring responses from wingnuts. Currently 164 guests viewing.

do you have ANY evidence that the GOP supports rapes of any women?

Seriously!

 

[daveman]

There is nothing to discuss. Shitting Bull is just listening to the voices in his head.

I invite their ignorance...

 

[Seawytch]

Funny...I see a lot of Lakhota bashing in this thread, but not a lot of actual discussion on the topic. Amazing that the Republicans can't defend this...

Opposing useless duplication of existing laws doesn't require defense.

It isn't a duplication.

Given the complex jurisdictional scheme on tribal lands, the federal government has the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute major crimes that occur on the reservation; yet, according to a 2010 GAO Study, United States Attorneys decline to prosecute 67 percent of sexual abuse and related matters in Indian country.

What the provision in the VAWA would do would give tribal jurisdictions limited power to prosecute some of these cases.

What is the problem with that?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Liz Warren needs our protection!

 

[Stephanie]

Poor Lakhota, so much on his shoulders to worry over..

how does he get through a day?

hufferpost and thinkprogress tells him what to worry over and OFF HE GOES

 

[daveman]

Funny...I see a lot of Lakhota bashing in this thread, but not a lot of actual discussion on the topic. Amazing that the Republicans can't defend this...

Opposing useless duplication of existing laws doesn't require defense.

It isn't a duplication.

Given the complex jurisdictional scheme on tribal lands, the federal government has the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute major crimes that occur on the reservation; yet, according to a 2010 GAO Study, United States Attorneys decline to prosecute 67 percent of sexual abuse and related matters in Indian country.

What the provision in the VAWA would do would give tribal jurisdictions limited power to prosecute some of these cases.

What is the problem with that?

Wait...you mean there already AREN'T laws against sexual abuse, etc.?

 

[Lakhota]

daveman ain't the brightest bulb on the tree...

 

[Lakhota]

Everything You Need to Know About the GOP’s Opposition to Protecting Native American Women From Abuse

 

[Seawytch]

Opposing useless duplication of existing laws doesn't require defense.

It isn't a duplication.

Given the complex jurisdictional scheme on tribal lands, the federal government has the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute major crimes that occur on the reservation; yet, according to a 2010 GAO Study, United States Attorneys decline to prosecute 67 percent of sexual abuse and related matters in Indian country.

What the provision in the VAWA would do would give tribal jurisdictions limited power to prosecute some of these cases.

What is the problem with that?

Wait...you mean there already AREN'T laws against sexual abuse, etc.?

This is about prosecuting those that break the existing law. You don't even know what your opposition to this is.

 

[daveman]

daveman ain't the brightest bulb on the tree...

Coming from you, that's...absolutely meaningless.

 

[daveman]

It isn't a duplication.

Given the complex jurisdictional scheme on tribal lands, the federal government has the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute major crimes that occur on the reservation; yet, according to a 2010 GAO Study, United States Attorneys decline to prosecute 67 percent of sexual abuse and related matters in Indian country.

What the provision in the VAWA would do would give tribal jurisdictions limited power to prosecute some of these cases.

What is the problem with that?

Wait...you mean there already AREN'T laws against sexual abuse, etc.?

This is about prosecuting those that break the existing law.

So...you need a law to require prosecutors to enforce existing laws.

What makes you think the prosecutors will obey THAT law?

You don't even know what your opposition to this is.

Your inability to understand conflicting views is not my problem.

It's yours.

 

[Jarlaxle]

There is nothing to discuss. Shitting Bull is just listening to the voices in his head.

There is medication that can help nowadays.

Medication is expensive. Cheaper to just lobotomize him.

 

[Old Rocks]

Well, let's see if adding Native Americans to the list that the GOP doesn't need for votes is a good idea.

 

[Seawytch]

Wait...you mean there already AREN'T laws against sexual abuse, etc.?

This is about prosecuting those that break the existing law.

So...you need a law to require prosecutors to enforce existing laws.

What makes you think the prosecutors will obey THAT law?

You don't even know what your opposition to this is.

Your inability to understand conflicting views is not my problem.

It's yours.

It's not about obeying the law. Jesus...you should at least find out what your opposition is before you oppose it simply because that unctuous twerp Eric Canton fucking opposes it.

In response to the epidemic rates of domestic violence against Native women on reservations, the Department of Justice issued a legislative proposal that would restore Tribes’ ability to prosecute misdemeanor crimes of domestic and dating violence committed by non-Natives against Native women. This proposal also requires that the non-Native offender either live or work on the reservation and be in an existing relationship with the victim. DOJ statistics show that 3 out of 5 Native women had been assaulted by their intimate partners and 56 percent of American Indian women have non-Indian husbands.

Today on Indian reservations, the local governments don’t have the ability to respond to domestic violence crimes in their community if the perpetrator isn’t Native. Without this ability, non-Native offenders often go unpunished on tribal land because the only ones who can bring them to justice are federal prosecutors who are often hundreds of miles away and lack local resources to properly investigate and prosecute these crimes. The result, according to a recent National Institute of Justice (NIJ)-funded report, the offenders become emboldened, and the violence escalates to rape and in some cases homicide. On some Indian reservations, the homicide rate of Native women is 10 times the national average.​

As a "small government" guy, I'd think you would support more local law enforcement control.

I'm still waiting for a single explanation as to why you are opposed to this provision that would; restore Tribes’ ability to prosecute misdemeanor crimes of domestic and dating violence committed by non-Natives against Native women.

Anyone?

 

[Lakhota]

 

[daveman]

This is about prosecuting those that break the existing law.

So...you need a law to require prosecutors to enforce existing laws.

What makes you think the prosecutors will obey THAT law?

You don't even know what your opposition to this is.

Your inability to understand conflicting views is not my problem.

It's yours.

It's not about obeying the law. Jesus...you should at least find out what your opposition is before you oppose it simply because that unctuous twerp Eric Canton fucking opposes it.

In response to the epidemic rates of domestic violence against Native women on reservations, the Department of Justice issued a legislative proposal that would restore Tribes’ ability to prosecute misdemeanor crimes of domestic and dating violence committed by non-Natives against Native women. This proposal also requires that the non-Native offender either live or work on the reservation and be in an existing relationship with the victim. DOJ statistics show that 3 out of 5 Native women had been assaulted by their intimate partners and 56 percent of American Indian women have non-Indian husbands.

Today on Indian reservations, the local governments don’t have the ability to respond to domestic violence crimes in their community if the perpetrator isn’t Native. Without this ability, non-Native offenders often go unpunished on tribal land because the only ones who can bring them to justice are federal prosecutors who are often hundreds of miles away and lack local resources to properly investigate and prosecute these crimes. The result, according to a recent National Institute of Justice (NIJ)-funded report, the offenders become emboldened, and the violence escalates to rape and in some cases homicide. On some Indian reservations, the homicide rate of Native women is 10 times the national average.​

As a "small government" guy, I'd think you would support more local law enforcement control.

I'm still waiting for a single explanation as to why you are opposed to this provision that would; restore Tribes’ ability to prosecute misdemeanor crimes of domestic and dating violence committed by non-Natives against Native women.

Anyone?

You've been told before:

Because domestic and dating violence committed by anyone against anyone is already illegal.

But that doesn't pander to Democrat special interest groups, so it's not good enough, is it?